Aerocolor
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off
|
Hey folks. I had this reply typed up in response to the archived Fotodiox Pro PRONTO thread, but decided it was more applicable here in the FAQ thread, as it is more Techart Pro focused than PRONTO.
Therefore, if looking for the context for the quotes, please see this thread instead:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1504638/0
------------------------
techartpro wrote:
Thats a fake copy of our patented design. This company is famous for copying people's products without licensing.
d-intrigue wrote:
In what countries is it patented?
Buffalonian wrote:
Fake copy or not - it looks more refined like only the Chinese can do in manufacturing than your design. What's the patent number, btw?
Patent infringement accusations are serious business, and since I prefer to be an informed consumer and these claims from Techart remained unsubstantiated, I have spent some time researching this subject, and decided to share my findings. As far as I can tell, I don't believe anyone else has found these Chinese publications or made this connection - and I think it might be good to clarify this actual status in the Techart PRO FAQ as well.
(Note: I am not a lawyer, so do not take anything below as legal advice. I'm just a guy with a few patents under his belt, who has seen a bit of the process from personal experience. The BEST outcome here would be if both Techart AND Fotodiox stepped in and cleared the air.)
Long story short:
I believe I have found the mysterious "Techart Pro patent"... and it's not actually a patent, only a patent application 
The initial publication is CN105785692A, a patent application filed in China on 2016-05-19 and published on 2016-07-20.
There is a priority date of 2016-03-09 for a separate application, CN201620181519, but I can't find a copy of this one online.
A worldwide patent application was filed on 2016-05-27, and published on 2017-09-14, with the application number of WO2017152510A1.
Note those dates... Both the application filing date (2016-05-19) as well as the priority date (2016-03-09) are several months after the adapter was shown to the world and described in great functional detail, which was at least as early as 2016-01-07. I'm not familiar with Chinese patent laws, but at least in the USA with the first-to-file patent system, this would be quite problematic, and could quite negatively impact your ability to obtain a patent, if not prevent it entirely.
Digging deeper, the inventor listed on the Chinese patent application is "梁建平", which Google translates as "Liang Jianping". Googling this name, I found that the developer "JianPing Liang" is the name associated with the "TECHART Upgrade" utility in the Google Play Store, so we can reasonably assume that the Chinese patent application is from the person or entity that we here would refer to as "TECHART". The email address listed in the Google Play Store also matches that for the contact information provided for "Tiangong electronic technology co., LTD", the company behind the techart.net.cn website. The iOS App Store's version of the app is credited to "WeiLin Liang", and a LinkedIn profile for this undergrad research assistant confirms this project was worked on from Sept 2013 through Aug 2016, for Nitian Technology Inc.
Beyond techart.net.cn and techartpro.com, there is yet a third Techart website: techart-logic.com. This is the website listed as the contact page for the Google Play Store app. The banner at the bottom lists the company name as Guangzhou NITIAN Electronic Technology Co., Ltd. ("NITIAN Corp" is also referenced on the sticker on the LM-EA7, and is also referenced on a techart.net.cn page).
In the USA, they appear to be going under the company name "TECHART", however it looks as though a US trademark has not been registered, nor has one for "NITIAN". (There is one "Techart" listed that produces photographic products, however it appears to be a different and much larger company. Also that trademark was filed in March of 2016, long after our "Techart" was selling other adapter products in the USA.)
So where does this leave us?
Some simple statements:
1) The Techart PRO website does not mention a patent holding in any way, nor does the LM-EA7 adapter labeling.
2) From public records, we can see that a pair of patent applications, Chinese and Worldwide, have been filled, which we can reasonably attribute to the person/group/company we know as "TECHART".
3) A patent application does not mean a product, design, or concept is patented, nor does it mean that the concept is even patentable. A patent application could be invalidated by the finding of prior art, for example, or by early disclosure and publication of the concept before seeking patent protection. It could also not be deemed novel, unique, or specific enough to patent. There are NO GUARANTEES that a patent will be granted for a given application.
4) If it is true that "TECHART" does not actually hold a patent, then it is illegal for them to claim their product is patented in the US, and doing so could subject them to fines. ("Patent Pending" would be appropriate and encouraged, but "Patented" is a very different legal status.)
5) In light of #4, it is probably misleading for the Techart Pro FAQ on the FM forum here to repeat Techart's quote that "the Fotodiox Pro Pronto is an unlicensed fake of Techart's patented design", and leaving it is potentially also damaging for Techart (who endorse and link to it from their website, giving it authenticity).
Note that I'm not at all defending Fotodiox here, as the Pro PRONTO bears all the markings of a shameless knockoff clone. But it's a very important distinction that the Techart Pro itself isn't actually "Patented", as that status is what allows or prohibits OTHER companies (including but not limited to Fotodiox) from producing LEGAL autofocus adapters of the same or alternate designs for our cameras. While Techart claims to be the victim here, (and they likely are), falsely claiming a patent status to stifle competition isn't legal either... or ethical.
Please feel free to correct me if I have made a mistake or omission anywhere above...
References:
Techart PRO product website:
http://techartpro.com/product/techart-pro-leica-m-sony-e-autofocus-adapter/
2016-07-20 Chinese patent application, with diagram / illustration matching the Techart PRO & Fotodiox Pro PRONTO design:
https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/98/88/ee/c22f4cbe4bc5db/CN105785692A.pdf
2016-05-27 Worldwide patent application:
https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2017152510A1/en
2016-01-07 announcement of Techart PRO on Sony Alpha Rumors:
https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/hot-worlds-first-techart-m-mount-to-e-mount-autofocus-adapter/
Chinese forum thread discussing TAP development & beta testing (Archived, and with English translation, 70+ pages before it was removed):
https://web.archive.org/web/20160905094900 /http://forum.xitek.com/thread-1535183-1-1-2.html
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fweb.archive.org%2Fweb%2F20160109063837%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fforum.xitek.com%2Fthread-1535183-1-1-2.html
TECHART Upgrade utility on the Google Play Store & Apple App Store:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.techart.administrator.techart_update&hl=en_US
https://apps.apple.com/app/id972383385#
LinkedIn profile with TECHART Update app development timeframe listed:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/ray-leung
Techart.net.cn website - contact info:
http://en.techart.net.cn/contact.html
US Code on false patent marking:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/35/292
Trademark searches for "Techart":
https://www.trademarkia.com/trademarks-search.aspx?tn=techart
https://trademarks.justia.com/search?q=techart
http://tmsearch.uspto.gov (use Basic word Mark Search)
Likely unrelated "Techart" trademark:
http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4803:x61gm4.2.3
Techart's endorsement of the FredMiranda forum FAQ:
http://techartpro.com/downloads-2/
An early publication & description of the Fotodiox Pro Pronto adapter:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/fotodiox/36517110064
|
Its become a tilt lens without me wanting it to be! The images I took are decidedly less sharp in the lower part of the image at the focal plane. 
(even with pre-focus)