Every government is dirty. It comes down to just how much and who gets caught and who gets away with it. Japan’s Government is dirty for sure! I recently watched the Hillary Clinton Secretary of State conformation hearings. A Senator from the East Coast asked for help in dealing with the Japanese government. The Senator spoke of a manufacturer in her state that manufacturers large printing presses. She said a Japanese manufacturer was “dumping” their printing presses here in America. The American manufacturer had to go to court to complain of unfair trade practices which they won. The Japanese government retaliated against this American manufacture and they (can’t remember exactly) change laws or simply did what it took to help their manufacturer acquire and take all assets/Japanese assets that belong to this American manufacture. The senator complained that our current administration has done nothing to help her manufacturer and she was asking Hillary Clinton if or when she becomes Secretary of State if she would help her with this matter.
Carmen, Your loathing of Mr. Dyson is getting the best of you. Most would side with the David’s when they come up against Goliath’s, but not you.
Are you speaking of David the Isrealite who defeated Goliath the Philistine in the Valley of Elah or David of ORECK who defeated Goliath of bagless in the market of vacuums.
BTW, COSTCO stores are pushing brand new DC14 Animal for $350 a pop. I was told by staff at one store that they are not even getting a look by customers. Vacuum buyers walk right past.
PS: Samsung is Korean not Japanese! Is today your opposite day again?
Carmine D.
This message was modified Jan 23, 2009 by CarmineD
I've been known to make fun of vacuum manufacturers who choose to be innovative lazy.... and there's plenty of them.
DIB, do mean too lazy to innovate? or innovatively lazy.? Either is grammatically correct. The first implies slothfulness, the second ingenuity.
Trebor
I played around with the words... innovative vs. innovatively vs. innovative[ly]. Websters did not show “innovatively”, so I went with innovative.
I played around with slothful too. What do you think?... Innovative[ly].
Many mfgs. are innovative[ly] slothful. Of course many simply fail to appreciate the value in innovation and some are arrogant too. Have you ever looked at the inventors names on the U.S. vacuum patents? They are (or used to be) all in house engineers. Many great ideas come from the outside, yet mfgs. do not purchase or license outside ideas.
How well I know the resistance manufacturers have to any input from the outside, from design to advertising.
It has expired, but there is a patent with my name on it. I can look up the number and post it if you are interested. (This was pre-Reagan when it was possible to get a patent for under 1,000 dollars. )Reagan increased the cost out of the range of the average working schmuck, and so most patents are by engineers working for multi-nationals. The easiest way to aquire a US patent now is to file overseas and get it by reciprocity.
In addition to the above, I designed a tube/wand assembly that would essentialy give OBT convenience to power nozzle canisters, so a crumb, a corner, a cobweb could be whisked out 'on the fly 'without a disconnect at all. Rexair looked at it because the wives of several RGD's who saw it raved about it (one said it was the best invention since the vibrator! I found out later she actually meant the power nozzle) No dice, because it was from the outside. James Berkeley, an engineer at Electrolux was working on something similar, when I showed him my concept, he liked it better. James McCain, the chief of operations at the time, had me flown in to address his engineering team, the ONLY person in 80 years ever accorded that particular distinction. Three days of presentations, 8hrs a day. There was a lot to talk about! Mr.McCain wanted so badly to bring innovative product to the market place and see Electrolux recapture and exceed its glory days of over 600 branches in the US alone.
There was to have been a field product development team, headed by yours truly. But Joe Urso sold us all down the river, including the veterans who trusted him with their 401Ks accrued from the days of Lux as a division of Consolidated Foods (Sara Lee). Most of them have died off by now, and there was talk of some widows getting up a class action lawsuit, but I never heard anything more about it. If there is a hell, Joe P. Urso deserves the hotseat at the left hand of Beelzubub himself. He destroyed an American icon for nothing more than senseless greed, but I digress.
I attempted once more to sell my concept of the OBT instant on tool wand to MD mfg. and was told that people spending 1500.00 or more for a vac system with sweep inlets would not spend an additional 100 to 150.00 to increase the convenience of using the system for instant spot cleaning with no disconnect of the wand, or even having to stand it up vertically. The problem is that most engineers who design products used primarily by women are-MEN who just don't understand the variety and complexity of routine monotonous tasks the average woman, employed or not, performs daily as her lot in life. It's why they multi-task better than we do, guys! It's the estrogen factor, get over it. Any married guys, ask your wife about the validity of my last statement.
Although hopefully not widespread, business operating in the countries of the far east have somewhat of a reputation for unethical practices. Bear witness to the Chinese baby milk scandal in the news this week, which caused sickness in 300,000 infants and the deaths of six. I think the last thing we should be doing is going easy on businesses that try to push their luck in taking short cuts to profit.
According to the latest news: The company is bankrupt. The two male execs got the death penalty. The Chairlady got life in prison. 3 others involved got 5-15 years with no chance of payroll. One of the 6 tried to commit suicide before the trial by jumping off a building, and was left permanently paralyzed. Friends and family of the 6 victims were not allowed any where close to the trial. Authorities feared that they would take justice into their own hands. One such person was quoted to say even killing and dismembering the perpetrators' bodies are not adequate punishment for the crime. It would not surprise me if the jailed perpetrators meet with an untimely death at their own hands or those of their inmates. Disgracing one's honor is tantamount to a death sentence.
BTW, for APPLE followers, the SEC lawyers have opened an informal investigation into APPLE's handling of the Jobs's health issues and its official news report releases. Depending on the outcome, the SEC may launch a formal investigation. I suspect it will happen. Some say APPLE was pushing its luck by shortchanging stockholders and stakeholders with honest information. Why? Profit motive. Jobs is APPLE. If he's out, APPLE suffers.
Carmine D.
This message was modified Jan 24, 2009 by CarmineD
Even Sanyo gets an honorable mention from the high court, as excerpted:
"Nevertheless, in recent years there has been an increased interest in cyclones as a result of their widespread use in domestic vacuum cleaners. This use was pioneered by Sir James Dyson (see Dyson Appliances Ltd v Hoover Ltd[2001] RPC 26 at [12]-[17] and [44]), although it turns out that one of the items of prior art in the present case(Sanyo, which was not cited in that case) pre-dates his work.
Wonder if Sanyo will sue dyson now over patent infringement? Wouldn't that be ironic.
Carmine D.
This message was modified Jan 25, 2009 by CarmineD
How well I know the resistance manufacturers have to any input from the outside, from design to advertising.
It has expired, but there is a patent with my name on it. I can look up the number and post it if you are interested. (This was pre-Reagan when it was possible to get a patent for under 1,000 dollars. )Reagan increased the cost out of the range of the average working schmuck, and so most patents are by engineers working for multi-nationals. The easiest way to aquire a US patent now is to file overseas and get it by reciprocity.
In addition to the above, I designed a tube/wand assembly that would essentialy give OBT convenience to power nozzle canisters, so a crumb, a corner, a cobweb could be whisked out 'on the fly 'without a disconnect at all. Rexair looked at it because the wives of several RGD's who saw it raved about it (one said it was the best invention since the vibrator! I found out later she actually meant the power nozzle) No dice, because it was from the outside. James Berkeley, an engineer at Electrolux was working on something similar, when I showed him my concept, he liked it better. James McCain, the chief of operations at the time, had me flown in to address his engineering team, the ONLY person in 80 years ever accorded that particular distinction. Three days of presentations, 8hrs a day. There was a lot to talk about! Mr.McCain wanted so badly to bring innovative product to the market place and see Electrolux recapture and exceed its glory days of over 600 branches in the US alone.
There was to have been a field product development team, headed by yours truly. But Joe Urso sold us all down the river, including the veterans who trusted him with their 401Ks accrued from the days of Lux as a division of Consolidated Foods (Sara Lee). Most of them have died off by now, and there was talk of some widows getting up a class action lawsuit, but I never heard anything more about it. If there is a hell, Joe P. Urso deserves the hotseat at the left hand of Beelzubub himself. He destroyed an American icon for nothing more than senseless greed, but I digress.
I attempted once more to sell my concept of the OBT instant on tool wand to MD mfg. and was told that people spending 1500.00 or more for a vac system with sweep inlets would not spend an additional 100 to 150.00 to increase the convenience of using the system for instant spot cleaning with no disconnect of the wand, or even having to stand it up vertically. The problem is that most engineers who design products used primarily by women are-MEN who just don't understand the variety and complexity of routine monotonous tasks the average woman, employed or not, performs daily as her lot in life. It's why they multi-task better than we do, guys! It's the estrogen factor, get over it. Any married guys, ask your wife about the validity of my last statement.
Trebor,
Yes! I would very much like to view anything you have. You can post here or send/link to me privately, whatever you are comfortable doing.
Sorry to hear how you were mistreated and the others too. Greed is a cancer. I never had to jump through the many hoops you did only to be cut off at the knees. My toy agent (one of the best in the country) presented my invention (novelty candy) to a major player, the company said it was a terrible idea, within 8 months they knocked me off. It was at all the major retailers (name a venue that sold candy and it was there). I would only made 3 cents per unit, I would not made much money anyway. It was a great lesson learned and a lesson I will never forget. A lesson me and my wife will pass on to our kids. Looking back, I am grateful for the rip-off.
By contrast what did you think of the manufacturer that sold their business (mfg. ball bearings, I think) and gave out a few million in Christmas gifts (money) from some of the profits from the sale? Those types of people are golden.
Did you view my thread on Oreck named as the assignee to the [Halo] husband and wife inventor team? These two have some really good ideas (IMO). Inventing for the tired vacuum cleaner isn’t easy.
I’ve spent much time as a Mr. Mom while recovering from major surgery. Women's work is underestimated and under appreciated and unending. A good wife is worth her weight in gold! Building good/great product for "her" should be common sense.
Even Sanyo gets an honorable mention from the high court, as excerpted:
"Nevertheless, in recent years there has been an increased interest in cyclones as a result of their widespread use in domestic vacuum cleaners. This use was pioneered by Sir James Dyson (see Dyson Appliances Ltd v Hoover Ltd[2001] RPC 26 at [12]-[17] and [44]), although it turns out that one of the items of prior art in the present case(Sanyo, which was not cited in that case) pre-dates his work.
Wonder if Sanyo will sue dyson now over patent infringement? Wouldn't that be ironic.
Carmine D.
With dyson sales of $1 BN a year, Sanyo could reap enough money for past dyson sales to expand and flourish very nicely in this economic sunami. Probably put dyson in bankruptcy/reorganization. What an ironic ending!
