Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Dyson sues rival Vax over vacuum cleaner design
Dyson has launched legal action against rival manufacturer Vax, claiming the design of its Mach Zen vacuum cleaner is an infringement of the registered design of its first "bagless" Dyson cylinder vacuum, launched 15 years ago.

The company's founder and inventor James Dyson – who revolutionised the domestic appliance market with the product – said the Chinese-owned rival had "flagrantly copied" Dyson's iconic design and pledged to set a precedent on behalf of all designers.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jan/27/dyson-sues-vax

Take the Vax Mach Zen, remove its branding transfers, ask a cross-section of people who makes the cleaner and I'd reckon that a majority would say Dyson. With the branding transfers in place, few would buy it by mistake, thinking it was a Dyson.

The issue is that by copying the Dyson style, a purchaser might give greater emotional kudos to the competing brand, as it looks near enough identical - hence the lack of an incentive to have a wholly original design style and why a product would get some degree of protection by being registered. The Zen isn't an identical copy, but it's certainly very close to the mark.

While victory for Dyson can't by any means be assured, it would certainly seem to be relatively low risk for Dyson. If they succeed, it would disrupt the sales and reputation for the Vax brand, while boosting their own (any compensation would again go to a worthy engineering cause, to get several times the value in PR exposure). If Dyson lose the case, they'd be liable for the legal fees, but they'd still be able to milk some publicity - it's small change for the opportunity.

Regarding the Perfect vacuum.   The canister shell is that of an old Electrolux.  It has an upgraded motor, cloth bags, and other changes.  Does Electrolux get royalties from this design?

what about Cratsman & Ridgid shop vacs?  I think Ridgid should make their own design & not steal from Craftsman!

M00seUK wrote:

M00seUK:

Have to vehemently disagree with this perspective.  The reasons you state should not be bases for legal actions of one company against another in the same industry.  You may want to use these arguments orally with your legal opponents to prevent lawsuits.  However, arguing the veracity of a legal suit solely on these bases rather than written principles of law is IMHO frivolous and capricious.  Courts and people see through these whimsical motives.

Carmine D.

The thing is though, largely until Dyson came along, other brands just let other brands get on with it. If a company copied a design from someone else where vacs were concerned, some would take it as a compliment rather than be against it. Dyson have been infamous with taking many companies to court over suction claims and lots of other issues, trying to reinforce that Dyson are number one for vacuums and suctions. This bullying tactic hasn't gone unnoticed - Hoover were forever being taken to court by Dyson for copying their Vortex/associated names with Cyclones.

vacmanuk wrote:

True.  Like the boy who always cried wolf.  When the wolf finally comes, no one believes him.  Credibility is shattered.

Carmine D.

vacmanuk wrote:

By the way, does anybody know what Hoover's record was as far as lawsuits were concerned?  There were lot's of "variations"  on the beater bar alone by other manufacturers.

Venson

CarmineD wrote:
What's the issue? I'm stating a likely, if cynical, view for all this. I don't represent or speak for anyone. Yes, a lawsuit shouldn't be brought for these reasons, but doesn't mean it isn't

vacmanuk wrote:
VacmanUK,

I guess putting locks on the door to your home is out of the question, and if a robber or opportunist takes something that’s yours and you want it back...then this makes you an infamous bully.

Any idiot with brain matter can design and build the [what’s mostly a] silly little vacuum cleaner anyway they choose, but Amway (working with Bissell), Hoover UK, Hoover/Maytag, TTI (Hoover USA and VAX, and/or other manufacturers) leach vice lead.  Society needs leaders more than suckers (suck the life from others), and that’s history and a demonstrable fact and not an opinion.

Do you think TTI/Dirt Devil's using Model numbers that parallel Dyson's is an attempt to con the public or is it an attempt to separate and differentiate themselves (from Dyson) in the mind of the public?

http://www.which.co.uk/news/2010/01/dirt-devil-launches-high-powered-vacuum-cleaners-195683


Dyson Invents Big

Venson wrote:

Hi Venson:

To my knowledge HOOVER had a patent that ran 30 plus years on the beater bars and its agitator.  At that time patents ran longer.  I might be wrong, but I don't recall any vacuum makers violating the HOOVER patent until the protected time expired.  As you know HOOVER also used in concert with the beaters bars the famous slogan: "It beats, as it sweeps, as it cleans."  And the corrollary also printed/inscribed on all HOOVER uprights for many years: HOOVER makes rugs last longer.  No vacuum makers ever sued over the veracity of these HOOVER claims.  Since HOOVER used them for many years without any dissent/copying I presume all believed them to be true and owned/used solely by their originator: HOOVER.

Carmine D.