Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Dukrous
187
Sep 15, 2017
"This was against the terms of our agreement"
Would Massdrop consent to revealing the language of this contract? IC appears to be willing to reveal what the contract says but fears a penalty for doing so. We, your customers, would like to determine which of the statements out there are factually correct.
UncleVesemir
7
Sep 15, 2017
Dukrous"In our agreement for the HALO switch, Input Club requested an exception to our exclusive distribution rights to allow them to offer switches directly to end customers as replacement parts and as standalone switches via their website. This was a reasonable request, so we agreed and wrote it into the agreement. "
From what I understand, using those switches as an option for a product is neither selling replacement parts nor selling standalone switches, and Kickstarter is not their (IC's) website. Therefore, it is a breach of agreement.
Of course, this is not the legal contract and there may be other interpretations or whatnot in there. But from what is said here, MD doesn't seem to be in the wrong.
Dukrous
187
Sep 15, 2017
UncleVesemirThat's what Massdrop claims. IC claims otherwise. You don't know it's a breach of agreement because you haven't seen the contract. And that's why I asked what I did.
dubiousOne
69
Sep 15, 2017
DukrousI'd also like to see the language of the contract. There is clearly some disagreement over 'distribution.'
It's a shame if I:C gave away their product just to get the switches produced. I think they could have gotten them manufactured without handing over their secret sauce, but I can understand the incentive.
However, if Massdrop really cared about the community (and not money) I feel like they could have let I:C sell the switches as add-ons (or with whitefox or whatever) in the original contract. They also wouldn't say things like "We have no interest in engaging further..." I really hope they can sit down, and work something out that benefits the community, and not what's best for the company with millions in capital funding and top-shelf lawyers.
I also want to say, I believe the discussion should be public if you are going to sell things listed by "Communities" and not categories.
Dukrous
187
Sep 15, 2017
dubiousOneTo make one thing clear...nobody is claiming IP rights here. In fact, both parties have gone out of their way to avoid the terms "IP" and "intellectual property". Both agree that Massdrop has exclusive manufacturing and distribution of IC's design. This is something neither party disagrees on.
What they disagree on is what IC's use of the HALO switches is. IC claims they have the right to source switches from Massdrop. Whether it's at cost or slightly above is unknown, but this is what they wanted: to buy switches from Massdrop to include in their Whitefox keyboard.
Massdrop claims IC is only allowed to resell the switches individually or to replace broken switches. However, Massdrop will have individual sales of the HALO Switches. This is an economic certainty.
If I, as a keyboard manufacturer, wanted to use the HALO switches for a keyboard I designed and sell, and I bought them through a drop then I'm legally allowed to use them in any manner as there is no agreement beyond X switches cost me Y price.
Generally, this strikes me as Massdrop wants not only exclusive manufacturing and distribution rights, which both sides agree they have, but also wants to be the sole source of products with this switch such as the K-Type. Had IC sold the Whitefox through Massdrop I'm sure there would not have been an issue.
And this is almost the legal definition of a discriminatory practice. If the agreement is IC can use the switches as a component, then Massdrop has overextended their reach. If the agreement is IC can only use it in the way specified above, then IC was mistaken.
Either way, without the explicit portion of the contract being released, we won't know. But from a business sense, I want to sell widgets...I shouldn't care how people use said widgets, just that I make a profit from selling them to whoever wants them.
dubiousOne
69
Sep 15, 2017
Dukrousok, IP wasn't the correct term
UncleVesemir
7
Sep 15, 2017
DukrousWell said. It's just that to me at this point, MD's update sounds more solid and specific than IC's. If MD lied or intentionally misrepresented the contract, then I guess I can only say well played, MD.
PRODUCTS YOU MAY LIKE
Trending Posts in Mechanical Keyboards