Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Showing 1 of 63 conversations about:
PhantomTaco
116
Sep 15, 2017
bookmark_border
Seeing as how I:C had the sense to post the part of the agreement that is relevant to this entire problem, I'm going to repost that part of your contract here for everyone to decide for themselves who is at fault:
" Limited License Back. Massdrop does hereby grant Designer a limited, non-exclusive and revocable license to use Massdrop’s Joint Inventions solely to the extent necessary for Designer to (i) perform Designer’s obligations under this Agreement; and (ii) to request manufacture of, and purchase, Products solely from the manufacturer designated in Exhibit C, and to sell products incorporating such Products to end users. Input Club (itself or with or through other entities) agrees to not distribute or sell such Products to resellers or distributors. "
Ergo they were entirely not breaking the contract in any way. The key phrase in there is: "and to SELL PRODUCTS INCORPORATING SUCH PRODUCTS TO END USERS". That would mean nothing about running the Whitefox on Kickstarter (MEANS DIRECTLY TO END USERS) with Halo switches (SELL PRODUCTS INCORPORATING SUCH PRODUCTS) broke any terms of the contract.
Sep 15, 2017
Dukrous
187
Sep 15, 2017
bookmark_border
PhantomTacoI'm a firm believer in trust, but verify. This is pretty open and shut from IC's POV as the Whitefox on Kickstarter would meet "to sell products incorporating such Products to end users " pretty easily. At this point, I'm waiting to see if MD says anything.
I would also consider silence from MD tacit acceptance that this part of the contract is correct and they have acted in a discriminatory manner toward IC for not selling through this site.
Sep 15, 2017
ChitownM2
736
Sep 16, 2017
bookmark_border
DukrousIC never tried to buy the halo switches from MD. Per the contract that was posted, IC has the right to commission and purchase the switches directly from Kalih without going through MD. Since Kalih's contract for them is with MD, they likely contacted MD for approval to produce them and that is where MD denied IC the right to buy the switches.
Doesn't really change anything regarding the overall situation, but there was never going to be a batch of Halo's sold on MD in the near future. I'm guessing MD is waiting for the k-type drop to be fulfilled prior to launching a buy for those switches, which will likely still happen.
Sep 16, 2017
Amnesia1187
544
Sep 17, 2017
bookmark_border
PhantomTacoThe wording “limited, non-exclusive and REVOCABLE“ in that quote means they have pretty much no rights though. That means MassDrop was free to nulify that portion of the contract entirely anytime they felt like it for any reason.
Sep 17, 2017
Dukrous
187
Sep 17, 2017
bookmark_border
Amnesia1187No it doesn't. Revocable means that the revocation clause, however it's worded, kicks in. If Massdrop were initiating revocation of the license, there is likely as detailed process on how that works.
However, since this is dealing with a patent, and no patent has yet been granted, the truth is IC doesn't NEED the license. There is a patent application pending and that means there's nothing to license, but there is also a risk to taking this route. You can read some expert analysis here: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/massdrop-input-club-halo-switches,35468.html
Sep 17, 2017
consolation
742
Sep 18, 2017
bookmark_border
PhantomTacoIt depends entirely on what's in the rest of the contract and if its intent was to establish a partnership for specific products or ad infinitum. The single clauses themselves prove nothing; until you see the context, I'd refrain from "bush-lawyering" as you might look bit silly later.
Sep 18, 2017
View Full Discussion
Related Posts
Trending Posts in Mechanical Keyboards