This user has no status.
Member
I think I can clarify some issues on the celluloid free table tennis balls.
Patent issue: Patents are valid only in countries where it has been granted. The patent holder has the right to prevent others to manufacture/use the patented product/process only within that country.
Indeed there is a granted patent to "In Sook Yoo International Project Management - IPM" in United States (US8105183), Korea (KR101331035), Japan (JP5078894) China (CN101272830) and in countries which are a party to European Patent Convention (EPC) (AT, BE, BG, CH, CY, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, HU, IE, IS, IT, LI, LT, LU, LV, MC, NL, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE, SI, SK and TR) (EP1924331). Please note that IPM has to pay the necessary fees to those countries to keep the patent rights. Furthermore, there is an opposition to the EP1924331 patent. At the end of the opposition procedure within the European Patent Office, that patent may be totally revoked within EPC countries.
The scope of protection of the patent: I'll only evaluate the EP patent. The patent claims "Celluloid-free table tennis ball, preferably having a diameter of 38.5 to 45 mm, a weight between 2.0 and 4.5 grams and a shell thickness between 0.20 mm and 1.30 mm, where the shell is composed of plastics whose principal component is an organic non-crosslinked polymer, which has not only carbon atoms but also heteroatoms in its main chain, characterized in that the principal component a) is a thermoplastic, furthermore b) is having a density according to DIN EN ISO 1183 of 1.22 g/cm3, as well as c) is having water absorption at standard climate according to DIN EN ISO 62 of less than 1.0 %." All other claims are dependent on this claim. If any manufacturer in any of the above mentioned countries, manufactures a table tennis ball according to the claim, without the consent of IPM, will be infringing the patent rights, regardless of the ball being seamless or not.
However, any table tennis ball manufactured by using crosslinked polymer will not infringe the IPM patent. Also, even if non-crosslinked polymer is used, if the specifications of the polymer is different than that of the specified in (a), (b) or (c), there will be no infringement; eg., anyone can use a non-thermoplastic polymer, or a thermoplastic polymer with a density of less than 1.22 g/cm3, without the fear of the patent.
Since there are many celluloid-free balls on the market, the manufacturers may have either have found ways to avoid the patent or may be manufacturing with the consent of IPM.
IPM patent is not valid in other countries. For example, any manufacturer can manufacture in India and export to countries which are patent free.
Possibility of different characteristics of table tennis balls manufactured by the same company: Contract manufacturers manufacture according to the process and specifications of the contract giver. To give an example, DHS may manufacture its own balls according to its own specifications and for lets say for Stiga with according to Stiga's specifications, or to Butterfly with the same specifications with DHS if Butterfly accepts. They are arranged with commercial agreements within companies.
I hope it helps.
Regards
Patent issue: Patents are valid only in countries where it has been granted. The patent holder has the right to prevent others to manufacture/use the patented product/process only within that country.
Indeed there is a granted patent to "In Sook Yoo International Project Management - IPM" in United States (US8105183), Korea (KR101331035), Japan (JP5078894) China (CN101272830) and in countries which are a party to European Patent Convention (EPC) (AT, BE, BG, CH, CY, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, HU, IE, IS, IT, LI, LT, LU, LV, MC, NL, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE, SI, SK and TR) (EP1924331). Please note that IPM has to pay the necessary fees to those countries to keep the patent rights. Furthermore, there is an opposition to the EP1924331 patent. At the end of the opposition procedure within the European Patent Office, that patent may be totally revoked within EPC countries.
The scope of protection of the patent: I'll only evaluate the EP patent. The patent claims "Celluloid-free table tennis ball, preferably having a diameter of 38.5 to 45 mm, a weight between 2.0 and 4.5 grams and a shell thickness between 0.20 mm and 1.30 mm, where the shell is composed of plastics whose principal component is an organic non-crosslinked polymer, which has not only carbon atoms but also heteroatoms in its main chain, characterized in that the principal component a) is a thermoplastic, furthermore b) is having a density according to DIN EN ISO 1183 of 1.22 g/cm3, as well as c) is having water absorption at standard climate according to DIN EN ISO 62 of less than 1.0 %." All other claims are dependent on this claim. If any manufacturer in any of the above mentioned countries, manufactures a table tennis ball according to the claim, without the consent of IPM, will be infringing the patent rights, regardless of the ball being seamless or not.
However, any table tennis ball manufactured by using crosslinked polymer will not infringe the IPM patent. Also, even if non-crosslinked polymer is used, if the specifications of the polymer is different than that of the specified in (a), (b) or (c), there will be no infringement; eg., anyone can use a non-thermoplastic polymer, or a thermoplastic polymer with a density of less than 1.22 g/cm3, without the fear of the patent.
Since there are many celluloid-free balls on the market, the manufacturers may have either have found ways to avoid the patent or may be manufacturing with the consent of IPM.
IPM patent is not valid in other countries. For example, any manufacturer can manufacture in India and export to countries which are patent free.
Possibility of different characteristics of table tennis balls manufactured by the same company: Contract manufacturers manufacture according to the process and specifications of the contract giver. To give an example, DHS may manufacture its own balls according to its own specifications and for lets say for Stiga with according to Stiga's specifications, or to Butterfly with the same specifications with DHS if Butterfly accepts. They are arranged with commercial agreements within companies.
I hope it helps.
Regards