Searz strikes again....

[Conductor562]

I knew Sears was a shadow of its former self, but shaking down small time manufacturers for their products is just sad. Sears can rot in hell.

 

[Sureshot]

My employer lost a spot on Wal-Mart shelves to a Chinese knock-off and did indeed have to lay off employees. (We also discovered that in the long term we were better off without Wal-Mart's BS.)

I think alot of people and companies would be better off without Walmart.

 

[Altec]

The guy may have invented the bionic wrench, but he damn sure didn't invent contacts!

 

[Mickey O]

Here's a link to the company that actually makes them: Penn United Technologies

A 550+ employee company. Nowhere near the size of Apex and Sears, but certainly not a mom and pop operation. I think they have a case, the Cman is an obvious copy, but I think they're flat out lying about the jobs to bolster their case and attempt to rally people against the Evil Big Corporationy Corporations™

I'd still say 550 employees is small for a manufacturing company. If sears really wanted to sell it I dont under stand why they just didnt try buying the rights to it or making some kind of partnership.

It is small, plenty of mom and pop operations with 500 plus employees and there's no reason not to believe they laid off people because of Sears unethical/illegal actions. I hope it costs Sears a bundle, of course that cost will be passed right on to their consumers. I'd also like the judge to allow Dan Brown to punch the owners of Sears Holdings and the tool purchasers (one of whom I know).


There was a similar local case out here, a guy came up with a lamp and brought it to a big retailer (or similar) and they said they had no interest in his idea. A while later the guy was in their store and saw his lamp, they ripped off the design. The guy one big in court.

 

[91bronc300]

So that's the reason Sears is going down the tubes..............karma.

Now I see.

 

[SpeedCoach]

I never really liked or wanted the bionic wrench but i might have to get one just because of this. I saw it yesterday on my trip into sears. I thought surely it was made by the same company. but i did notice it was china. and the handles arent offset like the loggerhead. shame to see them do that. is there some kind of copyright infringement? if i was loggerhead i would be taking them to court

bought one this afternoon after reading the story.....i WILL find a place to use it, just because of this story. Garbage move by Sears/Cman

 

[NC-Fordguy]

I looked at both wrenches tonight after reading this thread. There are differences between the two with the imported one having different angles on the handles and some sort of locking device. The re-design differences perhaps gets around any patent issues. Guess thats ultimately up for the courts to decide.

Personally I don't have a use for the tool

Until I hear from both sides and get to read the actual contracts, I'll reserve my judgment on who did what especially seeing how msnbc and the new york times seems to be the first to run the stories.

 

[gatewaysysop]

Wow. This is pretty low, even for Sears, and that's saying a lot.

Glad the article puts at least some spotlight on the outsourcing and duping people into thinking the tools are US-made. That's always rubbed me the wrong way, but to off-shore even a gimmick tool and make an obvious copy with a few changes to avoid infringement? What a bunch of scum bags.

That's the last time I buy anything from them.

 

[worknhard]

If Mr. Brown's case against Sears progresses like the case brought against Sears many years ago on the quick release socket wrench, he's in for a very loooong haul.

http://articles.latimes.com/1986-07-14/business/fi-19337_1_wrench-case

 

[Steinmetz]

I wish more people would fight the cases. The big Companies know that they can keep it ******* in court and the little guy cant afford that. More lawyers have started working these cases on contengency just for this reason.
We had to sue Challenger a couple of years ago because they copied one of our patents and started producing it in China. We at SVI try to keep everything local and made in the USA.

I don't think that there's any evidence that patent holders aren't asserting their rights. You just don't hear much about it, except in the rather egregious case, such as this. Incidentally, most of these cases settle, which generally includes an agreement on licensing terms.

 

[Dieselbutterfly]

Please tell me what the correct response should be,from an American,who frequents this site.Perhaps none at all in your opinion,im not naive,or a hypocrite.This is my point:sears research and marketing reads this site i would imagine,and if everybody shares your opinion they think gee we can do this with no tangible losses.On the other hand if enough people say they wont shop there anymore maybe a change is in order.This apathetic attitude in our country today sickens me,at least here in this forum the majority of people seem to be offended by the action sears has taken.

 

[Steinmetz]

If Mr. Brown's case against Sears progresses like the case brought against Sears many years ago on the quick release socket wrench, he's in for a very loooong haul.

http://articles.latimes.com/1986-07-14/business/fi-19337_1_wrench-case

These two cases are not comparable. In the Roberts' case, he was not the patent owner. In fact, he sold his idea to Sears for about ten grand. It was only later that he had "seller's remorse" based upon the popularity of the Craftsman quick-release ratchet.

 

[Steinmetz]

Please tell me what the correct response should be,from an American,who frequents this site.Perhaps none at all in your opinion,im not naive,or a hypocrite.This is my point:sears research and marketing reads this site i would imagine,and if everybody shares your opinion they think gee we can do this with no tangible losses.On the other hand if enough people say they wont shop there anymore maybe a change is in order.This apathetic attitude in our country today sickens me,at least here in this forum the majority of people seem to be offended by the action sears has taken.

I'm offended by it too. And I haven't been in a Sears store in years.

 

[Mickey O]

While Sears did make these 31 people lose their job, they also created those jobs in the first place right? Not that it makes stealing this guy's crappy idea any more acceptable.

Sears didn't create the jobs, Dan Brown invented/made a product, Sears sold some, made a boat load of money and ripped off Dan Brown's design. Dan Brown created the product, Dan Brown hired the employees, Dan Brown paid their salaries, not Sears.

 

[bimmerZ5]

well, if you ever thought Sears, at least in recent times, is a trustworthy company/brand... you're fooling yourself. their track record has been horrible.

http://ftc.gov/opa/2009/06/sears.shtm

 

[Mickey O]

These two cases are not comparable. In the Roberts' case, he was not the patent owner. In fact, he sold his idea to Sears for about ten grand. It was only later that he had "seller's remorse" based upon the popularity of the Craftsman quick-release ratchet.

I think Sears bull-shitted the kid a bit as well and he later obtained the patent.

If you look at the picture of the ratchet below, right above the quick release button you will see "Roberts", the patent holder.

 

[Mickey O]

well, if you ever thought Sears, at least in recent times, is a trustworthy company/brand... you're fooling yourself. their track record has been horrible.

http://ftc.gov/opa/2009/06/sears.shtm

Remember when their auto centers were busted for ripping off people, that was a while ago, you're right Sears doesn't have a good track record.

 

[worknhard]

In the Roberts' case, he was not the patent owner. In fact, he sold his idea to Sears for about ten grand. It was only later that he had "seller's remorse" based upon the popularity of the Craftsman quick-release ratchet.

"Sellers remorse"? Don't think so... Roberts the inventor trusted the information Sears gave him was true and accurate, not the BS it was. The courts agreed with Roberts.

 

[Steinmetz]

I think Sears bull-shitted the kid a bit as well and he later obtained the patent.

If you look at the picture of the ratchet below, right above the quick release button you will see "Roberts", the patent holder.

Roberts is the patentee, because the patent statute requires the name of the actual inventor (35 USC sect 115) on the application, and the patent that issues from it. His name doesn't mean that he owns anything, though. He relinquished all rights in the prior agreement.

 

[Mickey O]

Roberts is the patentee, because the patent statute requires the name of the actual inventor (35 USC sect 115) on the application, and the patent that issues from it. His name doesn't mean that he owns anything, though. He relinquished all rights in the prior agreement.

Not so, he was the person tha applied for the patent originally and the patent was returned to him at some point during all the trials because it was obtained fraudulently, he then sued Sears for patent infringement.

 

[Steinmetz]

Here's the actual story, excerpted from Roberts v. Sears Roebuck & Co.; 723 F.2d 1324 (7th Cir. 1983). I'd forgotten several of the important details of this interesting story. My apologies to all.


"...Those of us who have experimented, not always successfully, with the "do-it-yourself" approach to car or bicycle repairs may have had occasion to use a conventional socket wrench. When we were able to tell the nut from the bolt, wished to remove the former, and had located the socket of the correct size, the problem became how to remove the socket then attached to the wrench. After pulling, prying, muttering, and more pulling, the two-handed operation was completed. Plaintiff Peter Roberts, having personally experienced such frustration, addressed himself to that problem; in 1963, he designed and constructed a prototype socket wrench with a quick-release feature that permitted its user to facilely change sockets with one hand without the customary pulling, prying, and muttering. Roberts filed an application for a United States patent on the wrench in April, 1964,2 which was rejected in March, 1965. He then extensively amended his application and presented a single claim3 upon which a patent formally was issued on September 28, 1965.

4
Defendant Sears, the assignee of all rights to Roberts' patent, mounted an advertising campaign which explained, in layman's terms, the principal advantage of Roberts' claimed invention: "Push-button ratchet wrench releases without a fight. Ever tried to separate a socket from an ordinary ratchet wrench when your hands were greasy? Forget it. You just press a button on Sears new Craftsman wrench. They separate easily--no yanking." Roberts' quick-release wrench was an enormous commercial success.

5
In 1969, Roberts sued Sears alleging, inter alia, that he was fraudulently induced to assign his rights to the invention to Sears. The jury awarded Roberts one million dollars in damages. This court affirmed the district court's judgment against Sears and its decision not to alter Roberts' monetary award, but reversed the district court's determination that it lacked authority to order rescission of the agreement assigning Roberts' rights to Sears. Roberts v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 573 F.2d 976, 986 (7th Cir.1978) (Sears I ).

6
Following the remand, Sears prepared, executed, and tendered to Roberts, through the district court, reassignment of any and all rights in the patent obtained pursuant to the June 15, 1965, agreement, the sole equitable relief anticipated by this court in Sears I. The district court, however, further ordered the entire case reopened for an accounting of Sears' "unjust enrichment" from June 15, 1965. On appeal, this court held that because Roberts had elected to submit his damage claim to a jury, he was precluded from pursuing the equitable remedy of restitution for "unjust enrichment." Roberts v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 617 F.2d 460, 465 (7th Cir.1980).

7
This court further held that Sears was the lawful owner of all patent rights from June 15, 1965, to January 20, 1977, when Roberts, through reassignment, became the lawful owner of all patent rights. We stated that Roberts would be entitled to sue only for infringement occurring after January 20, 1977. Although Sears was precluded from challenging the validity of the patent in the first trial, we made clear that Sears could do so if sued by Roberts for post-January 20, 1977, infringement. Id...."

 

[Laker]

Please tell me what the correct response should be,from an American,who frequents this site.Perhaps none at all in your opinion,im not naive,or a hypocrite.This is my point:sears research and marketing reads this site i would imagine,and if everybody shares your opinion they think gee we can do this with no tangible losses.On the other hand if enough people say they wont shop there anymore maybe a change is in order.This apathetic attitude in our country today sickens me,at least here in this forum the majority of people seem to be offended by the action sears has taken.

I expressed my displeasure on their Facebook page linking the article and emailed customer service.

For the email I received a canned reply that is in effect a blow-off or a "we don't give a ****" response:

***********
Good Morning Michael,

Thank you for contacting sears.com. We owe you an apology for any inconvenience you encountered with the quality of our products.

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We know that your time is valuable and we appreciate the fact you took the time to give us feedback on our performance.

The feedback that you have provided today regarding the quality of our products will be taken into consideration as we continue to enhance our services to meet the needs of our customers going forward.

Sincerely,

Alex A. (jambro3)
Sears Customer Care
[email protected]
1-800-366-3028
*************

F'em -I'm so done with sears.

 

[Coach James]

Just thinking, with Bain behind all that mess along with many other USA patent infringments that we may not be privy too, Mitt Romney owning the company, if he would have been elected to run our country ? ouch!

Sears is behind all the mess, not Bain Capital. I have often wondered how many people know what Bain Capital actually does. Not what tv talking head says the company does, but what it really does.

Romney does not own Bain Capital anymore than I own Exxon-Mobil. He has shares in a blind trust that was created in 1997. He left any management role with Bain in 1999.


Coach

 

[carterbeauford]

if Sears' legal department operates anything like the rest of the company, I'll be surprised if they even respond to the suit, the guy will probably win by default.

 

[d.mcfarland]

If I'm not mistaken, New Balance shoes is the company that spends the most money per year fighting patent infringement. They don't win all the time either. My point is, this could be a tricky case. Courts can't decide what is ethical, only what is legal.

 

[Laker]

Here's the patent:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...50&s1=6889579.PN.&OS=PN/6889579&RS=PN/6889579

Locking handle, straight handle on the Sears knock-off doesn't matter. Loggerhead owns the patent on the (6) converging pieces that form the bolt gripping concept.

 

[Mike.ASC]

Sears is behind all the mess, not Bain Capital. I have often wondered how many people know what Bain Capital actually does. Not what tv talking head says the company does, but what it really does.

Romney does not own Bain Capital anymore than I own Exxon-Mobil. He has shares in a blind trust that was created in 1997. He left any management role with Bain in 1999.


Coach

Well said Coach. Some people foolishly interject their ignorant political comments suggesting the present president is a better choice then someone with a proven track record of success . Slavery is alive & well for the uninformed .

Mike

 

[dirtydogintex]

So who's supplying today's equivalent to old time CM tools.... S-K?

Sure is convenient to meander into Sears to exchange abused broken tools....

 

[Laker]

So who's supplying today's equivalent to old time CM tools.... S-K?

Sure is convenient to meander into Sears to exchange abused broken tools....

Maybe we should start a CM / OEM thread? Listing the US makers of CM gear and ordering directly from the OEM vendor thus leaving CM out in the cold.

I believe some of the ratchet wrenches are made by Kastar.
http://www.garagejournal.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2673816#post2673816

I wouldn't be too happy to warranty a US made ratchet for a Chinese CM replacement. I'd rather take it home broken and search for a rebuild kit.

 

[dsmnickk90]

So who's supplying today's equivalent to old time CM tools.... S-K?

Sure is convenient to meander into Sears to exchange abused broken tools....

Armstrong is the supplier of USA RP wrench, sockets and extensions

 

[Tucko]

Why am I not suprised that Bain Capital gets mentioned in this story?

 

[dsmnickk90]

It's actually Apex Tool Group. Armstrong is a brand under the Apex umbrella.

http://www.apextoolgroup.com/

But, the extensions and wrenches are now Chinese. I would guess the sockets are not far behind. Apex may still be producing them, but there are some differences between the Chinese and USA versions.

Thats why i said USA in front of them. And I have a bunch of Armstrong sockets. they are exactly the same as Cman. Chrome and Impact. Armstrong Matco and Cman are the only 3 and have pinless impact sockets. Armstrong and Cman are the same and the mactos are a little different.

 

[Tucko]

Hopefully Lowe's, Home Depot or Menard's go do a deal with them -- and then publish that fact.

Sometimes I wish a person would create a FB page or standalone website that was dedicated to "Bring back USA-manufactured Craftsman products" (like my father and grandfather have).

I no longer buy Craftsman tools. So much disappointing China made Craftsman cr*p today and the quality isn't there. Cheaper to spend a few dollars more and get a quality product elsewhere.

Facebook is FULL of such websites. A simple google search will get you tons of lists for Made in America products. I just bought 2 pairs of workboots at a decent price. They are UNION made in the USA. Thorogood boots. Screw you, Diehard.

 

[SMKS]

Thats why i said USA in front of them. And I have a bunch of Armstrong sockets. they are exactly the same as Cman. Chrome and Impact. Armstrong Matco and Cman are the only 3 and have pinless impact sockets. Armstrong and Cman are the same and the mactos are a little different.

Yes, the Armstrong and Craftsman USA sockets are identical. They're both made by Apex Tool Group.

 

[Skin]

they were both made by Apex. From the looks of things i'd say Cman severed ties with them around the time Danaher spun them off. Thats when this China move started after all.

 

[SMKS]

they were both made by Apex. From the looks of things i'd say Cman severed ties with them around the time Danaher spun them off. Thats when this China move started after all.

I don't know if that's clear. Apex does have production capacity in Asia, so the new imported tools could be made by them in Asia.

Apex tools was formed in 2010 and some of the tools made by them -RP wrenches, for example- have stayed USA made until now. That seems to indicate that Sears kept a relationship with Apex after it was formed by Danaher and Cooper.

But, we're all just guessing anyway, so who knows.

 

[McFarmer]

Facebook is FULL of such websites. A simple google search will get you tons of lists for Made in America products. I just bought 2 pairs of workboots at a decent price. They are UNION made in the USA. Thorogood boots. Screw you, Diehard.

Those are good boots, I've worn them for years.

 

[nanofrog]

I don't know if that's clear. Apex does have production capacity in Asia, so the new imported tools could be made by them in Asia.

Apex tools was formed in 2010 and some of the tools made by them -RP wrenches, for example- have stayed USA made until now. That seems to indicate that Sears kept a relationship with Apex after it was formed by Danaher and Cooper.

But, we're all just guessing anyway, so who knows.

It's possible that Sears or Apex wants out (even both), but have contractual obligations that will delay their full parting of ways (Bain inherited any existing contracts Apex had on the books at the date they took control).

So perhaps it's that the RP wrench contract just expired (USA production), and they either renegotiated with Apex for lower cost product (thus switching production to China), or went with another vendor entirely that's producing them in China (lower bid than what Apex was charging).

Assuming this is the case, other USA made products currently provided by Apex could go the same way over time as the expiration dates of existing contracts come up.

Just a thought anyway.

 

[egnorant]

ABC news had a blip showing that David Muir, as part of his Made in America series would be showcasing this very issue during world news with Dianne Sawyer sometime this week.

Could not pin down which day, but here her show is at 5:30.

Bruce

 

[patent pending]

Here's the patent:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...50&s1=6889579.PN.&OS=PN/6889579&RS=PN/6889579

Locking handle, straight handle on the Sears knock-off doesn't matter. Loggerhead owns the patent on the (6) converging pieces that form the bolt gripping concept.

THIS is what matters right here. Claim 1 of the patent granted...which is pretty broad for the applicant. Hopefully he's got some decent attorneys. I know I would take the case, even on contingency, if I were a lawyer.