John Paines wrote:As best I understand it, Red sued Jinni-Tech for making the compatible mags, and then Jinni-Tech counter-sued. That counter-suit was what got thrown out. But Jinni-Tech is still making the mags, no? Did Red drop its infringement suit?
ShaheedMalik wrote:When he countersued, Red changed the name of their company. They were going to lose.
I believe Jinni-Tech sued RED first in February of 2017 based on the commentary on the REDUSER forum
https://dockets.justia.com/docket/washi ... 217/242137Then RED later sued later in the year for patent infringement, but I don't think the patent was enforceable in that case and they continued to dispute into 2020 based on the first suit where Jinni-Tech is the plaintiff.
https://dockets.justia.com/docket/washi ... 217/242137jamedia wrote:Also, RED insisted that Jinni-Tech videos were removed. That was 2020. Now they are all back up as the court reversed its decision.
It seems nothing in Jinni-Techs videos is incorrect.
The original Jinni-Mag YouTube advertisements from 2017 were never removed.
Interesting quote from Howard's link above suggests RED may have some custom code on their mags. Maybe just to 'authorize' the SSD for use? The videos posted by Jinni-Tech don't imply this, unless I missed it:
"Although Plaintiffs provide evidence that RED's SSDs are standard-issue, Mr. Royce's testimony about the steps he had to take to create the JinniMag, including "copying" some "random characters," suggests that RED's Mini-Mag product as a whole may include hardware and/or software created specifically by RED. Moreover, neither party submits expert testimony that might clarify the issue."
EDIT: Actually my quote is taken from this link:
https://casetext.com/case/jinni-tech-ltd-v-redcom-inc-7