Vapars.com Little Magic Square Portable Vaporizer"Il piccolo quadrato"

[Seek]

pakalolo: It's a redraw of my drawing that I posted at MFLB thread. MF told me that the drawing was perfect for explanation and asked if they can use/tweak it for some new manual and if I've got it hq. I didn't like the original version, it was ugly and overdrawn and also I haven't got the source anymore so I've drawn it again and nicer. I also found the drawing good to explain why this knockoff doesn't utilize the IR so I posted it.

I don't find this picture absolutely perfect too, the IR focus point should be brighter in that picture, I used wrong blend mode there.

 

[pakalolo]

pakalolo: It's a redraw of my drawing that I posted at MFLB thread. MF told me that the drawing was perfect for explanation and asked if they can use/tweak it for some new manual and if I've got it hq. I didn't like the original version, it was ugly and overdrawn and also I haven't got the source anymore so I've drawn it again and nicer. I also found the drawing good to explain why this knockoff doesn't utilize the IR so I posted it.

I don't find this picture absolutely perfect too, the IR focus point should be brighter in that picture, I used wrong blend mode there.

Now you're just being picky.

It is the best diagram I've seen to explain the IR characteristics. Do I have your permission to use it for the Vaporpedia entry?

 

[Seek]

Of course you can.

 

[pakalolo]

Of course you can.

Done, and on behalf of Vaporpedia users I thank you.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled topic.

 

[Abysmal Vapor]

Well I have used both.. and it works as good as the mflb believe it or not.. The screen is not flat it has a sink too..
Anyway.. I wasn't impressed with the MFLB.. the Vapars didn't got me any further and i kept it because i can clean it.. which is the most important feature for a vape for me... Once i inhaled a goo from the MFLB... I puked 16 times.. The vapars has a little ashtray at the bottom that collects the herb dust.... and the draw is from the middle.. not from the bottom..
Show me a cut off picture of a mflb.. and i bet we will see that there is no space age design there...
For me that heat the screen tech is just an excuse/fix compared to real convection vape.. I am not diggin it.. .. I got better results with all my other portables than mflb and vapars..

 

[vap999]

I dont think there is patent violation.. Shape is different .. I don;t thin MF patented wiring battery to a stainless screen ... Thats like to patent screwing a bolt..

From my limited experience with patents, mostly biotech/chemical, the MF and most other patents for vaporizers are a joke, i.e., rather worthless. First, the Magic Flight Launch Box-related "patent" linked to is just an application, so nothing has been granted and there is nothing that can be enforced.

The claims (what the patent covers/what is legally enforceable, with the rest of the document just supplementing this) for this and most other vaporizer patents/applications are just too broad; and ironically end up like this one, mostly just covering "a vaporizer," i.e., one or a few specific device designs (which are very hard or impossible to defend against infringement). I don't seen any real (non-obvious) technological advance or invention claimed or described in this and most other vaporizer patents. Further, the MF application (and many other vaporizer patents/applications) does not cite any prior art at all! That is, this application incredibly does not cite any prior related publications, patents, commercial applications or products, etc., despite conduction vaporizers and electrical resistance heating of materials using metal screens not being anything new or inventive.

Note, I am not alleging that the MF LB is not an innovative product. Just that in terms of technicalities, this and most vaporizer patents are weak, at best design-specific, involve no real invention/technological advance, and are generally worthless (other than as a trophy, for marketing, etc.).

 

[Hippie Dickie]

@vap999 - thanks for that post. that pretty much reflects my thoughts on trying to secure a patent. i.e. why bother -- unless the vape is truly unique, like running on static electricity or something really clever.

 

[OF]

As I understand patient law it has to cover something 'not obvious to those skilled in the art'. A vape run by x-ray might win. Maybe.

But the process of say bonding the mesh screen to electrodes and passing current through them most likely is fodder for a solid patient. At least for the making of vapes. These guys might claim they weren't bonding, but a well written patient will have split those hairs very fine and they'll fail on the current part unless they can show this is a common heating technique that 'any good engineer' would suggest.

Consider Colt's very successful patient on revolvers. Remington and a bunch of other makers made what were in many ways superior Black Powder 'cap and ball' Revolvers but Colt got a patient to cover 'cylinders bored through' so they could take the new cartridges from the other side. The courts blocked the other makers from this key feature and they couldn't make them new fangled cartridge revolvers to go with that there Winchester lever gun. The concept protected was not the revolver, but the hole through the cylinder. Nobody had done that before.

OF

 

[pakalolo]

From my limited experience with patents, mostly biotech/chemical, the MF and most other patents for vaporizers are a joke, i.e., rather worthless. First, the Magic Flight Launch Box-related "patent" linked to is just an application, so nothing has been granted and there is nothing that can be enforced.

I clearly explained when I posted the original link that it was a patent application and that nothing had been granted.

The claims (what the patent covers/what is legally enforceable, with the rest of the document just supplementing this) for this and most other vaporizer patents/applications are just too broad; and ironically end up like this one, mostly just covering "a vaporizer," i.e., one or a few specific device designs (which are very hard or impossible to defend against infringement). I don't seen any real (non-obvious) technological advance or invention claimed or described in this and most other vaporizer patents. Further, the MF application (and many other vaporizer patents/applications) does not cite any prior art at all! That is, this application incredibly does not cite any prior related publications, patents, commercial applications or products, etc., despite conduction vaporizers and electrical resistance heating of materials using metal screens not being anything new or inventive.

Note, I am not alleging that the MF LB is not an innovative product. Just that in terms of technicalities, this and most vaporizer patents are weak, at best design-specific, involve no real invention/technological advance, and are generally worthless (other than as a trophy, for marketing, etc.).

I do not understand your comments about patents for vaporizers being a joke and worthless. How? If a patent is granted, the owner has legal grounds to initiate lawsuits against violators and to claim damages. There are numerous companies out there trying to make a lot of money from this point, and many of them are succeeding. There's even a term for this: patent troll. If you're familiar with patents then I can't see how you would not know this.

The US in particular has been freely granting patents that are far less innovative and original than the MFLB, and for which prior art or obvious derivation should have been a barrier. This happens because the US Patent Office doesn't bother to search for prior art anywhere but in its own archives and seems unable to conceive obvious derivations.

The software industry has seen hundreds of patents granted despite prior art and/or obvious derivative application, including for such basic ideas as podcasting (granted in 2009), making an online purchase with a single click (2001), page up and page down (2008), and even something as stupid as changing font colours in an email based on the intended recipient (2009). Some of these, ridiculous as they seem, have been enforced. For example, Amazon has gotten licensing fees from Apple for their infamous one-click shopping patent, and succeeded in forcing Barnes & Noble to change their online ordering system to add a second click.

Given what has been happening with patents in recent years, I would never call any patent worthless and a joke, no matter how stupid and obvious it seemed.

Edited to correct grammar, and because silly little mistakes are what I am all about today...

 

[Hippie Dickie]

while what you are saying is certainly true, it is also true that it takes an Apple or an Amazon to be able to litigate against a patent infringement. too much effort just for the bragging rights, in my humble opinion.

 

[vap999]

while what you are saying is certainly true, it is also true that it takes an Apple or an Amazon to be able to litigate against a patent infringement. too much effort just for the bragging rights, in my humble opinion.

Yes, a patent gives you grounds to sue, but what federal judge or jury is going to actually enforce this or other such overtly weak and device/design-specific patent? And the costs of going to court would be far more than any financial damage a competitor could do. Add in that most vaporizer patents are weak, likely would not pass any real scrutiny, e.g, they would likely lose a patent office reexamination, and they would likely never be enforced -- to me makes them worthless. What federal judge or jury presented with loads of prior art (literature, example products, etc.) or just looking critically at these patents' claims would actually rule against a competitor (force them off the U.S. market and fine them for damages)? More likely the judge would preliminarily rule in favor of the competitor (against the patent holder) simply on the basis of presumption of the patent(s) involved being unenforceable -- too vague, too specific/not applicable, too much relevant prior art totally ignored, the invention (?) being obvious to those in the field, etc. -- with any one of these legal reason enough to kill the patent.

So, back to the topic, this battery-powered vaporizer: How about some reviews and direct comparisons?

 

[Abysmal Vapor]

while what you are saying is certainly true, it is also true that it takes an Apple or an Amazon to be able to litigate against a patent infringement. too much effort just for the bragging rights, in my humble opinion.

Yes, a patent gives you grounds to sue, but what federal judge or jury is going to actually enforce this or other such overtly weak and device/design-specific patent? And the costs of going to court would be far more than any financial damage a competitor could do. Add in that most vaporizer patents are weak, likely would not pass any real scrutiny, e.g, they would likely lose a patent office reexamination, and they would likely never be enforced -- to me makes them worthless. What federal judge or jury presented with loads of prior art (literature, example products, etc.) or just looking critically at these patents' claims would actually rule against a competitor (force them off the U.S. market and fine them for damages)? More likely the judge would preliminarily rule in favor of the competitor (against the patent holder) simply on the basis of presumption of the patent(s) involved being unenforceable -- too vague, too specific/not applicable, too much relevant prior art totally ignored, the invention (?) being obvious to those in the field, etc. -- with any one of these legal reason enough to kill the patent.

So, back to the topic, this battery-powered vaporizer: How about some reviews and direct comparisons?

I did some.. few pages back.. if not this are the main diffs
MFLB
Heats a bit faster..
Deliver hotter vapor.
Smaller chamber.
Wood finish and is make off solid piece of wood.
Has diod power indicator..
The screen has smaller holes.
Smaller.
Has lifetime warrany .. but i will never have the guts to ship out a box covered with illegal GOO... I am not a narcotraficante sorry
+ screen cannot be removed or at least without damaging it..
--------------------------------------------------
Delivers cooler vapor but is as efficient as the MFLB..
You can load more in the Square and you have more heating surface.
It is not maple but pinewood i think.
It can be unscrewed and easily maintain it and replace parts .
Cheaper and they sell unit only..

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
Well this is the main differences between the two models.. and again not much difference in performance .
Being able to clean(no herb stacks on the corners like on mflb.. and can be disassembled), no herb can leak out of the Square.. I can vape more without reloading..(Mflb was never enough for me.) + get less throat irritation due to cooler vapor. Also is easier to work with concentrates (which are my main on the go stash) cuz it can be cleaned.
I regret for the 55-60$ i gave for the LMS much less than those 120 $ + i paid on my mflb pack.. (with crap batts and charger + 30 $ more for new batts and charger.. )
I am sick of how some people offer a "quality" cheap product and they sell you will eat a bunch of cheap chinese low quality accesoaries with it... They sell 1 $ batts for 5-10 $ , 5 dollar charger for 15 $ LOL.. .BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO..
I am betting that some guys are earning more $ on that than their main product..

 

[Xchadb]

Abysmal -> this is all i really even needed to know bout this little thing thank you!

 

[GO!!bot]

so this thing actually works? interesting...

 

[Stone__Man]

thanks again AV, with your nice photos for reference I will try to make one some day. The one point you made I'm not sure I understand, about length of the metal rods, and the length of them being important to how it works. I could see that if they were very different in size. I just don't have the knowledge of how the principals of heat transfer work. I'll assume the longer a rod is the longer it should take for the other 'business' end to heat up. I read somewhere about the wire and that good one to use. "pipe hangers" are a good choice for the rods. amazon pipe hangers

and make note of the "frequently bought together" lol stainless steel mesh I wonder why ? lol , it would seem many have tried their hand at DIY

 

[snappys]

Many thanks Abysmal, I've been trying to do this from months. I found everything in mesh (A4, and A5 sheets) at http://www.themeshcompany.com/

 

[Abysmal Vapor]

LOL .. No, Thank you Dude ! .. I was going to say welcome to FC.. but i saw you are Registered: 2008-12-28 ... long before me .. Well nice time to make a first post... and i bet i will be useful to the DIYers..
Cheers ! .