RV FEATURE
She said that the other reel was larger and the water hose had a smaller diameter, which may affect water flow, make the hose harder to flatten, and more prone to kinking. She said the larger size of the reel made it harder to store and the lack of a winder knob – as found on the original Multi-Reel – fundamentally changed how the product was used.
“ Features that we carefully engineered to make life easier were not present in their version, which changed the overall experience,” she said.“ Ultimately, a consumer could buy this product believing they had purchased ours, only to find it did not work the way they expected. They could easily be confused by the similar appearance and then associate our brand with features and design choices that were not ours.”
Zoe took action because, as she said, standing up for her beliefs was paramount.
POTENTIAL CONFUSION
Zoe believes that it’ s possible the producers of the product believed they were legally entitled to create and distribute their own version.
“ There is a common misunderstanding regarding intellectual property laws. While design registrations and utility patents eventually expire to ensure fairness and allow for market competition, which we support, this case was different. I am not suggesting we should be the only company allowed to manufacture a flat hose or a stackable cable reel system; competition often drives better products for the end user. However, we fought this specific instance based on potential confusion.
/ 31