Origin behind the "Majohn" brand

[someguyhere]

I happened to come across some stuff on the internet regarding Kaweco vs. Moonman that I thought was interesting. The following is what I've been able to discern:

 

Kaweco was threatened by Moonman producing pens that were better in quality than their own and accused Moonman's designs of copying Kaweco (they called out the Moonman T1 as being a "copy" of a Kaweco's products). Since Moonman is a pen company and wasn't very well versed in Western law, Kaweco tried to bully the small manufacturer around by registering the Moonman trademark themselves in Europe! So that's right, Moonman in Europe is now owned by Kaweco, and Kaweco won't give it to the actual Moonman company unless Moonman basically pays them money & stops making pens that are "similar" to Kaweco, even though to my knowledge the T1 is not a copy of any pen.

 

As a result Moonman basically said "screw you" and then started actually copying Kaweco...because that's actually perfectly legal too. So newer pens such as the Majohn Rs1 and others were made directly in response to Kaweco trying to bully them. Kind of like "you're accusing us of making copies? Okay, now I'll actually make a copy!" That's why they even have brands like Majohn now, because they can't use Moonman anymore.

 

Kaweco also tried to trademark their Kaweco sport design, but it was in fact rejected in Europe because it was too generic of a design. Furthermore, the Kaweco sport itself is a copy of an older Aurora pen and the design is now what...80 years old or so? So technically you could say they're both kind of copying the Aurora.

 

Anyways I find this whole thing pretty funny.

 

Thread1

Thread2

[silverlifter]

2 hours ago, someguyhere said:

Since Moonman is a pen company and wasn't very well versed in Western law

 

That's something of a charitable take on the clone business.

[OCArt]

I hadn't paid attention to this and also didn't realize that Majohn was Moonman. Thanks.

[someguyhere]

7 hours ago, silverlifter said:

 

That's something of a charitable take on the clone business.

What do you mean? The only thing Moonman didn't do was to register their trademark in another zone. Everything they did was 100% above board and totally legal. They didn't clone anybody until Kaweco took Moonman's trademark from underneath them.

[silverlifter]

11 minutes ago, someguyhere said:

What do you mean? The only thing Moonman didn't do was to register their trademark in another zone. Everything they did was 100% above board and totally legal. They didn't clone anybody until Kaweco took Moonman's trademark from underneath them.

 

So, their clone of the Pelikan M800 doesn't count? Or the LOI MZ? Or the numerous Montblancs? Their whole business model is to rip off pen designs and sell cheap versions. Pretending that they are unaware of IP laws is disingenous. 

 

Yes, its great people can buy cheap versions of classic pens. That comes at a cost, though. And the people of reddit seem to prefer to remain oblivious to that while they decry Kaweco's admittedly ill-advised retaliation. 

 

You can pony up the full price for an M800 and know that it will still be a top line pen for decades to come. Or you can buy a rip-off for a fraction of the price, which will be lucky to last a couple of years before falling apart. You also have no way of knowing about the working conditions of the people that made it, what they were paid, whether they were children, forced labour, etc...

 

So, yeah, not 100% above board. Not even remotely close.

[A Smug Dill]

1 hour ago, silverlifter said:

So, their clone of the Pelikan M800 doesn't count?

 

As far as I'm aware, Moonman aka Majohn does not have a piston-filler, so which clone of the Pelikan M800, in which the M clearly indicates the pen model is a piston-filler?

[Mech-for-i]

No Moonman start style cloning way before this but needless to say the style they cloned are all either generic ( but people associate them with certain brand certain model ) or long overdue for copyright ( industrial design )

 

That is still style cloning , but yes it's legal. Most consumers who voice out against this probably not aware that it's actually legal , and in fact the laws were constructed specifically to allow copying , cloning after the copyright period so know-how and advance can spread and be more available to the wider public. This happen with almost all breakthrough industrial design and yet there are design that can be call unique but still cannot be granted trademark copyright and most of the time it's because while the product might be unique now it's not really unique when compared to historically available compatriots.

 

And Kaweco's exploit to try to trademark the Sport's industrial design will of course not be granted, not only because it's simply there too old to start with but overall it's also a generic design. And yes there are others before Kaweco that had this design, even down to the faceted cap.

 

Consumers who buy into more well known brand and pay more and of course those Mfrs themselves rightly would think negative of that but a lot of the exclusiveness really are just self born image of a brand a product. Take the Parker Duofold Century. We all say Kaigalu , Jinhao, Moonman clone the style and indeed they are, but is it not Parker themselves clone that against their old Duofold which that old Duofold actually style cloning even older Waterman Flat Top(s)

 

Also people forget when copyright and trademarking you do not just look at a single isolated market sector , you look at the wider larger all industrial design 

 

Is Moonman not to be blamed , certainly not they should be , and consumers should be notified of their products ( some of them ) are not genuinely original styled.  Being perfectly legal is one thing , being non progressive is another and let's not forget us the consumers .. there are those who are ignorant , there are those who just do not care ( would you care if that $0.5 Zebra ballpoint actually cloning the BIC Krystal ) and then there are many hobbyist like us, knowing it all but will still BUY it.

 

So long the market there the business will be there too.

[Mech-for-i]

8 minutes ago, A Smug Dill said:

 

As far as I'm aware, Moonman aka Majohn does not have a piston-filler, so which clone of the Pelikan M800, in which the M clearly indicates the pen model is a piston-filler?

 

The T1 is a piston filler but every ( styling ) element of it no where even resembles a Pelikan .. BTW what's that LOI IZ , no idea what's talking here !?

[silverlifter]

13 minutes ago, A Smug Dill said:

 

As far as I'm aware, Moonman aka Majohn does not have a piston-filler, so which clone of the Pelikan M800, in which the M clearly indicates the pen model is a piston-filler?

 

My bad, I assumed that the Moonman 800 was a ripoff of the Pelikan M800, when in fact it is a ripoff of the Momento Zero. My point about their business model stands.

[Mech-for-i]

10 hours ago, silverlifter said:

 

My bad, I assumed that the Moonman 800 was a ripoff of the Pelikan M800, when in fact it is a ripoff of the Momento Zero. My point about their business model stands.

 

- it’s not personal–it’s strictly business -

 

Personally I held neutral towards the business model , it's nothing new nor even uncommon. 

 

It's just that among us hobbyist , some of us , feel being degraded by commoditization of products that we see as prestigious. Truth be told , most country had trademark mechanism , so why are these prestigious fountain pen not trademarked. Some because of Mfr's own but most because from a wider industrial design trademark POV , they are just not unique , in fact most are generic .. Fountain pen particularly so cause our so call styling, most of them dated decades, even century old and being that old they are public domain property now. No one can claim it their own.

 

And do not discount the average Joe consumers , they buy some at certain price knowing full well those are not premium price and expect not a premium product .. for them they can equally happily just write with a BIC. 

 

So long market exist, business will be there. I think for the big names , trying to monopolies ultimately would fail cause the product indeed is not unique. Personally I would not buy any of the style cloned ones but I would welcome any advance , derivatives , say the T1.

 

[txomsy]

Sorry, but I am fed up of astroturfing posts using the Net to give a wider scope to petty commercial wars and make strongly biased opinions seem as "stablished truth".

 

What we know of the case is that apparently none of the two companies has done anything illegal, and that they offer different qualities and prices.

 

And that being so, claiming either to be good or bad is uncalled for and strongly biased.

 

Claiming one is making better products than the other without any experience is defamation. Claiming someone using legal methods is abusing is defamation. Claiming someone is a saint that gives away superb products at sale prices out of their warmth of heart and is being retaliated unfairly is uncalled cheap propaganda.

 

Given that, I feel it extremely  hard to believe (and I try hard) that the OP is not a troll paid by one of the sides to smear the other. Not that they are, or the OP is, but it so stenchfully smells like so that this is starting to be disgusting.

 

Now, I do not defend any, but I do actually have products from both. And I can say in my experience, Kaweco's quality is higher, and in my experience, looking at prices, they are comparable, and in my (limited) knowledge, none of them seems to have done anything illegal at all.

 

I can also add that, to many, the strategies of either may seem questionable from different cultural stands, but that we share not the same views is no reason to smear anyone. Moonman has a right to use a century old unprotected design, and Kaweco to register any unregistered trademark they want.

 

Loaded words do not help anyone and less than anything a healthy and objective discussion. No wonder if someone then questions your intentions. For me, the original post looks like nothing but a recurrently paid troll echoing a smearing campaign.

[someguyhere]

6 hours ago, txomsy said:

Sorry, but I am fed up of astroturfing posts using the Net to give a wider scope to petty commercial wars and make strongly biased opinions seem as "stablished truth".

 

What we know of the case is that apparently none of the two companies has done anything illegal, and that they offer different qualities and prices.

 

And that being so, claiming either to be good or bad is uncalled for and strongly biased.

 

Claiming one is making better products than the other without any experience is defamation. Claiming someone using legal methods is abusing is defamation. Claiming someone is a saint that gives away superb products at sale prices out of their warmth of heart and is being retaliated unfairly is uncalled cheap propaganda.

 

Given that, I feel it extremely  hard to believe (and I try hard) that the OP is not a troll paid by one of the sides to smear the other. Not that they are, or the OP is, but it so stenchfully smells like so that this is starting to be disgusting.

 

Now, I do not defend any, but I do actually have products from both. And I can say in my experience, Kaweco's quality is higher, and in my experience, looking at prices, they are comparable, and in my (limited) knowledge, none of them seems to have done anything illegal at all.

 

I can also add that, to many, the strategies of either may seem questionable from different cultural stands, but that we share not the same views is no reason to smear anyone. Moonman has a right to use a century old unprotected design, and Kaweco to register any unregistered trademark they want.

 

Loaded words do not help anyone and less than anything a healthy and objective discussion. No wonder if someone then questions your intentions. For me, the original post looks like nothing but a recurrently paid troll echoing a smearing campaign.

 

So you're resorting to insults and using loaded words that yourself? That's great. You don't even know me. I think my account is 5-10 years old, with my original account established in 2007 which I had forgotten the password. But you're not the only one with experience from both companies.

 

I just happened to have run across something I found interesting. It's not everyday a brand has to establish a new brand because a rival bought out their rival's trademark in a different country.

 

I'm also not a lawyer. But at least in the US, it is illegal to cybersquat. Of course, the difference is this takes place in the EU and involves trademark. I'm unsure if the EU has a similar provision.

[A Smug Dill]

11 hours ago, txomsy said:

Moonman has a right to use a century old unprotected design, and Kaweco to register any unregistered trademark they want.

 

I agree.

 

But we already know people arbitrarily choose to engage in all sorts of ‘tribalism’, whether that's pretending America to be better than Europe or vice versa; barracking for certain sports teams; or just hating on brands and groups who dare to adhere to a different set of values, even though nobody has any claim to a universal standard or Right™ and Good™.

 

11 hours ago, txomsy said:

Sorry, but I am fed up of astroturfing posts using the Net to give a wider scope to petty commercial wars and make strongly biased opinions seem as "stablished truth".

 

It's your prerogative to stop reading and refrain from participating, if that's how you feel.

 

I'm trying hard to pretend you're not alluding to the need for (self- or externally imposed) censorship of content, just because you find something disgusting or otherwise an affront.

 

11 hours ago, txomsy said:

For me, the original post looks like nothing but a recurrently paid troll echoing a smearing campaign.

 

I don't see it that way. If two sides or factions are going to fight anyway, then at least they should try to strike with ‘facts’ supported with evidence, strike precisely and strike hard. Nobody is obliged to refrain from painting either side of the battle in a bad light, especially if they're using statements and observable actions originating from those companies themselves.

[Mech-for-i]

In the end , neither Kaweco nor Moonman are in the wrong nor any of them in the right .. both engage in acting less than gentleman manner 

 

If it's legal , and its business , then it will be , it's just capitalism on display , probably not the better side of it.

 

No need to be any emotional about it , those pens not going to be better or worse off pending the arguments.

 

 

 

[MuddyWaters]

Kaweco looks kind of stupid because the retaliation for the endless copying was not a concerted effort from multiple European brands at once which were being targeted by moonman. It looks more like a petty move now, but in the end it is necessary to put boundaries on this sort of behaviour. 

[Dan Carmell]

On 10/15/2021 at 11:05 PM, silverlifter said:

 

My bad, I assumed that the Moonman 800 was a ripoff of the Pelikan M800, when in fact it is a ripoff of the Momento Zero. My point about their business model stands.

It’s interest that you’d mention the Momento Zero, a really lovely pen, but more closely derived from the Omas Paragon than any of the Chinese pens mentioned here are to their non-Chinese lookalikes. 
 

Might be a good place to note that Parker about lost its mind over all the tiny Italian pen makers producing P-51 clones during the 51’s height of popularity. It’s an old issue.