You're Ok with that? He doesnt patent it because he would go to jail because of corruption in the system and its ok to steal his intellectual designs for this reason? No wonder pot is illegal when fools seriously think like this.
I do to believe roor is starting to look like a joke...but im not gonna lie...i still want at least ONE roor.de for my collection.... preferably a gold label...those are sexy as FUCK
He may have started it, but it would have come anyway I feel, its the 21st century... and his innovations have been far surpassed now, yet his prices are still firm (top dollar). There are just better pieces of glass to spend your money on now a days.. tubes where the most functional part is the label just don't quite cut it anymore, at least for that price IMHO.
You all need to do some more research, a lot more before you jump to all these conclusions. While they did originally come up with the design for glass on glass in water pipes they only got the idea from age old usage in chemistry glass-ware. The glass lathes used to produce all high end pipes are all originally intended for work on laboratory glass-ware. First off, RooR.de has ALWAYS produced limited quantities of custom tubes with worked sections various places as well as limited edition tubes. Secondly, RooR.de has been in R&D with perculation systems since way back in the day when the guys over at Dementia glass where producing the best RooR.us tubes made. Dementia has since moved onto LUX Scientific and Sheldon Black to further their design innovations free from the RooR.de restrictions. Thirdly, if you are blaming the shobby build quality of current perculating RooR.us pipes its because the name license now resides under ZOB, who have been less than spectacular to say the least with their laid-back perc designs and shobby craftsmenship. Fourth, RooR.de is still a SMALL glass work shop, SMALLER than Toro or Dementia. The reason the price on their tubes are so steep is simply the fact that they have been around so long and have made a name for themselves on their simple, effective, and quality designs. The demand is so high that the price is way over-inflated, but good for the humble German glass blowers who had the idea for this innovation back in the day Fifth, stop complaining about what you get for your money. Its a RooR(.de), not some no-name glass. They have earned the right to charge the price they do simply because of their name and the luxury demand, just don't buy them if you don't want them but to bash them on price alone is equivalent to saying that way over-priced Porsche is a POS when it is just over priced, yet still amazing. That all being said, that vape they have started to put out most likely licenses a basic design and is built under the RooR.de workshop so they can charge their god-high premium.
How can it not be considered innovation? That is probably one of the most ridiculous claims I have ever heard. Show me a roor that stacks bubbles/diffuses like a stemline (roor.de downstems only please) and I will agree with your statement. No matter how little regard you may regard function in a piece a good deal of the glass community sees it differently. The percs that these artist are designing these days are something that were added on to what you're calling "copies" to improve function for that part of the glass community. A lot of tubes today are stemless...completely differing from anything you would see from roor. Is reducing drag and eliminating excess albeit breakable pieces not innovation?
Did he invent the ground glass joint? Or was he just the first to use it on a Bong? And I agree that he deserves to have had more compensation that was given for his invention, and its a shame that he didn't patent it. I also don't think it was wrong of other companies to use his design ideas that he didn't patent. It would have been better if he was paid by those who use his ideas, but that was due to one of his mistakes, and I can't fault other companies for trying to get ahead in the game. And I still disagree about the use of borosilicate glass argument as well. In patent law, since he didn't invent the bong, he only used a new material, that is a process claim, and only applies to the manufacturing process. So, if you manufacture the tube in a different way than he did, you aren't violating that patent. If he invented the ground glass joint, then yes, he should have patented it and sold it to a company, but if he didn't then his putting it onto a bong is just a new use of an already existent component, a process claim, same as above. So with that stemless bongs aren't using the same process, they only use one joint, so that would be different. Tubes with stems it could easily be argued would have to pay that patent. So yeah, I agree with you that it sucks in some cases, specifically with the GonG connections, but legally its ok because he had no patent. In other cases his patent would have only been a process claim, and wouldn't have granted him any right to payment for a lot of these things, and I believe morally Ok, because I don't think patents shouldn't extend that far. Of course thats all opinion and my interpretation of a set of laws, and it would take a court hearing to get an official answer, but I have been through business law classes, so I know something about this. If you know any business lawyers you can ask and get a better opinion than mine I have no problem accepting that he should be due more payment, I just don't think so legally or morally in most cases. (Unless he invented the ground glass joint.) Its really the inventors of the bong, the downstem, and the bowl who are due the extra money, other people just copied their designs with new materials, and then again with whoever invented the first stemless bong, the first showerhead, the first pillar...etc because those were actually new designs, not just a new material.
Richard Melograno AKA Sheldon Black holds an ornamental design patent for the Combined tobacco smoking pipe bowl and receiving stem which if you look up is basically the classic downstem and slide design. I don't know the legal stuff but I hope that helps Patent Images P.S. he also holds a patent for the grommet bong style.
It does, cool, in that case I would say he is due credit on all downstem and bowl designs, without the downstem though, people are fine to innovate. as they please...like stemless designs.
Yeah saying other glass companies shouldnt use GonG joint is stupid its the best tech we have to use so why not. If everyone only used their own innovation's just imagine what the world would be like. I mean just look at the auto industry.
A badass vape, a badass bubbler with a badass diffuser.. All in one. Not to mention created by RooR.. Is well worth that price if you ask me. They've been in the industry for a long time, So obviously its going to be top notch quality. The idea of it being created by RooR gives me a lot more comfort then buying a "Herborizer". No Im not knocking the Herborizer but think about it. I will most definetly be making this purchase and will be 100% satisfied with my choice. Anyways its all personal preference. RooR was never passed up by todays bongs, They just stick to what they know best. And for all the shmucks who say Alex K diffusers blow RooR diffusers outta the water.. Your wrong.. 9 times outta 10 the RooR takes the cake. Plenty of videos and threads to back it.