5 ms·
> I have a simpler explanation for that. Someone bought the tooling (injection moulds?), in an auction maybe But the company never sold them, so even they from
by throwaway_jobs 6y ago
> I have a simpler explanation for that. Someone bought the tooling (injection moulds?), in an auction maybe
But the company never sold them, so even they from the beginning reasonably believed they had in fact manufactured the slide. Had they sold the molds (which I don’t think a company would do bearing their mark without selling the actual mark as well) it would have actually helped their defense and helped them consider/discover they were not the manufacturer of this particular slide.
- raverbashing 6y agoAh, those details were not clear from the original story. They could have assumed (at the start of the process) that it could have been a pre-dissolution built slide. But if they admit that, during the dissolution process their machinery wasn't sold that definitely goes against my theory.
- throwaway_jobs 6y agoFWIW I think your comment was in good faith and at minimum intellectually curious. I asked my colleague similar questions when hearing about the case.
- extrapickles 6y agoIt’s somewhat common for worn out molds to be sold as scrap metal, then someone buys them from the scrap dealer and starts making counterfeits. This is why quite a few places will deface old molds before scrapping so it would be cheaper for the counterfeiter to make a new mold than repair the genuine one.