Recently, an intellectual property dispute broke out in the field of intelligent tire manufacturing equipment, which caused great concern in the industry.
VMI, an internationally renowned tire equipment manufacturer, officially filed three patent infringement lawsuits with the Zhengzhou Intermediate People’s Court, accusing Lianya Intelligent Technology (Suzhou) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Lianya Intelligent”) of infringing on its core patent rights.
It is worth noting that the tire manufacturer Henan Tianji Tire Co., Ltd. was listed as a co-defendant in these three cases for purchasing and using the equipment involved.
It is reported that the focus of this lawsuit is on the LAPC series tire building machines produced and sold by Lianya Intelligent.
VMI accused this series of equipment of infringing on three patents it enjoys in China, which are related to the core processes of tire manufacturing.
Among the three patents involved in the case, one is particularly eye-catching.
The patent involves the core technology of “one-step tire molding”. The Supreme People’s Court has previously determined in another case that this technology was a patent applied for by Sachi Intelligent Equipment Co., Ltd. after obtaining VMI’s technical secrets through improper means, and was ultimately ruled to be owned by VMI.
Evidence submitted by VMI showed that executives and key technical personnel of Lianya Intelligent once worked for Sachi and were suspected of using VMI’s proprietary technology in the LAPC series tire building machines even though they knew the source of the technology.
In addition, the other two patents involved in the case involve cutting technology of tire components (such as belt layers) and tire building drum technology respectively.
Among them, the patented technology of the building drum can significantly save the time of replacing the building drum during the production of tires of different sizes, and greatly improve the accuracy of equipment connection. It is a key technology to improve the efficiency of tire production.
In the lawsuit, VMI not only requested the court to issue an injunction to stop the infringement, but also claimed compensation for the damage caused.
This lawsuit puts the equipment manufacturer Lianya Intelligent and the end user Henan Tianji Tire in the dock at the same time, sounding the alarm for domestic tire manufacturers.
For tire companies, production equipment is a core asset.
If you are involved in legal disputes due to the use of infringing equipment, you may not only face the risk of deactivating the equipment and repurchasing it, but it may also affect normal production schedules and business reputation.
VMI emphasized that the company comprehensively protects its innovations in tire building machines and other fields in the form of technical secrets and patents, and will adopt a “zero tolerance” attitude towards any infringement of its intellectual property rights.
As China’s tire industry transforms into high-end and intelligent industries, intellectual property rights have become a key battlefield for corporate competition.
The progress of this lawsuit will have a profound impact on the competitive landscape of the tire equipment manufacturing industry and the equipment procurement strategies of tire companies.
When purchasing equipment, companies must more carefully assess intellectual property risks to avoid falling into similar legal disputes.
At the same time, this also reminds domestic tire companies to focus on independent innovation, strengthen intellectual property protection, enhance their core competitiveness, and remain invincible in the fierce market competition.
