22 replies to this topic

[Miles]

 

 

I emailed them, and this was their response! 

"Hello,

 

Here is physical properties for our product: 

Use Consistency 26-28 cc/100g

Set Time 18-25 minutes

Maximum Expansion ( 0.25%

 -100 Mesh 99.5-100%

Dry Compressive Strength 10,000 psi

 

Yes, it is identical to USG's Hydrostone.

 

Thank you,

Yurii

Plaster Guys

215-836-2413"

 

 

"Identical to" seems to indicate that it is not USG's product.  Since USG owns the trademark to "Hydrostone," what they're doing by advertising it as "Hydrostone" is kind of shady, even if there's nothing wrong with the product, itself.  

 

If USG wanted, they could pretty much put these folks out of business by taking down their infringing eBay listings, making it more difficult for people like you and me to find their product.  Worse, using a registered trademark to sell a non-genuine product opens them up to severe legal action.

 

Those were exactly my first thoughts. So, you'd agree that the product seems to be identical to that of USG's and fine to order?

 

I'm surprised these people aren't more careful.

[dspdrew]

Yeah, "it is identical to USG's Hydrostone" sounds problematic. It's great for us as long as these guys don't get caught.

[Foogoo]

Yeah, "it is identical to USG's Hydrostone" sounds problematic. It's great for us as long as these guys don't get caught.

 

I wonder how this works with the Target or Walmart brand generic products that say "Comparable to <name brand>". 

 

Edit: Based on my 5 minute internet law schooling, calling it Hydrostone is infringement as it causes confusion. It wouldn't be infringement if the listing title was "Identical to Hydrostone".

https://cyber.law.ha...domain/tm.htm#7

http://www.iusmentis...se/limitations/