SweFrame’s response is that these two spreaders are not, as Cargotec asserts, identical copies of the Bromma Second Generation electrical units. Mikael Pettersson of SweFrame told Port Strategy that: “SweFrame allegedly has taken ideas that the filing individuals ‘believe’ come from Bromma, when in actual fact these principal technical steps had already been taken years in advance by RAM, Bubenzer, Stinis and ZPMC.”
The company goes on to say because of this, technical details such as vertically-oriented telescopic transmission, twistlock transmission and linkages with a mechanical stop can not be considered “new and unique” to Bromma’s designs which were released in June 2010.
Further, SweFrame adds its designers have an “immense general knowledge” of the subject and they simply would not have needed to illegally obtain and copy Bromma’s designs.
However, the Swedish police’s department for intellectual property law searched SweFrame’s premises and confiscated drawings and other materials, Anne Westersund of Cargotec told Port Strategy.
The local court in Sweden, Västmanlands tingsrätt, has accepted the lawsuit and ordered SweFrame to comment on the claims, facts and circumstances in Cargotec’s lawsuit. A first hearing in the matter is expected to take place after the summer break.
