SweFrame\u2019s 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: \u201cSweFrame allegedly has taken ideas that the filing individuals \u2018believe\u2019 come from Bromma, when in actual fact these principal technical steps had already been taken years in advance by RAM, Bubenzer, Stinis and ZPMC.\u201d<\/p>\n
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 \u201cnew and unique\u201d to Bromma\u2019s designs which were released in June 2010.<\/p>\n
Further, SweFrame adds its designers have an \u201cimmense general knowledge\u201d of the subject and they simply would not have needed to illegally obtain and copy Bromma\u2019s designs.<\/p>\n
However, the Swedish police’s department for intellectual property law searched SweFrame\u2019s premises and confiscated drawings and other materials, Anne Westersund of Cargotec told Port Strategy.<\/p>\n
The local court in Sweden, V\u00e4stmanlands tingsr\u00e4tt, 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.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Following Cargotec\u2019s filing of a lawsuit against its recently formed competitor, SweFrame has rebutted allegations that its Y40-E and Y45-E spreaders were based on stolen Bromma information.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":1776,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"sponsor":[],"class_list":["post-1775","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-europe"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1775","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1775"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1775\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1777,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1775\/revisions\/1777"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1776"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1775"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1775"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1775"},{"taxonomy":"sponsor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/sponsor?post=1775"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}