Mindef rejects claims it stole idea for mobile first-aid vehicle

Mindef rejects claims it stole idea for mobile first-aid vehicle
It will refer matter to AGC; start-up stands by claim and will defend itself

By Feng Zengkun

SINGAPORE - The Ministry of Defence (Mindef) yesterday hit back at claims that it stole the idea for a mobile first-aid vehicle from a Singapore start-up and infringed the firm's patent. It added that it took the allegations very seriously and will refer the matter to the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC).
In a lengthy post on its Cyberpioneer Facebook page, Mindef said it could not have infringed the patent for the vehicle since it was not valid in the first place. It pointed out that in January last year, a court had declared the patent invalid and revoked it.
This was after MobileStats Technologies abandoned its defence to Mindef's counterclaim that the patent was invalid.
Mindef said yesterday: "Just as there are many smartphone designs and manufacturers who do not infringe each other's patents, there are also many ways to design and produce military equipment." It added: "We are disappointed that the owner of MobileStats has disrespected the court's decision, and continues to make false and unsubstantiated accusations against Mindef."
Last week, MobileStats co-founder Ting Choon Meng alleged in a report on The Online Citizen website that Mindef had illegally copied his patented concept after speaking to him about it at a trade fair in 2005.
He and Dr Mak Koon Hou had started work on their mobile medical station after the Sept 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States. Their vehicle is essentially a truck that opens up to become a resuscitation area with surgical equipment, a built-in suction system for removing blood, fluids and debris, and emergency life-saving devices. They named it a "Station With Immediate First-Aid Treatment", or Swift.
The duo obtained local and international patents in 2005.
Dr Ting said that while the Singapore Civil Defence Force had respected the patent when it called for a tender in 2006 to manufacture the Swift vehicle, Mindef did not in its 2009 tender. He said he found out about Mindef's vehicle only when it was exhibited at the 2011 National Day Parade.
Dr Ting and his partners decided to sue Mindef instead of Syntech Engineers, which manufactured and supplied the vehicles. He said he was forced to drop the case last January, claiming that the legal costs were too high.
In its rebuttal yesterday, Mindef said it was the court that had decided MobileStats should reimburse Mindef $580,000 in legal fees. "The money will go to Syntech, the vendor, which honoured its legal obligation to Mindef and bore the cost of the legal proceedings," it said.
If MobileStats believes it has a valid case, it should pursue the matter with the manufacturer, Syntech, not the end-user. Mindef said: "Imagine if Apple sued Samsung handphone users - instead of Samsung Electronics - for allegedly infringing Apple's Intellectual Property rights."
Dr Ting posted a reply on Mindef's Cyberpioneer Facebook page, saying this was a poor argument as even a person who buys a pirated DVD is also liable. He also told The Straits Times that if the AGC decides to act, "we will have to defend ourselves".
[email protected]
Copyright © 2015 Singapore Press Holdings. All rights reserved.

it's a case of big fish eat small fish...there is no way that dr ting can fight lky's cronies..

krafty said:

it's a case of big fish eat small fish...there is no way that dr ting can fight lky's cronies..

Click to expand...

In ang moh country,even when big fish eat small fish,small fish can sometimes successfully sue back big fish for tens of millions.here in Singapore,government can revoke a patent after its been issued for 7 years,the only country where the military,the courts and patent office and media can work against u in collusion and this is not called corruption.

my experience with saf as a whole, is that they are pap por lumpars especially those occifers. reason being they want to be working in GLCs after they retire at age 50. last year, i know a few , one is a star general who call it quits. besides, these regular soldiers who have no moral are abusing their position in mindef to fight dr ting. they are as good as using their ah gong's money to bully ting. i have only one word for them, fuck saf!:oIo:

frenchbriefs said:

In ang moh country,even when big fish eat small fish,small fish can sometimes successfully sue back big fish for tens of millions.here in Singapore,government can revoke a patent after its been issued for 7 years,the only country where the military,the courts and patent office and media can work against u in collusion and this is not called corruption.

Click to expand...

They sure know how to stifle entrepreneurship and kill budding entrepreneurs in Singapore. Remember the person who start a mobile food service about 10 years back? They made sure he didnt succeed.

PAP want to turn SIngapore into the intellectual property Law hub of Asia. What a joke. Govt agencies infringing on patents. Not the first time. HDB also sued one inventor for his clothe hanging rack design.

retardface said:

They sure know how to stifle entrepreneurship and kill budding entrepreneurs in Singapore. Remember the person who start a mobile food service about 10 years back? They made sure he didnt succeed.

Click to expand...

...iirc i read it somewhere, there is only one left...2 aunties selling ..i think is coffee ???

Papsmearer said:

PAP want to turn SIngapore into the intellectual property Law hub of Asia. What a joke. Govt agencies infringing on patents. Not the first time. HDB also sued one inventor for his clothe hanging rack design.

Click to expand...

big fat joke. so blardy stupid to the point of being obscene. How can one give a patent and then ask for it to be withdrawn. if a patent is given i the first place it means the patent office has deemed it to be original and worth protecting!!!!! worse is to ask the patents awarded in otehr countries to be transferred to mindef!!!! this means the patent is valid. just that they want it by extorting. this is plain extortion and daylight robbery!!!!
how come this idiots never ask for the other countries to withdraw their patents if they think it has no value or originality ??? Probably they would be told to fark off by the patent offices in other countries. truly and only in singapore , no wonder so many idiots and deadwood in mindef. so idiotic and arrogant

krafty said:

it's a case of big fish eat small fish...there is no way that dr ting can fight lky's cronies..

Click to expand...

Yes agreed with you, Mindef has got guns, the party has got only pen and pencil cant fight them!!

The BIG gainst the small

Papsmearer said:

PAP want to turn SIngapore into the intellectual property Law hub of Asia. What a joke. Govt agencies infringing on patents. Not the first time. HDB also sued one inventor for his clothe hanging rack design.

Click to expand...

Infringing patents is bad enough. In other countries lawsuits are the means to settle such disputes.

Here the Govt is not only making Ting pay $580,000, they're also insisting that he re-assign his patents here and in seven other countries to MINDEF. This is daylight robbery! Even if they insist that they didn't infringe on his patents (the kangaroo court will naturally support them), on what grounds do they have the right to forcibly take over ownership of the patents for Ting's hard-earned inventions?

Also, there's a fundamental contradiction here: if a patent is invalid and is thus revoked, why ask for the patents to be re-assigned to MINDEF? Obviously, MINDEF regards these patents as valid and as a route to riches by selling their stolen mobile medical stations to other countries in which the patents were registered.

And we want to be the IP hub of the region? Bah!

Obviously it is Dr Ting who stole the idea from MINDEF and registered the patent in 7 other countries! Otherwise how would a perfectly legitimate and transparent organization like MINDEF sue for all his patents? Crooks like Dr Ting need to be taught a lesson to serve as a warning to other would-be thieves!

kezgtree said:

...iirc i read it somewhere, there is only one left...2 aunties selling ..i think is coffee ???

Click to expand...

This idea had a good chance of taking off and cutting food costs down but those greedy grasping hands of you know who just wouldnt let it happen.

yellowarse said:

Infringing patents is bad enough. In other countries lawsuits are the means to settle such disputes.

Here the Govt is not only making Ting pay $580,000, they're also insisting that he re-assign his patents here and in seven other countries to MINDEF. This is daylight robbery! Even if they insist that they didn't infringe on his patents (the kangaroo court will naturally support them), on what grounds do they have the right to forcibly take over ownership of the patents for Ting's hard-earned inventions?

Also, there's a fundamental contradiction here: if a patent is invalid and is thus revoked, why asked for the patents to be re-assigned to MINDEF? Obviously, MINDEF regards these patents as valid and as a route to riches by selling their stolen mobile medical stations to other countries in which the patents were registered.

And we want to be the IP hub of the region? Bah!

Click to expand...

The logical corollary to all of this is as follows:

1) If as the SAF claims, they came up with the design FIRST, and therefore should have the proper patents in their name, why did they not register their patent in the other 7 countries. After all, as they claim, the patents are designed with taxpayer money. The SAF has to defend the use of these funds by registering their patent in other countries.

2) Instead, they did not register their patents or even attempted to do so. If they did, the other country's patent office would have rejected them. And if they did indeed come up with this invention first and registered it, then Ting would have been rejected when he registered his design. The failure to register their design in other countries is just pure and simple financial negligence on the part of the SAF. they did not manage and protect their asset legally, an asset which was developed using taxpayer's money.

3) The real reason why SAF did not register their patent in other countries is that Ting would have sued them and won in those countries. They know this and therefore is asking for an assignment. In truth, Ting's market for his invention is much bigger in these countries. He should not assign his rights and just get out of singapore and market his invention overseas.

Papsmearer said:

3) The real reason why SAF did not register their patent in other countries is that Ting would have sued them and won in those countries. They know this and therefore is asking for an assignment. In truth, Ting's market for his invention is much bigger in these countries. He should not assign his rights and just get out of singapore and market his invention overseas.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. Give up his Singapore patent (lost cause here, fighting kangaroos you know) but keep his overseas patents and take his invention abroad. At last count eight – Australia, Japan, Israel, Taiwan, Malaysia, Hong Kong, US, Europe.

Papsmearer said:

The logical corollary to all of this is as follows:

1) If as the SAF claims, they came up with the design FIRST, and therefore should have the proper patents in their name, why did they not register their patent in the other 7 countries. After all, as they claim, the patents are designed with taxpayer money. The SAF has to defend the use of these funds by registering their patent in other countries.

2) Instead, they did not register their patents or even attempted to do so. If they did, the other country's patent office would have rejected them. And if they did indeed come up with this invention first and registered it, then Ting would have been rejected when he registered his design. The failure to register their design in other countries is just pure and simple financial negligence on the part of the SAF. they did not manage and protect their asset legally, an asset which was developed using taxpayer's money.

3) The real reason why SAF did not register their patent in other countries is that Ting would have sued them and won in those countries. They know this and therefore is asking for an assignment. In truth, Ting's market for his invention is much bigger in these countries. He should not assign his rights and just get out of singapore and market his invention overseas.

Click to expand...

ST Kinetic need the oversea patents in order to sell their spare units to overseas customers. Dr Ting wrote in other articles that mindef procured 50+ units of the vehicles when SAF need no more than 20 units.

mindef may have guns but the PEN is always mightier than the gun.

yellowarse said:

Absolutely. Give up his Singapore patent (lost cause here, fighting kangaroos you know) but keep his overseas patents and take his invention abroad. At last count eight – Australia, Japan, Israel, Taiwan, Malaysia, Hong Kong, US, Europe.

Click to expand...

local patent don't give up. keep it as proof that pap govt infringe copyrights.

Press release mentioned they think it should not have to pay for patent as there is no inventive step, yet they want assignment of Ting's patents from overseas. This circus truly has too many clowns!

Never do a patent in sinkieland.. Th at is a hard lesson for him.. If he read my post all these years.. This will not have happen to him.

sleaguepunter said:

local patent don't give up. keep it as proof that pap govt infringe copyrights.

Click to expand...

He may have no choice. IPOS has no enforcement powers; only our courts have, and we know who runs them.

Mindef will likely take him to court for defamation or contempt of court. Either way, this fat bastard is going down!