It amazes’ me that the ayya, and nyyl are ok with a single company having a monopoly on a whole division in each comp. the second most popular division at that.
It doesn’t really matter if they’re “ok” with it or not, they have no control over the patent.
While technically it is a ‘monopoly’ because it theirs until the patent expires, that Flambeau’s property and they have all the rights to protect it. Again, like Ben said, it’s all business.
The yoyo associations can’t do anything as they don’t have any control on how Flambeau’s property should be used. The least they can do is, again…to develop something to protect sponsors from legal action.
No need to blame AYYA/NYYL
You know the AYYA and NYYL, don’t really like… do anything, right? It’s not as if they have a team of hotshot lawyers on retainer ready to hash things out when companies butt heads.
Hardly. It’s Steve Brown’s(that guy that works for YYF now, haha) intellectual property, they just funded and own the patent as far as I’m aware.
Do you want me to get technical? Look what Steve Brown said at the other site
Anyway, back to the topic.
They could easily remove 5A from comps and not back any comp with duncan as a sponsor, effectivly cutting away the canacer. Since 5A is little to nothing outside the yoyo comunity, they would either have to fold, and open it up a bit, and make a clear statment that release’s companys for use of 5a in promotion and on packaging. or just go somewhere else.
I don’t get everyone bitching. Duncan just want to protect their IP, simple, its how the world works. YYF are seemingly fine about it and are working around it. The 5a scene has massively shrunk because of this, neither has it massively grown. Its going to continue to grow steadily, and the competition is going to get more and more intense.
I do not believe that it is nearly that simple. All of the stakeholder’s here, are themselves holders of “intellectual property” patents that they believe have value. Each, therefore, has an interest in not rocking the IP boat. That is the true danger here.
We are not talking about the next touch-screen technology for the iPad. We are talking about yo-yos. I fail to see how any patents will significantly benefit anyone. The only power that yoyo patents have is the steep economic barrier to challenging them. Therefore, the real issue is the very existence if “IP” in the yoyo world.
After reading the flambeau release, I believe it is clear that there is no longer a “5A” division. It should now be referred to as DUNCAN_5A.
As long as Duncan takes the stand that DUNCAN_5A is their “IP” - then it is my belief that any “competition” in 5A is necessarily an advertisement for Duncan. As such, Duncan should be responsible for its marketing and promotion. It should not be part of any contest that involves an Open division. By definition DUNCAN_5A is not “Open”. It should be removed from any contest that allows anyone to compete other than Duncan sponsored players.
The other point that I would like to make is that this dispute is hurting all participants in yoyo competitions and promotion. By reducing the money available to the contests, 1A players are being hurt because of this squabble. I find it ironic that a tiny division like DUNCAN_5A can affect the competition for all.
I hope that someone works this out. The only one being hurt are the yoyo-ers.
Firstly i’d like to make clear that i’m not trying to cause issues or hate, just want to have a well reasoned argument 
Your first point, all people involved mainly in this issue hold patents. Yes. YYF hold many for the adjustable stuff, the Hubstacks swell as brand names. Duncan Similarly hold Patents on many yoyo designs, including the idea and design for Counterweights.
However shown in previous yoyo releases, both of them are more than happy to license out their designs, Duncan released their 5a patent to YYJ for their 5A yo-yos, YYF released their Hubstack stuff on AnY for the free rider i believe( Check me on that, the Microc was AnY right?).
I don’t understand how you can say that there is no longer a 5A division, but a DUNCAN-5A division. Duncan clearly say in their statement, that they will not take action against any competitors in any division, nor will they attack sponsors of those players. The only thing they are interested in, is the promotion of other companies by using 5A. I can agree that this will reduce some 5a exposure, but not very much, they only real advertising campaign that used 5A, was 5A May, which was a great success imo, and did give a boost to 5A. This again was barely advertising YYF, yes they were YYF videos, but they weren’t wildly branded or anything.
I understand that YYF want to protect themselves, i do however think that by pulling out from directly sponsoring contests with 5a divisions isn’t the way to do it.
And if Duncan-5A is a new division, how does EYYC’s YoyoFactory 1A finals go?
I’m going to go out and say that i am more of a Duncan Fan, i’ve got nothing against YYF, but i find some of what Certain members have said to be a little more than Rude 
But the majority of YYF crew is awesome!
Duncan + YYF = LOVE
5A= EVEN MORE LOVE
YOYO = LIFE
Simon…
I completely agree, I am not trying to create any hate either. No dis-respect to 5A players. I love watching them compete.
But this is an issue that I think we both agree deserves to have a reasoned debate
Have you read the statement released by Flambeau that states their position? The conditions that are demanded are completely un-tenable for any manufacturer to comply with. The only reasonable course of action is to ignore the entire division and leave it to Duncan.
An example:
“Can a yo-yo contest organizer sell a compilation DVD from the contest where several 5A players are not using Duncan products?”
Yes, with prior written consent from Duncan Toys.
How could any manufacturer comply with that? More importantly, why would any manufacturer comply with that? They and their product are beholden to a competitor - Duncan. Hardly a sound business plan. Most importantly, Duncan can cancel that agreement at any time, for any reason.
This is but one of the many conditions that they impose on DUNCAN_5A. All of those conditions demand compliance in the form of prior written consent when it benefits anyone other than Duncan. When it is in Duncan’s interest (like having DUNCAN_5A in the contest) you can operate without fetter.
So I fail to see why you do not see a problem with anyone but Duncan selling products related to DUNCAN_5A. The problems are obvious and the benefits all go to Duncan. The market is too small to make the conditions worth my time. As for the patent - history is replete with the evils of dubious patents. Ask RIM.
As for why I call it “DUNCAN_5A” - read the release. How can it be called anything else than what it is? A style of play controlled by a manufacturer.
Thanks for the information Ben et al. I am looking forward to seeing YYF’s influence on the contest, through players and hopefully some vendor stuff even if they are not sponsoring it.
Thanks for correcting my correct response with essentially the same words.