Earlier this week, I saw a news article in Bloomberg Law, detailing a vote by the US International Trade Commission to investigate several manufacturers and importers of gel ball blasters. That vote was based on a complaint from Hasbro and Spin Master, and was made against brands ranging from SplatrBall to Hydro Strike (Dart Zone) to Gel Blaster. That complaint asserted that the others were importing products violating patents Hasbro had licensed from Spin Master.
Of course, you may remember that Hasbro recently announced their Nerf Pro Gelfire Mythic blaster, with preorders available for its November launch. Naturally, the timing seems more than coincidental, seeing as a successful action would leave a growing gel ball market in Hasbro’s hands. But with a recent filing in the United States District Court, Western District of Texas…things don’t seem to be that simple.
Background: SAPs and Xploderz
Superabsorbent polymers (SAPs) are long chemical chains that can absorb and retain large amounts of water relative to their size. Research began in earnest during the 1960s, when the USDA became interested in finding materials to improve water conservation in soil. Since then, SAPs have been used in diapers, candles, flood control devices, and (of course) potting soil and related applications, where it can give a controlled release of water and water-based fertilizers.
Among the United States blaster community, the line didn’t quite take off…but the blasters lent themselves to modification for firing short darts, and the large plunger tubes and strong springs were easy targets for harvesting when the blasters were found in thrift stores.
While the Xploderz line may have died, the underlying patents and branding for Xploderz, Orbeez, etc. were acquired by Spin Master in later years.
Gel Ball Today
A few of our previous reviews, if you want more info (I’m behind on reviewing these):
Hasbro Files For Action
Gel Blaster Fires Back
Wrong.
Once Hasbro and Spin Master filed those complaints with the USITC, Gel Blaster sued Hasbro in federal court! According to their filing, Hasbro and Gel Blaster not only entered into talks about licensing the Nerf brand, but entered into both a Confidentiality Agreement (meaning information shared would only be for evaluating a possible business transaction), but also a Common Interest Agreement (with several things on the table, ranging from purchasing a significant stake in Gel Blaster LLC to a viable defense strategy against the Spin Master patents, should a lawsuit occur). Reading the entire document, it would appear that (at least from Gel Blaster’s point of view) Hasbro entered into these agreements, acquired critical info from Gel Blaster, and then proceeded to license the Spin Master patents for their own product while attempting to destroy the competition. All without actually exiting said agreements. To add insult to injury, Gel Blaster accuses Hasbro of falsely telling prospective retailers that Gel Blaster was violating IP to which they had rights; the obvious motive, of course, would be pitching the Nerf Pro Gelfire line instead.
There is much more to the situation than meets the eye, and we have yet to hear the Hasbro side of the story in court. Even so, a precursory reading of the filing with the Western District of Texas has six counts for which Gel Blaster can sue Hasbro. How this resolves is anyone’s guess, with one opting for Executive Branch relief and the other going to the Judicial Branch in response. Personally, reading the patents gives me the impression that they’re invalid. Mainly, it claims all possible methods of propulsion, all possible shapes of the ammo, and defines magazines as essentially all possible carrying methods for ammo. With claims so broad, I don’t think they’d hold up in court, and I’m sure Gel Blaster thinks the same. Especially considering what The Maya Group actually made when they first got those patents; you shouldn’t be able to claim things you haven’t actually made.
In any case, the saga will continue for the foreseeable future. Hasbro is more than welcome to prove my impressions of the situation wrong. And at the end of the day, I hope that whichever party is in the right is able to win on the merits of the case.