Text/Qian Jiaqing
Recently, CATL has admitted that the company is suing Tafel for patent infringement, with the subject amount of the lawsuit being 120 million yuan, and asking Tafel to stop manufacturing and Selling related battery products that infringe patent rights.
Currently, the Fujian Provincial Higher People’s Court has officially accepted the case, and the court date is still being determined.
There are two protagonists in this infringement case. One is an absolute leader in global power battery suppliers, with a market share of more than 27%.
The other one, I believe even people in the industry will be unfamiliar with the name, Tafel has just entered the top ten in the ranking of domestic power battery manufacturers.
Such a game does not seem to be common. The usual drama is that small factories sue big factories, and there are really not many big factories suing small factories.
It is understood that the content of this infringement is related to the design of the explosion-proof valve on the battery pack.
Because the temperature of the battery changes during charging and discharging, this will affect the gas in the battery pack. For example, charging and discharging will generate heat, and the gas in the battery pack will expand.
When the vehicle is parked, especially when the outside temperature is too low, the gas in the battery pack will also be affected by the low temperature and become compressed.
The expanded and compressed gases will affect the pressure inside the battery pack, and may even cause the battery pack to explode. Therefore, an additional component is needed to balance the internal and external air pressure, and the existence of the explosion-proof valve can solve this problem very well.
Basically all power battery manufacturers have their own explosion-proof valve patents. However, depending on the R&D technology of each company, the number of patents applied for and the design will be different.
According to statistics, 144 of the patents disclosed by CATL are related to explosion-proof valves, while Tafel also has 49 patents.
The fraction of CATL’s applications is almost as much as Tafel’s, but for such a small component, both parties can apply for so many patents, which is enough to show that they attach great importance to battery safety.
In the author’s opinion, the design principles of the explosion-proof valve should be similar. And if CATL can apply for so many patents, it must cover many design possibilities.
For some small companies, they may adopt the designs of large companies and make changes. After all, this is a part closely related to security, and seeking stability is the best choice.
And according to industry insiders, part of Tafel’s technical team came from CATL and participated in the research and development of BMW’s power batteries, and then left CATL for some reasons. So will the works of these teams be included in CATL’s existing explosion-proof valve patents?
Therefore, we do not rule out that Tafel’s technology may overlap with that of CATL, and there is indeed the possibility of infringement.
But what is very strange is why did CATL choose to prosecute Tafel at this point in time?
Just in February this year, Tafel’s shipments reached a new high, with a year-on-year increase of 4802%. It ranked seventh in the domestic power battery rankings and was a dark horse.
And Tafel is currently accelerating the mass production of fast-charging NCM batteries. Its products include "high-performance square aluminum shell lithium-ion batteries", "lightweight lithium-ion battery modules" and "customized high-performance batteries". These three series of new energy technology products, "Performance Battery System", have promising prospects.
But if CATL wins the lawsuit at this time, Tafel will not only face a compensation of 120 million yuan. What's more, the battery packs they are preparing to ship and are developing will no longer work and will need to be redesigned. This will inevitably affect the car companies that Tafel serves, and may even cause Tafel to lose those customers with whom he has maintained stable relationships.
At this time, the person who benefits the most may be the Ningde era.
These font developers will first release the new fonts they have developed on font websites for others to download, and do not indicate whether they are free to use or use ambiguous descriptions to confuse users.
But once it is discovered that a creator using the font has gained a lot of attention, they will notify the other party through legal channels that they have infringed the font they developed and demand compensation. At this time, the creator must either pay up or delete all previous videos. There is no room for reasoning.
This approach can be understood as "fattening and then killing".
In the face of Tafel, who is on the rise, does CATL also have this mentality in this prosecution?
This article comes from the author of Autohome Chejiahao and does not represent the views and positions of Autohome.