|
micklevin
Oct 15, 2009, 4:38 PM
Post #1 of 23
(9934 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 3, 2009
Posts: 7
|
CCH's patent was up for their Alien cam design as of May 23 2009. After seeing how quickly DMM jumped at producing their Dragon Cams (quite obviously based off the recently-expired BD C4 patent), I'm curious if someone will step up and remake the Alien. Maybe this time with better quality control.
See US patent #4832289 at:
http://patft1.uspto.gov/...89&RS=PN/4832289
Note: you will need a TIFF viewer plugin for your browser to see the actual patent document.
|
|
|
|
|
adatesman
Oct 15, 2009, 4:47 PM
Post #2 of 23
(9909 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479
|
|
|
|
|
|
boadman
Oct 15, 2009, 7:55 PM
Post #3 of 23
(9810 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 7, 2003
Posts: 726
|
I don't think that any of the bigger manufacturers are going to pick up the alien trigger design, it's super labor intensive to assemble. It would be awesome if DMM used the internal springs and the alien cam angle on an upgraded zero.
|
|
|
|
|
rschap
Oct 16, 2009, 12:42 AM
Post #4 of 23
(9701 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2005
Posts: 592
|
I think Metolius already came out with an alternative. You only have to change it by 10% and the patent doesn’t mean anything. I don’t know why people patent mechanical devices anymore, it just gives your competitors the blueprint to work from and it’s too damn expensive.
|
|
|
|
|
pfwein
Oct 16, 2009, 12:58 AM
Post #6 of 23
(9687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 8, 2009
Posts: 353
|
adatesman wrote: It's my understanding that it expired a couple years ago, as patents filed prior to 1994 only had a protected duration of 17 years rather than the post-1994 duration of 20 years.
First, the cut off date between the "old" term is June 7, 1995, not a date in 1994.
Second, the term for patents "in force" (either pending applications or unexpired patents) is the longer of either (a) 17 years from date of issuance or (b) 20 years from effective filing date. (Effective filing date refers to parent applications.)
There can be a few other complexities in calculating patent terms (terminal disclaimers; extensions for some reasons; failure to pay maintenance fees). Let me know if you'd like a cite to any of this (although like most other fairly simple things, a quick Google search will probably work also).
|
|
|
|
|
pfwein
Oct 16, 2009, 1:08 AM
Post #7 of 23
(9672 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 8, 2009
Posts: 353
|
rschap wrote: I think Metolius already came out with an alternative. You only have to change it by 10% and the patent doesn’t mean anything. I don’t know why people patent mechanical devices anymore, it just gives your competitors the blueprint to work from and it’s too damn expensive.
I don't know who told you any of the above, but it's basically whack. 10% of what the hell are you talking about?
The scope of a patent is defined by its claims (read a patent to see typical ones). If an accused device is described by the claims, it infringes; if it isn't, it doesn't. There is no attempt to quantify a percentage of change, and as accused device may infringe a patent even if it is radically different (in some respects) from the operative device described in the patent.
As far as costs go, successful patent attorneys tend to charge a lot. Still, a motivated applicant can read Patent It Yourself and file without an attorney, in which case the only expenses are USPTO fees, about $1000 to have a patent issued. If that's too expensive, how much is your invention worth?
Finally, your statement that you "don’t know why people patent mechanical devices" is obviously correct. If you want to learn something about patent law and then form a reasoned opinion, by all means do so. But based on your present lack of understanding of patent law (as reflected in your post), you do not have a well informed opinion as to whether pursue patent protection.
|
|
|
|
|
rschap
Oct 16, 2009, 2:38 AM
Post #8 of 23
(9611 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2005
Posts: 592
|
Well aren’t you just a dick? I would take the time to look up information and defend my statement to have a lively debate with you but after reading your post I’ll just say F-you.
|
|
|
|
|
pfwein
Oct 16, 2009, 4:03 AM
Post #9 of 23
(9545 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 8, 2009
Posts: 353
|
Haha, you got me.
Good luck with your patent advising hobby and enjoy reveling in ignorance.
You sure you don't want to "defend your statement"? I really want to learn that 10% rule--it will make my job a lot easier.
Don't hold back on that font of knowledge you have--maybe an executive of a big corporation in charge of patents will read your post and say, "Golly, why have we been wasting money filing patent applications. That rschap sure seem to know what he's talking about."
Or maybe you're about the dumbest mofo who apparently has some slight idea of what a patent is to opine on the subject.
|
|
|
|
|
andersjr
Oct 16, 2009, 11:59 AM
Post #10 of 23
(9460 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 1, 2005
Posts: 141
|
rschap wrote: I think Metolius already came out with an alternative. You only have to change it by 10% and the patent doesn’t mean anything. I don’t know why people patent mechanical devices anymore, it just gives your competitors the blueprint to work from and it’s too damn expensive.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Oct 16, 2009, 1:01 PM
Post #12 of 23
(9428 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
nikmit wrote: boadman wrote: It would be awesome if DMM used the internal springs and the alien cam angle on an upgraded zero. Zeros are made by Wild Country 
n00b
|
|
|
|
|
nikmit
Oct 16, 2009, 1:10 PM
Post #13 of 23
(9415 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 10, 2009
Posts: 55
|
angry wrote: nikmit wrote: boadman wrote: It would be awesome if DMM used the internal springs and the alien cam angle on an upgraded zero. Zeros are made by Wild Country n00b
?!? Why's that? Am I missing something here? 
|
|
|
|
|
climboard
Oct 16, 2009, 1:33 PM
Post #14 of 23
(9400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2001
Posts: 503
|
nikmit wrote: angry wrote: nikmit wrote: boadman wrote: It would be awesome if DMM used the internal springs and the alien cam angle on an upgraded zero. Zeros are made by Wild Country n00b ?!? Why's that? Am I missing something here?
Yep.
|
|
|
|
|
adatesman
Oct 16, 2009, 1:36 PM
Post #15 of 23
(9395 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479
|
|
|
|
|
|
qtm
Oct 16, 2009, 1:46 PM
Post #16 of 23
(9382 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 8, 2004
Posts: 548
|
nikmit wrote: angry wrote: nikmit wrote: boadman wrote: It would be awesome if DMM used the internal springs and the alien cam angle on an upgraded zero. Zeros are made by Wild Country n00b ?!? Why's that? Am I missing something here?
They're both owned by the same DMM parent company.
|
|
|
|
|
pfwein
Oct 16, 2009, 3:28 PM
Post #17 of 23
(9292 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 8, 2009
Posts: 353
|
Nothing "crawled up my ass," thanks for asking.
I was merely trying to correct some errors relating to patent law that I observed.
Based on things you've posted on this website, I would have thought you would be interested in accuracy and eradicating misinformation when it arises.
I still think that you are, but I'm guessing something in the tone of my email rubbed you the wrong way. Tone doesn't always come across well over the Internet--I assure you my goal was simply to correct an error relating to patent term calculation, I regret if my email (unintentionally) caused offense.
I was a little harsh on the other guy, but his posted reflected such incredible ignorance regarding patents that he did a real disservice to the rc community by posting.
How would you like it I started piping in regarding a question about, say, welding (a subject I know nothing about), with statements like "I don't know people even bother to weld things, the weld will probably just break," or "you only need to weld 10% of something to something else and you're good to go."
We're all entitled to have an express opinions, but people who express opinions on subjects they are utterly unfamiliar with are not really helping anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rschap
Oct 17, 2009, 3:07 AM
Post #19 of 23
(9101 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2005
Posts: 592
|
andersjr wrote: rschap wrote: I think Metolius already came out with an alternative. You only have to change it by 10% and the patent doesn’t mean anything. I don’t know why people patent mechanical devices anymore, it just gives your competitors the blueprint to work from and it’s too damn expensive. i have never heard of this mysterious metolius cam. a cam this great deserves a great name. something that makes it sound powerful, like it is the leader of all cams. i think it should be called: super magnificent, awesomely great power of three lobes on rock interface with springs.
http://www.metoliusclimbing.com/cams.html
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Oct 17, 2009, 4:11 AM
Post #20 of 23
(9070 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
qtm wrote: They're both owned by the same DMM parent company.
Thats complete news to me care to name your source?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
andersjr
Oct 18, 2009, 2:11 PM
Post #22 of 23
(8957 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 1, 2005
Posts: 141
|
rschap wrote: andersjr wrote: rschap wrote: I think Metolius already came out with an alternative. You only have to change it by 10% and the patent doesn’t mean anything. I don’t know why people patent mechanical devices anymore, it just gives your competitors the blueprint to work from and it’s too damn expensive. i have never heard of this mysterious metolius cam. a cam this great deserves a great name. something that makes it sound powerful, like it is the leader of all cams. i think it should be called: super magnificent, awesomely great power of three lobes on rock interface with springs. http://www.metoliusclimbing.com/cams.html
is it the offset tcu?
|
|
|
|
|
Kyle10376
Nov 14, 2009, 12:26 AM
Post #23 of 23
(8602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2009
Posts: 17
|
The metolius cams feel really awkward, they'll be tough to use bigwalling especially since you'll be using BD c3's and c4's. Little insider info, BD is supposed to launch a set of offsets fall 2010. ALso, the owner/head maker of aliens just died so i'd score a set ASAP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
