Yeah. I read that and don't know what to think. Kinda vague, but maybe there's something to it that I just don't see.
"What would a $2,000 Geissele Super Duty do that a $500 PSA door buster on Black Friday couldn't do?" - Stopsign32v
Such is a consequence of the screwed up US Patent system. The end result is patents so complex and esoteric as to be indecipherable by nearly everyone. I've got a 4 year engineering degree under my belt, deal with .gov deliverable TDPs all day every day and after reading the above listed patents, I don't get what feature they're claiming as both "novel" and having "utility"
… but now they’re the big guy, and like all big guys, they want to continue being the big guy. One way to do that is to vigorously prosecute what they see as infringements on their patents. Can’t blame them for that.
Litigation is expensive, and patent litigation is especially so. Magpul’s counsel has recent experience in successfully prosecuting patent infringement cases with, I assume, issues and facts very similar to the issues and facts in the ETS case. In addition, Magpul is, I’m sure, in a much better financial position to bear the expenses of litigating this matter. Those are definite advantages.
On the other hand … I think if I were to design and consider manufacturing a polymer AR magazine, I’d have qualified patent counsel review all of the relevant patents to make sure that my design wasn’t infringing any of them, and/or modify my design accordingly … and then retain additional patent counsel (not involved in the earlier discussions regarding modifying my original design) to review all of the designs, including mine … so that, if any of the polymer magazine manufacturers were to sue, I’d have an expert already primed and ready to testify that my design didn’t infringe. ETS may well have done that.
Lest anyone think otherwise, I’m neither expressing an opinion as to the merits of any party’s position nor am I taking sides for or against any parties to this litigation. Just my 2 cents …
Clearly the most germane of all your points. It really doesn't matter who is the heavy in this scenario. IP is IP, and if an internal dimension, that is patented, is used to make your "new" product successful, then the owner of the IP must protect it -- or lose that IP to the world. The ferocity in which the protection is pursued matters very little.
"I'm not saying I invented the turtleneck. But I was the first person to realize its potential as a tactical garment. The tactical turtleneck! The... tactleneck! - Sterling Archer"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Courage is not the absence of fear, but rather the judgment that something else is more important
than one's fear. The timid presume it is lack of fear that allows the brave to act when the timid do not."
We ended up shooting the ETS mag suppressed on Saturday... and I was concerned about the suppressor filth permanently staining the See-thru-nicity of the mag body, but it cleaned up nicely. Pulled it apart and wiped the inside down, and it looks like new. The ETS is the fastest disassembling mag I've ever owned... I mean.. they all come apart the same, but the bullet shaped base plate insert is super easy to depress with no tools.
I may have to panic buy some more of these next pay check in case this whole legal thing goes South.
"What would a $2,000 Geissele Super Duty do that a $500 PSA door buster on Black Friday couldn't do?" - Stopsign32v
Deleted. Different story.
Last edited by DWood; 10-29-14 at 15:25.
Go in peace, but be prepared for violence.
Bookmarks