Possible Victory For WDP over SP..... [Archive]

MarkM

08-26-2004, 10:21 AM

The legal speech is a little confusing but the section doubting (in the judges opinion ...his is the one that really counts) the Brothers actually having anything to do with the "invention" was just so close to coming out and saying...well you read and see ;) In all it sounds as if the Judge wasn't very happy with the suit even being filed and the ownership claims of Smart Parts.
Once the other court has re-filed the ownership title (patent) then we will see how this will effect the non aggression pacts that SP have had signed. Full disclosure of the amounts involved perhaps..afterall it is there in black and white that WDP have paid $50,000 to Dr Hensel so maybe we will see what DYE, AKA, ICD, National and Planet Eclipse and Smart Parts (to DYE) paid out. Maybe a non agression pact will be signed between SP and WDP and the money collected so far split between the two and then a decision as to if they will allow anyone to make Electronic paintball guns...or maybe the two will become bedfellows and go after Kingman :eek: that must be worth a few pennies.

rabidchihauhau

08-26-2004, 10:36 AM

lots of juicy quotes in the ruling - things like:

Cronin: "...frankly, at that point in time neither Billy Gardner nor Adam Gardner had the faintest notion of how the gun worked."

Judge: "...Billy and Adam Gardner's testimony regarding their own contributions does not suggest the work of inventors."

Judge: "Although Smart Parts is correct that there is no specific requirement that inventors have engineering degrees or other formal training, the evidence also strongly suggests that neither Billy nor Adam could have invented what is claimed."

Judge: "Again, when questioned, Billy Gardner could provide absolutely no information regarding his purported conception."

Cronin used to own Pneu Ventures.

Now I'm wondering who really invented the ported barrel.....

robdamanii

08-26-2004, 10:42 AM

It was only a matter of time until someone handed their junk to them on a plate. Thankfully, it's my favourite company that did it.

Good for you WDP. Keep those cajones out and flopping, and keep the idiot brothers in line.

BobTheCow

08-26-2004, 10:43 AM

I think a single word can sum up all of the elatedly ecstatic emotions flowing through me right now:

<font size=+2>W00T!!!</font>

:dance:

MicroMiniMe

08-26-2004, 10:50 AM

OysterBoy

08-26-2004, 11:09 AM

http://www.68caliber.com/news/industry/story04341.php

Hooray

MarkM

08-26-2004, 11:17 AM

Under what legality was WPD able to aquire Hensel and his work/art? Because he wasn't a patent author and had the records to prove otherwise?

Because Hensel wasn't aware that the Patent claim had been filed...and further that he wasn't named on it...had Smart parts named him then perhaps the outcome of this would have been different...they didn't so it wasn't and nor did he sign the Pnu ventures share holding deal...but did get named when the debts came to be settled. How would you feel if you got saddled with the debts but didn't get the pay off for what you had invented/worked on. When WDP got in contact he must have thought christmas had come early.
Kill the people but never let the bodies be found ;)
At least when Bill Gates aquires a company and then effectively stops it's output (to allow no competitor to his products) the people in the company come away rather richer than they started off. He even bought shares in Apple so it was kept afloat so at least there is one competitor so he can attempt to look like a nice guy ;)

Bulldog

08-26-2004, 11:20 AM

What the hell does "laches and estoppel" mean? :confused:

billmi

08-26-2004, 11:32 AM

Wow - read the judges opinion....

WDP won on the grounds that they bought the rights to the Shocker, not because the Angel was first, or that there was other prir art.

Hensel was made VP of Pneu Ventures, and given stock in the company, with the agreement that the rights of what he invented with to the company. He didn't sign that agreement though, even though he got the stock and operated as the company VP. While VP of Pneu Ventures he designed the electronic circuit in the PV Shocker. Pneu Ventures and SP jointly filed the patent (as I understand their arrangement at the time that was their agreement.) Pneu Ventures went belly up, and according to a PV employee, that meant the patent rights went to SP.

When PV was dissolved and the bank came after him for unpaid debts, Hensel saw he wasn't named on the patent, and turned around and sold his claim to the rights to WDP for $50K.

Now we have a judge deciding in favor of WDP on the grounds that the Shocker was the first electropneumatic, but that WDP really has the rights to the patent because a contract was left unsigned.

In essence WDP bought SP's own patent out from under them.

Hexis

08-26-2004, 11:35 AM

Found a little description here: Patent Litigation Options (http://www.patentlawyer.com/library/palitigate.html)

The elements of laches are (1) unreasonable, unexcused delay in the assertion of a claim (typically the filing of suit) and (2) prejudice to the Defendant resulting from the delay. The delay period commences when the patentee knows or should have known about the acts of the infringer. Plaintiff has the burden to show the reasonableness of delay periods of more than 6 years, while Defendant bears the burden to show unreasonableness for delay periods of less than 6 years.

The elements of estoppel include elements (1) and (2) above and further include (3) affirmative conduct by a patentee which induces the infringer into believing that the patentee had abandoned its claims, and (4) detrimental reliance by the Defendant.

Bolter

08-26-2004, 11:46 AM

To see the Judge's opinion, go to
http://furby.pbcproductions.com/opinion.pdf

To see the Judge's order, go to
http://furby.pbcproductions.com/order.pdf

mykroft

08-26-2004, 12:13 PM

Interesting, and probably good news, as WDP is not nearly as litigation-happy as SP is.

paullus99

08-26-2004, 12:13 PM

Wow - this certainly will change more than a few things around the industry. SmartParts got its butt handed to them....this judge is definitely not a happy camper....

shartley

08-26-2004, 12:33 PM

Whats more devastating to SP, that they didn't include Hensel as a patent author or that he didn't sign the SP buyout?
Under what legality was WPD able to aquire Hensel and his work/art? Because he wasn't a patent author and had the records to prove otherwise?
This is very important, but has been overlooked by far too many… to include SP’s lawyers. Was Hansel working for and on behalf of PVI when he “invented” this technology? If so, his work was not his own and belonged to PVI… which was purchased by SP.

Because Hensel wasn't aware that the Patent claim had been filed...and further that he wasn't named on it...had Smart parts named him then perhaps the outcome of this would have been different...they didn't so it wasn't and nor did he sign the Pnu ventures share holding deal...but did get named when the debts came to be settled. How would you feel if you got saddled with the debts but didn't get the pay off for what you had invented/worked on. When WDP got in contact he must have thought christmas had come early.
Kill the people but never let the bodies be found ;)
At least when Bill Gates aquires a company and then effectively stops it's output (to allow no competitor to his products) the people in the company come away rather richer than they started off. He even bought shares in Apple so it was kept afloat so at least there is one competitor so he can attempt to look like a nice guy ;)

I doubt that this shows any legal requirement. While Bill Gates did things the “smart” way, they may not have been legal requirements. And I don’t see how naming Hansel as the inventor on the patent would be a legal requirement IF he was simply working on behalf of PVI (as I stated above).

I see this as simply proving that the “Brothers” didn’t invent the technology, but not that they should lose control of it because someone got their feelings hurt by not being listed on the patent. Yes, it would cause hard feelings, but employees seldom get “credit” or “rights” to things they do or make while employed by a company. Nor can they later claim rights while working for another company who is now in competition with the first.

I bet AGD even has folks who did actual work but never received what they felt was just “reward” or “mention”. That is what goes along with working FOR someone as opposed to working for yourself.

And I am shocked that the SP lawyers let all that pass.

Wow - read the judges opinion....

WDP won on the grounds that they bought the rights to the Shocker, not because the Angel was first, or that there was other prir art.

Hensel was made VP of Pneu Ventures, and given stock in the company, with the agreement that the rights of what he invented with to the company. He didn't sign that agreement though, even though he got the stock and operated as the company VP. While VP of Pneu Ventures he designed the electronic circuit in the PV Shocker. Pneu Ventures and SP jointly filed the patent (as I understand their arrangement at the time that was their agreement.) Pneu Ventures went belly up, and according to a PV employee, that meant the patent rights went to SP.

When PV was dissolved and the bank came after him for unpaid debts, Hensel saw he wasn't named on the patent, and turned around and sold his claim to the rights to WDP for $50K.

Now we have a judge deciding in favor of WDP on the grounds that the Shocker was the first electropneumatic, but that WDP really has the rights to the patent because a contract was left unsigned.

In essence WDP bought SP's own patent out from under them.
This clears up a few points that I touched on above… but I don’t see how he could maintain rights when working FOR a company, signed contract or not.

I think this will all be brought back to court though. As we both know, rulings are not always “final” rulings. ;)

Wow - this certainly will change more than a few things around the industry. SmartParts got its butt handed to them....this judge is definitely not a happy camper....
Nah….. they are just being temporarily hampered in trying to enforce their “rights”. They are really not losing anything yet.

As I have predicted on another forum….. because so much was done “not right”, I think the technology will be awarded “Public Domain”, and no single company will benefit from holding control of it. The paintball industry as a whole will benefit, and players will still get their electronic markers…………. Life will go on. :clap: :clap: :clap:

:dance: :dance: :dance:

(Or at least we can hope.... ;) )

hitech

08-26-2004, 12:57 PM

thecavemankevin

08-26-2004, 01:00 PM

who-ray!!!!!! :headbang:

Miltonyz

08-26-2004, 01:00 PM

I believe it's because he wan't technically an employee. The judge refrences on early ruling about how something a company president develops does not automatically mean the company owns it.

fire1811

08-26-2004, 01:03 PM

Losing Patents = We have a patent for that too.

:D

shartley

08-26-2004, 01:05 PM

If you do not sign an agreement otherwise, determining who owns something an employee develops is not a simple matter. Just because you are an employee and develop/invent something, it doesn't automatically belong to the company you work for. Even if you developed/invented it while on company time. I develop software, and every company I work for has had me sign an agreement that states that all software developed by while "on company time" is property of the company. This is because companies lost lawsuits over ownership of software to employees.

I don't know the specific laws, but it appears that the judge ruled that the company did NOT own the patent rights to the invention, regardless of the inventor's employment status, or maybe because of it.

Regardless, I'm happy to see SP loose. :cheers:
This is all very true… and I just heard that he was indeed never actually paid as an employee even though he held the position. If this is true, it tosses in another wrench. And it may have been the wrench WDP needed. ;)

Damn! They just need to beet ALL of them with rubber hoses and give the rights to electronic markers to the world. It seems as if no one knew what they were doing. LOL :eek:

hitech

08-26-2004, 01:10 PM

It seems as if no one knew what they were doing. LOL :eek:

The only thing that is surprising is that any of us are surprised by that! ;)

billmi

08-26-2004, 01:11 PM

This clears up a few points that I touched on above… but I don’t see how he could maintain rights when working FOR a company, signed contract or not.

Problem was he wasn't an employee. He wasn't getting salary. He was a vice president and minority shareholder, the judge distinguished between the two in his summary.

I think this will all be brought back to court though. As we both know, rulings are not always “final” rulings. ;)

The case was scheduled for trial in January. This settlement beforehand means they agreed to forego a jury trial and let the judge arbitrate (faster process, and I don't believe arbitrate is the correct term when it's the judge doing it as opposed to a third party, but that's the concept.) Anyhow, when parties agree to something like that, one of the conditions is typically that the decision will be considered final and binding, unlike proceeding to trial where the could appeal later.

Nah….. they are just being temporarily hampered in trying to enforce their “rights”. They are really not losing anything yet.

How much if anything they lose is still to be decided. The judge is waiting for both parties to submit their suggested remedies. My take on reading it is that the judge's plan is to add Hansel to the list of inventors, which would make both SP and WDP own the patent.

As I have predicted on another forum….. because so much was done “not right”, I think the technology will be awarded “Public Domain”, and no single company will benefit from holding control of it. The paintball industry as a whole will benefit, and players will still get their electronic markers…………. Life will go on. :clap: :clap: :clap:

:dance: :dance: :dance:

(Or at least we can hope.... ;) )

Yep, to the playing public as a whole, I think it has relatively little impact either way. What will be interesting to see is where WDP goes with this - they went after ICD and other companies years before SP did, or so said the industry rumors at the time. Also, what will happend to companies that made licensing agreements. Those agreements are all confidential, but I'd bet a donut that none of them have a clause that say they are no longer binding if the patent is overturned.

shartley

08-26-2004, 01:12 PM

The only thing that is surprising is that any of us are surprised by that! ;)
Touché! ;)

http://www.gbsu-usa.net/shartleycustoms/forum/bandu1.gif

shartley

08-26-2004, 01:18 PM

Problem was he wasn't an employee. He wasn't getting salary. He was a vice president and minority shareholder, the judge distinguished between the two in his summary.
As you probably noticed already, I found that out after I made my first post. ;) It’s all good.

The case was scheduled for trial in January. This settlement beforehand means they agreed to forego a jury trial and let the judge arbitrate (faster process, and I don't believe arbitrate is the correct term when it's the judge doing it as opposed to a third party, but that's the concept.) Anyhow, when parties agree to something like that, one of the conditions is typically that the decision will be considered final and binding, unlike proceeding to trial where the could appeal later.
This is true…

How much if anything they lose is still to be decided. The judge is waiting for both parties to submit their suggested remedies. My take on reading it is that the judge's plan is to add Hansel to the list of inventors, which would make both SP and WDP own the patent.
Yup…..

Yep, to the playing public as a whole, I think it has relatively little impact either way. What will be interesting to see is where WDP goes with this - they went after ICD and other companies years before SP did, or so said the industry rumors at the time. Also, what will happend to companies that made licensing agreements. Those agreements are all confidential, but I'd bet a donut that none of them have a clause that say they are no longer binding if the patent is overturned.
You bring up points that I have discussed with people in private. There is MUCH that has been “forgotten” or “forgiven” in the industry. And yes, we will see what happens to all the agreements made and those that made them.

I see this as one big gamble that was made. And this time it looked like it didn’t work out. Such is business. And I see the playing field being brought back to the point it was before this gambit was put into play. It was an interesting show though.

Now let’s go play paintball! :headbang:

billmi

08-26-2004, 01:50 PM

As you probably noticed already, I found that out after I made my first post. ;) It’s all good.

The nature of forums, when a post goes up while a reply to a previous post is being written. :-)

Now let’s go play paintball! :headbang:

Amen!

Cryer

08-26-2004, 02:23 PM

In essence WDP bought SP's own patent out from under them.
Anyone else find this fact absolutely ehfin' hillarious? :rofl: :rofl: :headbang:

WARPED1

08-26-2004, 02:29 PM

Now, I like SP's products, but I never fully agreed with the style of thier business ethics, I hope this is the beginning of the end to the lawsuits. Bring back Emags AGD!

edweird

08-26-2004, 02:30 PM

I hate to jump the gun here... but...

Ding Dong the Witch is dead, the Witch is dead, the Witch is dead!
Ding Dong the Witch is dead, the Witch is dead, the Witch is dead!
Ding Dong the Witch is dead, the Witch is dead, the Witch is dead!
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

oh and a couple of these as rare as I use em. :dance: :dance:

Raven001

08-26-2004, 02:54 PM

Good to see that Hugh got a few licks in against the brothers :clap:

AGD

08-26-2004, 03:24 PM

We before anyone gets too overjoyed here I should put in my 2 cents.

From my (unprofessional) take on the judges overview, the patent was NOT invalidated. It was determined that there was an additional inventor that was unamed on the patent. That inventor sold his rights to WDP. WDP has proved to the judge he was involved therefore SP can't sue their own inventor over rights to the idea.

The other part thats interesting is that WDP is making a move to have their inventor added to the patent. This gives WDP in my mind co-ownership of the patent.

Now, if YOU were WDP, and you see that most of the paintball players are very willing to give their money to SP in the form of royalties AS WELL as buy their products, wouldn't you want in on the action?

I am not sure at this point that anything has changed.

AGD

AGDlover

08-26-2004, 03:30 PM

sounds to me like the judge was sick of SP like us ROCK ON WDP(don't sue us)

JimInVA

08-26-2004, 03:36 PM

bunker17

08-26-2004, 04:23 PM

and if they do that thats when Agd comes in and saves us with their Hair and no more problems with that issue.

AGD

08-26-2004, 04:33 PM

and if they do that thats when Agd comes in and saves us with their Hair and no more problems with that issue.

Don't think that there isn't huge legal hastles with the HAIR trigger either. The average player doesn't think all this affects him but after its too late they will find out it does.

All development on the hair trigger is at a dead stop right now.

AGD

BobTheCow

08-26-2004, 04:39 PM

All development on the hair trigger is at a dead stop right now.Wha...? Is this new, or am I just out of the loop? :confused:

LudavicoSoldier

08-26-2004, 04:40 PM

Whaaaaa?!?! Nicad has stopped all work on the hAir? Huh? Say it aint so!

Edit! CURSE YOU and your fast typing! :cheers:

Cyberious

08-26-2004, 05:18 PM

Very Cool. I hope WDP doesn't pull a Smart Parts now. I would hope that they allow the rest of the industry to benefit from this. To Tom's point there is little that affects AGD yet. Let's hope though that things are opened up so that the option to begin a new electro is there. I really hope the hAir issue gets worked out though.

One last thing I wanna mention:

HA HA GARDNERS HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA! HAVE A NICE DAY!

Sorry had to get that childish outburst out of my system.

warbeak2099

08-26-2004, 05:50 PM

I'm happy and yet at the same time fearful. As Tom said, what would stop WDP from just cutting in on SP's action instead of stopping it. They could certainly do that and not even suffer the PR disaster like SP did. They can merely blame it all on SP saying, "we'renot a part of that stuff, it's SP who's going around making money off of the little guy". All the while WDP could be in on it, just using SP as fodder so that no "WDP boycotts" happen. However I am happy that a blow (as miniscule as it may be) has been struck to SP and the Gardner brothers. I guess we'll just have to wait and see how WDP uses their new power in the industry. Let's hope it's for the good of the sport and not for the sake of more $$$. Anyways, I don't think anyone can resist doing what I'm about to do...

LONG LIVE WDP!!! WOOHOO, KICK GARDNER ***!

pop tart

08-26-2004, 05:56 PM

YAY :cheers: its about time

Lohman446

08-26-2004, 06:09 PM

Just... how is this a blow, really to SP?

They already have cross liscensing agreements with Dye for the spool valve (smart move, cause they were going to get mauled by Dye).

As stated above, I bet all there liscensing agreements are valid still... LOL - two owners just means you need one owners permission, and SP has cashed in with teh big boys (Planet Eclipse, National, Dye) already.

SP is not going to be hindered from making there electronics, just stopping others from using them will be a pain. But, those agreements from before, are highly unlikely to have a void clause involving the patent, in fact I will BET that those agreements acknowledged SPs rights to that patent. Ok, so WDP has rights too.. so SP cant sue them,

TAG

08-26-2004, 06:16 PM

Funny....
I keep seeing a young lady walking around a huge group of industry professionals hold up a big.....wait.....its a........Giant #2?!?!?!?!

Ding Ding Ding

Is anyone safe?

KRAKMT

08-26-2004, 06:23 PM

Sorry Love ya Mr. Mills but this is not correct. Unless I misread, the procedure that occured was summary judgment which means. WDP sued and smartparts countersued. WDP filed what is called a motion for summary judment which means - here are the indisputable facts and we win as a matter of law. It is a pretrial process. Not often granted, more often overturned and can be directly appealed without trial. The problem is in the "indisputable facts" as a lawyer most facts are disputable. Was a well written ruling. What I am saying is it was not a stipulation but a pretrial motion. Small thing.

The case was scheduled for trial in January. This settlement beforehand means they agreed to forego a jury trial and let the judge arbitrate (faster process, and I don't believe arbitrate is the correct term when it's the judge doing it as opposed to a third party, but that's the concept.) Anyhow, when parties agree to something like that, one of the conditions is typically that the decision will be considered final and binding, unlike proceeding to trial where the could appeal later.

MaChu

08-26-2004, 07:41 PM

Now, if YOU were WDP, and you see that most of the paintball players are very willing to give their money to SP in the form of royalties AS WELL as buy their products, wouldn't you want in on the action?

We can just have faith and hope that WDP is morally better than SP. I like to think that WDP like AGD has always been about futher evolving the sport of paintball with support and innovation, not hindering it with lawsuits and patent badgering for money. I just wish a WDP rep would post and say something that could give us a little light to the future, either happy or dark.

edweird

08-26-2004, 09:00 PM

I dont know if WDP would be that willing to climb in bed with the evil empire that is smart parts... after all it was smart parts that single handedly stole 99% of WDP's sponsored teams and damn near ended tourney popularity of the angel line of markers.

my chips are on the fact WDP is still bitter about this and the minute they get partial ownership they sacrifice the patent to the pagan gods of humility. Therefore they get the popular image as the company that killed the drama rather than perpetuate it.

InexactMelissa

08-26-2004, 09:44 PM

I'm with Edwierd....if WDP comes out looking like the hero, that's a few more Angels they're going to sell, plus getting the cut of everything else. Regardless of the eventual outcome, I was giggling like a maniac in my cube this afternoon reading the judgement.

http://www.inexact.info/images/static/spja1.jpg

nirvana1234

08-26-2004, 09:58 PM

They won! :rofl: :shooting: :dance: :bounce: :hail: :clap: :headbang: :cheers:

Miscue

08-26-2004, 10:35 PM

Anyone else find this fact absolutely ehfin' hillarious? :rofl: :rofl: :headbang:

It's absolutely beautiful! I might just have to go out and buy an Angel now, just because.

Miscue

08-26-2004, 10:38 PM

Funny....
I keep seeing a young lady walking around a huge group of industry professionals hold up a big.....wait.....its a........Giant #2?!?!?!?!

Ding Ding Ding

Is anyone safe?

Hurm, now there are two companies with a broad patent. Eek! I dunno how the law works, but I wonder if one has rights to sue for infringement without the other's involvement.

shartley

08-27-2004, 06:13 AM

I hope you are right. I think it would revive the fun that paintball was before all the litigation.
This just makes me laugh. If any player stopped having fun while this round of litigation was going on, they are the ones at fault.

And if anyone thinks that there was no litigation in paintball before this latest round, think again. In fact, many jobs have been lost and business ruined/seriously hurt because of standard business tactics over the years. The companies that are huge today didn’t get that way because of a giant love fest, but because they muscled their way to the top and in the process sometimes people got squashed.

And as Bill pointed out, WDP has not always been the lily white either.

Paintball as a sport or activity is fun, when players are having fun. It is all up to the PLAYER. And none of that has a thing to do with what the companies making products are doing.

TheTramp

08-27-2004, 08:58 AM

Hurm, now there are two companies with a broad patent. Eek! I dunno how the law works, but I wonder if one has rights to sue for infringement without the other's involvement.

Yes they can. I don't see why everyone's so happy. The only company protected by this is WDP. AKA is still screwed for example and this will in no way make a new electro from AGD any closer to reality :( .

manike

08-27-2004, 09:22 AM

I'd bet a donut that none of them have a clause that say they are no longer binding if the patent is overturned.

Krispy Kremes please! ;) But then again the patent hasn't been overturned...

It's still on going, but it looks like both WDP and SP will own the patent. This MAY mean WDP gets to own part of all the continuations also... :rofl:

BUT as to the deals and royalties.

WDP can not go in and demand half of the royalties SP are getting. All they can do is offer a cheaper licence on the patent to companies that are interested... I can tell you that right now they are not fans of SP...

Now that SP has some bad feeling from the market place, they could be undercut in royalties they get on the patents (nothing to stop WDP licencing the USE of the patents for a one off $1 fee...) and SP may still be stopped from using technology WDP have with regards to electronic guns such as adjustable settings etc...

Looks like Karma may be coming into effect. What would happen to SP if they don't get any royalties, can't make electronic guns, and the market place hates them? Just curious...

SlartyBartFast

08-27-2004, 09:43 AM

What would happen to SP if they don't get any royalties, can't make electronic guns, and the market place hates them? Just curious...

Pick Me! Pick Me! I Know! I Know! :clap:

Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of people. :p

I've been hoping for this since I was arguing against the nitwits on rec.sport.paintball about the rediculousness of the claims about spiral ported barrel rifling. :cuss: :rolleyes:

Tyger might remember me from (WAYYY) back then. :cool:

MindJob

08-27-2004, 09:52 AM

Don't think that there isn't huge legal hastles with the HAIR trigger either. The average player doesn't think all this affects him but after its too late they will find out it does.

All development on the hair trigger is at a dead stop right now.

AGD

Anyone care to elaborate on the HAir thing?

As far as all of this Smart Parts crap goes... we are all JUST GOING TO HAVE TO WAIT IT OUT.

In the mean time, we ALL should be careful about what companies we give our hard earned money too. Keep supporting companies like AGD.

Furby

08-27-2004, 09:52 AM

Krispy Kremes please! ;) But then again the patent hasn't been overturned...

It's still on going, but it looks like both WDP and SP will own the patent. This MAY mean WDP gets to own part of all the continuations also... :rofl:

WDP can not go in and demand half of the royalties SP are getting. All they can do is offer a cheaper licence on the patent to companies that are interested... I can tell you that right now they are not fans of SP...

I do appreciate the classic English talent for understatement.

And I dig Krispy Kremes as well.

KRAKMT

08-27-2004, 10:02 AM

I am not so sure. If the name is added to the patent for an ownership interest then I suspect wdp has a 1/5 right to all income derived from the patent. Not positive about joint ownership of intellectual property but I suspect that will be the next argument. It should not be a free forall on licensing. It would also seem that you can not be accused of infringing upon something you own. Looks to me like wdp made a great legal manuver but I highly doubt it was gratuitous.

BUT as to the deals and royalties.

WDP can not go in and demand half of the royalties SP are getting. All they can do is offer a cheaper licence on the patent to companies that are interested... I can tell you that right now they are not fans of SP...

Now that SP has some bad feeling from the market place, they could be undercut in royalties they get on the patents (nothing to stop WDP licencing the USE of the patents for a one off $1 fee...) and SP may still be stopped from using technology WDP have with regards to electronic guns such as adjustable settings etc...

Looks like Karma may be coming into effect. What would happen to SP if they don't get any royalties, can't make electronic guns, and the market place hates them? Just curious...

shartley

08-27-2004, 10:05 AM

Looks like Karma may be coming into effect. What would happen to SP if they don't get any royalties, can't make electronic guns, and the market place hates them? Just curious...
My prediction? Nothing.

They are business folks and would do what it takes to stay in business. Their only income is not from marker sales. Also I don’t think they would ever be in a position where they would not be able to make electronic markers. Worse case scenario they would pay royalties themselves to make the markers…. and they would be ALLOWED to pay the royalties.

I can’t see any business worth their salt denying ANY company from paying royalties to make a product. More so if that company could be such a huge cash cow, as SP would be. And even SP didn’t set out to shut anyone down. They simply wanted a piece of everyone’s pie. There is a difference.

And guess what, the market place does not hate them (SP). Sure there are a good many that do, but the market place in general simply buys what is available and from who is selling it. I see huge amounts of “Internet” hate, but see SP parts and products still selling off he shelves of real world stores.

Plus, as I have stated before, the general public has a short memory. This will all blow over like every other “issue” I the paintball industry. And the customers will not even care. If that is not the way of things, we would not see a good many of the businesses in the industry being in the positions they are in now. Take NPS as an example (and only ONE example of more than a few)…… how many people do you think THEY hurt on their climb to the top? How many people do you think hated them? How are their sales now?

Nah, SP will be fine.

And to make it clear, I am not supporting their actions. I am not supporting nor condemning anyone’s actions in all this. In fact, I think few involved are as “pure” as what some would like to think they are.

Marchborne

08-27-2004, 10:22 AM

Anyone else find this fact absolutely ehfin' hillarious? :rofl: :rofl: :headbang:

Hilarious, yes, but also kickin' legal work. At the bottom of page 10 of the opinion going onto the next page, Judge King spells it out:

"During the summer of 2003, Dr. Hemsel was contacted by WDP's counsel as well as an attorney in another case involving Smart Parts. ... Negotiations between Dr. Hensel's attorneys and WDP's attorneys resulted in an Assignment and Agreement in November 2003, whereby Dr. Hensel assigned his rights in the '326 patent ...."

Good stuff. The attorneys for the other, unnamed company probably found out about Dr. Hensel during discovery in their case, shared the information with WDP's lawyers and they all went out and found Dr. Hensel. $50k payment, and WDP's got a stake in Smart Part's game. Nice work-around.

billmi

08-27-2004, 10:23 AM

Sorry Love ya Mr. Mills but this is not correct. Unless I misread, the procedure that occured was summary judgment which means. WDP sued and smartparts countersued. WDP filed what is called a motion for summary judment which means - here are the indisputable facts and we win as a matter of law. It is a pretrial process. Not often granted, more often overturned and can be directly appealed without trial. The problem is in the "indisputable facts" as a lawyer most facts are disputable. Was a well written ruling. What I am saying is it was not a stipulation but a pretrial motion. Small thing.

Good catch, I believe you are entirely correct. It was the other of the two cases pending between SP and WDP's parent company where there was a move to get pre-trial settlement, which as I understood involved both parties approving the move. I found this out while being given a heads up about some video in my posession that may be subpoenaed (sp.) for the case, and there are differences in what the subpoena would require me to do depending on whether it's information to be simply reviewed by the judge or if it goes to trial.

billmi

08-27-2004, 10:29 AM

In fact, I think few involved are as “pure” as what some would like to think they are.

Well said. When the WDP v ICD flap started, a number of posts in various forums talked about people in paintball who had patents but were the "good guys" because they didn't use the patents against everyone, they kept everything free and open, when the people listed as saints have all either stopped products from being produced, or take royalties from other companies for producing things under their patents. The only real difference is there are now enough nosy people, and easy ways to spread info (the Internet) for patent issues to be seen more in the public eye than they used to be. That's not to say anyone's good or bad for what they've done business/IP wise, but a lot of the flagwaving around some industry people was based on bogus claims.

KRAKMT

08-27-2004, 10:38 AM

It is business. It just looks like wdp found a way to stick there fingers in smart parts pie. And they did it very poeticly if you ask me. To outfox the patent happy Gardner brothers was a great twist. The Gardners all but admitted that they didn't invent any part but just added there names to the patent. They have been accused of that before.

My prediction? Nothing.

They are business folks and would do what it takes to stay in business. Their only income is not from marker sales. Also I don’t think they would ever be in a position where they would not be able to make electronic markers. Worse case scenario they would pay royalties themselves to make the markers…. and they would be ALLOWED to pay the royalties.

I can’t see any business worth their salt denying ANY company from paying royalties to make a product. More so if that company could be such a huge cash cow, as SP would be. And even SP didn’t set out to shut anyone down. They simply wanted a piece of everyone’s pie. There is a difference.

And guess what, the market place does not hate them (SP). Sure there are a good many that do, but the market place in general simply buys what is available and from who is selling it. I see huge amounts of “Internet” hate, but see SP parts and products still selling off he shelves of real world stores.

Plus, as I have stated before, the general public has a short memory. This will all blow over like every other “issue” I the paintball industry. And the customers will not even care. If that is not the way of things, we would not see a good many of the businesses in the industry being in the positions they are in now. Take NPS as an example (and only ONE example of more than a few)…… how many people do you think THEY hurt on their climb to the top? How many people do you think hated them? How are their sales now?

Nah, SP will be fine.

And to make it clear, I am not supporting their actions. I am not supporting nor condemning anyone’s actions in all this. In fact, I think few involved are as “pure” as what some would like to think they are.

Marchborne

08-27-2004, 10:43 AM

Good catch, I believe you are entirely correct. It was the other of the two cases pending between SP and WDP's parent company where there was a move to get pre-trial settlement, which as I understood involved both parties approving the move. I found this out while being given a heads up about some video in my posession that may be subpoenaed (sp.) for the case, and there are differences in what the subpoena would require me to do depending on whether it's information to be simply reviewed by the judge or if it goes to trial.

There are all kinds of subpoenas. There's the classic subpoena for a deposition, then there's the subpoena duces tecum which also requires the production of documents (which can also be used in conjunction with a deposition); and then there are subpoenas requiring you to appear at a hearing or trial. All sorts of fun. Different subpoenas also have different "reaches." Generally speaking, a federal subpoena can be served just about anywhere in the US if it only requests documents or an appearence at a deposition, but there are limitations as to how far they can force you to travel to attend a hearing or deposition.

SlartyBartFast

08-27-2004, 10:50 AM

Got to say that I still think the situation is pathetic. The patent should be made invalid outright. As should many other paintball patents and thousands of other patents.

Many different mechanisms in paintball are indeed innovations and worthy of patent rights. The blow-forward firing mechanism of the Automag. The combination bolt-ram of the old Sovereign. The bolt/dump chamber designs in the Matrix (I think).

But what else? Certain hopper designs certainly. But certainly not the use of IR eyes or any other detecting mechanism.

I mean honestly. Patenting the use of various off the shelf components and standard practices should be punishable. Maybe it’s time to allow third parties to sue patent holders to invalidate them.

The use of switches, displays, sensors, buttons, rams, valves, solenoids, mechanical/electric/electronic controls are all simply the use of off-the-shelf parts to perform exactly the purpose they were designed for.

So, WDP and SP stand to have possession of a broad patent and WDP has another patent on WHAT? Adjustability?!? Are you :cuss: NUTS?!? Every damn system on Earth has various means of mechanical and electronic adjustability or programability. It’s obvious to the least intelligent single cell organism that the same principles apply to paintball guns.

Ask the least skilled worker in the pneumatics, electronics, or automation industries how to solve various paintball related issue sand they’ll come up with exactly the same solutions and designs. That would put most of paintball firmly in the state-of-the-art in those fields and unpatentable.

RRfireblade

08-27-2004, 10:59 AM

If this has been stated already then excuse it but.....

Don't forget WDP was the first to go after ICD, just to name one, and one of the first to use the threat of legal action against those who they feel are infringing on thier IP. Don't think they have just recently become reborn because of this. I wouldn't start calling them the 'white' knight just yet.

(for those who are)

skipdogg

08-27-2004, 11:22 AM

This adds nothing intelligent to the discussion but on principle i want to put in writing that i hate SP and will never buy anything from them. I will also continue to encourage other people to never buy anything from them. I have felt this way since day one of their lawsuits, but have just not vented until now. That is all.

rabidchihauhau

08-27-2004, 11:45 AM

SPECULATION TIME

While it is more than likely that the existing SP licenses will stand (any licensing agreement that doesn't have a 'this is still in effect even if the patent is invalidated' clause would have to have been written by a lemur), and it is more than likley that the 'settlement' will involve WDP getting a share of the existing license payments, there's also the possibility that they'll double license as in -

'ok, you took the license from SP, but now you have to have an agreement with us also'.

Unlikely, but fun to throw into the mix.

PATENT INVALIDATION

Treading on thin ice here but: you can invalidate a patent by showing prior art, by showing that its already been patented by someone else or by showing that it doesn't do what it claims to do (although that's probably the hardest and most costly).

Nothing in the court's decision invalidates the patent, it only adds an additional named inventor.

The big problem is the fact that the patent office seems to have classified paintball as its own 'field of invention' - which means that 'borrowing' from other disciplines, even if its painfully obvious to those of us who build stuff that it didn't take rocket science to do whatever, the patent office thinks it did take rocket science - or paintball science.

I personally agree that there are many many many issued paintball patents which did not meet the standard for a patent: they were 'obvious to those skilled in the art'. For example, in an electornic marker, where the effen else is the switch going to go except behind the trigger?

However, there is also a good argument in support of those (questionable) patents: while anyone could have said 'oh, an electronic marker will need a solenoid, a switch, a battery and a circuit board', the patent itself defines a specific WORKING way in which to do it - functional design versus concept. On that basis, many of those 'obvious' patents become less obvious.

Fortunately (for the most part) neither you, or I or the Gardner brothers get to decide what is obvious and what isn't, the patent office does.

Also, fortunately, this little go around with SP has demonstrated exactly why patents are set up the way they are: SP gets to prevent people from making their design, but many many many other people have been inspired to invent alternatives - and only did so because they did not want to pay royalties.

MORALS

The good guy bad guy thing. Yeah, SP was attacked and other people who are guilty of 'forcing others to pay royalties' got praised for being nice people.

Anyone who has a patent would be stupid not to get folks to license it. I think we're more concerned about the WAY in which someone goes about doing that. Its the difference between an opening paragraph that says 'hey, we need to discuss this' and 'we're suing your butt'

Just a few thoughts

hitech

08-27-2004, 11:52 AM

Finally, something worth discussing. :dance:

I noticed something that no one else has mentioned. In all the discussions of what the patent was for centered on an electronic circuit that controlled ELECTROPNEUMATIC solenoids, and the timing of these solenoid VALVES. The judge stated in his opinion:

WDP's evidence shows that Dr. Hensel's work related to how the electrical circuit could be used to control the solenoid valves and timing of the paintball gun, which is claimed.

The reason I find that significant is that it is a more limited interpretation of what is claimed in the patent than I have heard before. For example, the eMag does NOT use the electronics to control solenoid valves nor does the electronics control the timing of the paintball gun. The valve itself controls the timing. This is evidenced by the fact that it will continue to operate without the electronics. The electronics are ONLY used to INITIATE the firing cycle. They have no control after that.

Based on the written opinion of this judge, I do not believe that the eMag is covered under the '326 patent.

Other opinions?

fire1811

08-27-2004, 11:55 AM

hmm interesting Hitech

thecavemankevin

08-27-2004, 12:51 PM

if i am not mistaken, wasn't there two or more pattents involved that SP was useing when sueing everyone. One had to deal with the electronically controlled solenoid, and the other i think had to deal with being battery opperated and the battery being located in the grip frame. Now this is all from memory back when all this junk really started, but it seems as though this pattent was just dealing with the solenoid and not the battery in the grip frame. Furthermore, Angels don't use batteries in the grip frame, nor do e/xmags. However, the majority of the electro guns out there do use this battery placement. so if SP still holds this pattent, then they can still continue to sue over the battery placement issue.

In the end, i doubt WDP will become bedfellows with SP. I would not be surprised if they demand half of the currently being payed royalties though. I truely hope that WDP wont contue any of this suing for royalties crap, but would it be at all surprising to anyone if they did?

KRAKMT

08-27-2004, 01:02 PM

The judge was not interpreting the patent, he was determining the ownership. That language is dicta. It does not go to his reasoning or holding. Whatever the claims of the patent will have to be directly challenged by a company accused of infringing. WDP had a great manuver but unless WDP is somehow able to exert influencce over the patent it doesn't effect the breadth of the patent.

Finally, something worth discussing. :dance:

I noticed something that no one else has mentioned. In all the discussions of what the patent was for centered on an electronic circuit that controlled ELECTROPNEUMATIC solenoids, and the timing of these solenoid VALVES. The judge stated in his opinion:

The reason I find that significant is that it is a more limited interpretation of what is claimed in the patent than I have heard before. For example, the eMag does NOT use the electronics to control solenoid valves nor does the electronics control the timing of the paintball gun. The valve itself controls the timing. This is evidenced by the fact that it will continue to operate without the electronics. The electronics are ONLY used to INITIATE the firing cycle. They have no control after that.

Based on the written opinion of this judge, I do not believe that the eMag is covered under the '326 patent.

Other opinions?

hitech

08-27-2004, 01:21 PM

I realize that the judge was not ruling on what the patent covers. However, in order to determine ownership he needed to determine what the patent covered. It would be hard to determine who invented something if you don't know what they invented. Especially if more than one person is claiming to have contributed. See what I'm getting at. It is insight into what a judge might rule if asked to rule on what is covered in the patent.

You don't happen to be a patent attorney, do you (that would be too much to ask for ;) )?

Regardless, you probably know more than most here about patent law. Have you read patent '326? In your expert opinion, what does it cover?

Also, it appeared to me that if WDP sued SP claiming that Dr. Hensel was the sole inventor of that patented in '326 they would stand a better chance of winning that loosing. What do you think?

:cheers:

WARPED1

08-27-2004, 01:35 PM

How come no one has ever mentioned the Nelson based pump gun system and the number of times it has been directly copied(SI Bushmaster, Bloodsucker for example). I think Nelson tried a patent, but gave up due to the cost involved...........

KRAKMT

08-27-2004, 01:41 PM

More than likely it would be a different judge deciding the validity of the patent. chiefly because it will be a different plaintiff and lawsuit. WDP won't sue to invalidate there own patent. They stand to make money just like SP. I am not a patent attorney but am an attorney with some background. And I read every paintball patent as they are issued. I will have to reread 326 and the 700 patent since it has been awhile and they usually just get me pissed off. As for the last part WDP did try to claim that Dr. Hensel was the sole inventor. The judge probable would have found that way but for the pneu ventures guys involvement.

I realize that the judge was not ruling on what the patent covers. However, in order to determine ownership he needed to determine what the patent covered. It would be hard to determine who invented something if you don't know what they invented. Especially if more than one person is claiming to have contributed. See what I'm getting at. It is insight into what a judge might rule if asked to rule on what is covered in the patent.

You don't happen to be a patent attorney, do you (that would be too much to ask for ;) )?

Regardless, you probably know more than most here about patent law. Have you read patent '326? In your expert opinion, what does it cover?

Also, it appeared to me that if WDP sued SP claiming that Dr. Hensel was the sole inventor of that patented in '326 they would stand a better chance of winning that loosing. What do you think?

:cheers:

KRAKMT

08-27-2004, 01:46 PM

I don't remember the nelson patent but if it did exist I suspect it has expired by now. Meaning you could make the exact marker descibed in the patent. I suspect it was not protected or not enforced.

How come no one has ever mentioned the Nelson based pump gun system and the number of times it has been directly copied(SI Bushmaster, Bloodsucker for example). I think Nelson tried a patent, but gave up due to the cost involved...........

hitech

08-27-2004, 06:45 PM

More than likely it would be a different judge deciding the validity of the patent. Chiefly because it will be a different plaintiff and lawsuit. WDP won't sue to invalidate there own patent...As for the last part WDP did try to claim that Dr. Hensel was the sole inventor. The judge probable would have found that way but for the Pneu-ventures guys involvement.

Probably, but it does give us "lay people" insight into a patent judge's thinking. Also, it is my opinion that judges make the least possible ruling. In this case, the cases could all be dismissed by determining if Dr. Hensel was an inventor that should have been named on the patent. The judge did not need to determine if he was the sole inventor, since the cases were dismissed based on his being an inventor.

Now, if WDP sued SP for patent infringement claiming that Dr. Hensel is the sole inventor the judge (or jury) would have to rule on that claim. I think they have a better than 50% chance of winning. :D

I am not a patent attorney but am an attorney with some background. And I read every paintball patent as they are issued. I will have to reread 326 and the 700 patent since it has been awhile and they usually just get me pissed off.

I really look forward to your post after reading those! :bounce:

Like I thought, you know more about this stuff that most here... :hail:

1stdeadeye

08-27-2004, 07:03 PM

YAY!!!

Now AGD can get us a new Electro!

Bolter

08-28-2004, 05:38 AM

billmi

08-28-2004, 07:50 AM

i think you just answered your own question.

Patent # 3788298 - Nelson Splotchmarker.

shartley

08-28-2004, 08:05 AM

Another thing to keep in mind is that defending a patent is not always an “easy” thing to do, nor “cheap”.

Anyone familiar with the firearms industry, and its history, knows of several people who have died in the poor house trying to defend their patents on both firearms operation inventions as well as ammunition while those who were licensed to produce the product legally died rich men. Simply put the cost to defend the patents was far more than the income generated by licensing fees. And those who were licensing to produce the products did it that way on purpose.

Unless you have a good financial backing, sometimes it is easier to simply not defend your patents, or simply sell the rights to someone who CAN and make yourself a little money. So why even bother patenting something if you can’t defend it? It prevents someone ELSE from patenting it and possibly holding control of that technology/item. It is not so much about YOU keeping control of it, but of not allowing anyone ELSE from doing so. ;)

So as you can see, there are many thought processes and reasons for doing or not doing something. But I will still maintain that just because someone does not defend their patent rights does not mean they did it for the betterment of the industry, it may simply have been because they couldn’t afford to. It all depends on the individual situation.

m-98

08-28-2004, 09:49 PM

Correct me if I am wrong with any of this, and also bear in mind that I am confused by much of this. What I understand it that WDP and SP have co-ownership of the patent in question meaning that both could collect royalties etc. While these two companies could work together and make a lot of money, I do not believe that they will. Why? Because of human nature. Humans always want what is best for themselves and are generally greedy. Both companies will figure out that they could make more money without the other company involved and each may try to do away with the other company. I am just speculating and I hope what I posted makes sense.

Temo Vryce

08-29-2004, 02:23 PM

For now it doesn't matter to me if this comes out in our favour or not, today I have new found respect for WDP. I'm not a big fan of the Angel but I respect the company behind it, for now.

RingOfScale

08-29-2004, 03:44 PM

i had almost forgoten about this whole thing until this came back up ...
but...

VERY COOL ! lets go all laugh in SPs face ...

AcemanPB

08-29-2004, 07:27 PM

I don't know if this has already been asked but will we see more vikings now? Is ICD going to come back?

RRfireblade

08-29-2004, 08:06 PM

In a nutshell, despite the massive celebrating and cheers being heard around the boards.....NOTHING at all has changed for any of the currently involved or potentially involved parties.

The ONLY change is that there are now 2 companies with the full legal backing to force the industry to pay it's ransome.In reality this may very likely make things even worse for everyone involved.......besides SP and WDP that is. ;)

KRAKMT

08-30-2004, 04:53 PM

I was off playing paintball instead of talking about it. But a comment or two. The parties are co owners I don't believe they will be able to collect double royalties. You will license the patent- for x dollars and the owners will divy up the money. Problems may come about but why would wdp want to license the patent cheaper if they will make more at the greater price? They are now inbed for a profit by extorting a licensing agreement from others. And I suspect that wdp will benefit by not needing a license but as to fighting over an income stream- I doubt it.

From Shartley: Another thing to keep in mind is that defending a patent is not always an “easy” thing to do, nor “cheap”. Very true- and every company has weighed this issue. AGD inpart and AKA decided it was a better business move to not produce anymore and DYE and NATIONAL decided it was cheaper to pay the license. I am sure everyone has consulted experts on how much it would cost and made an informed business decision.

As to the discussion on another thread about the effect of the ruling against SP, someone said they were building a new facility. I suspect that SP has borrowed a substantial amount based on there intellectual property- that is why Key Bank was involved in the lawsuits counter claim. Remember businesses run on someone elses money and that was Key Banks. I bet the Bank is not happy.

rabidchihauhau

08-31-2004, 09:25 AM

stop reading for a weekend and look what happens.....

Here's my take on the current situation (I deal with IP and the PB industry all day long):

WDP wanted to clear this case up with the hopes of weakening SP's control of tech in other issued patents. They had a small zinger waiting in the wings (Hensel) and asked for summary judgement.

Of course this will be appealed - the question is, how much of this can they use going forward with the other cases...?

In kmoving forward with final resolution of the case at hand: WDP would be foolish to press for anything other than as much 'ownership' as they can justify. But here's the thing: just what was Hensel's ownership interest? Was he in a position (at Pneu-Ventures) to have nay-sayed an assignment or sale?

I suspect that it will resolve that WDP will receive a payment from SP in the amount of x% of all royalties/licensing fees paid to date. The complicating factor being the terms of SP's licensing agreements; are the licensees obtaining rights in all of the SP holdings, or only on specific ones?

Following that payment, I don't see how they can work things out with the two companies jointly licensing the property; all WDP has to do is undercut SP's fees; then SP does the same back...

They'll probably have to establish some kind of trust or consortium to manage the property, with each company receiving their 'proper' percentage.

I am more interested though in how things move forward with the remainder of the cases and the patents; is WDP set on unravelling them one by one? Does this sound familiar? Go after the weakest first to establish precedent in the later cases...?

I have a feeling that we're going to see complications over the 'filing in UK/filing in the US' issues, as different patents were granted to either party while similar patents were granting in the foreign office...

All we can say for sure is, this is not over yet.

KRAKMT

08-31-2004, 02:16 PM

I am not sure how the law will playout regarding whom has the power to license. As co-owner I would think it would have to be licensed for the most benefit. Similar to a marketing agreement for a patent. Reasonable efforts must be made to bring the product to market and if not then the agreement can be revoked. Now as you note what was actually licensed? Was it all or part of this patent or all patents or what. That has been a secret between the principals and I am sure they are either crying or laughing about it. I am unable to forsee how this will affect us. The parties may battle over who gets what part of the pie but we are stuck supplying the filling.
And as to any other patent, there is little actual patent law outside conception/reduction to practice involved. As to prior art or infringment the ruling is irrelevant.

Was he in a position (at Pneu-Ventures) to have nay-sayed an assignment or sale?

I suspect that it will resolve that WDP will receive a payment from SP in the amount of x% of all royalties/licensing fees paid to date. The complicating factor being the terms of SP's licensing agreements; are the licensees obtaining rights in all of the SP holdings, or only on specific ones?

Following that payment, I don't see how they can work things out with the two companies jointly licensing the property; all WDP has to do is undercut SP's fees; then SP does the same back...

They'll probably have to establish some kind of trust or consortium to manage the property, with each company receiving their 'proper' percentage.

.

rabidchihauhau

08-31-2004, 03:37 PM

True - there is no direct effect of this ruling on any other patents issued to SP; however, many of the SP patent's contain language which is 'self-defining'; that is, they name a mechanism or device (widget) and never provide any specification within their teachings, leaving them with the ability to say 'that's what we meant by a widget' if the claims are challenged.

I've watched the evolution of their patent applications for several years now; they belong generally to the school of 'broader and more vague, even if its weaker under a challenge', presumably hoping that the art is so arcane, new and confusing, or, expenses for challenging are so high, that they'll never have to better define their terms and admit that some newly created widget couldn't have been anticipated by their definition.

Dr. Hensel's lab notes, on the other hand (and we now have it on record that he's really the only named inventor who could have done the work) could be very revealing if he's asked 'what did you mean by a widget?'

Its pretty obvious that WDP had to do some real legwork in order to turn up Hensel (unless he's so pissed about the Pneu-Ventures bs that he sought out WDP - and that I doubt as I'm pretty sure SP would have gotten wind of it first) and they paid a decent sum up front (who knows what Hensel's back-end is) for this not to be the opening shot in a longer-term WDP strategy for dealing with this issue.

The SP patents have been reviewed by numerous patent attorneys and the language used to describe them has ranged from 'I can't believe this granted' to 'they are very, very weak', 'I would never have written the claims this way' with not much else on the other side to contradict those feelings. I suspect that WDP is just beginning to chip away at them and that we'll see Hensel "rear his ugly head" again in the not too distant future.