Patent Questions

[ICP]

Was wondering if there was anyone that knows anything about patents. Yes it has relation to SP electro patent. No i am not going to moan and groan. ;) I am wondering if patents are specific to the details. In all three of the patents I found of theirs regarding electro pballs, they all mention a bolt as a primary part. Does this mean , one can use an electric switch, if it left out a bolt, or any other specific part listed in the patent?

Here are the 3 patents I found. http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=paintball&FIELD1=&co1=AND&TERM2=smart+parts&FIELD2=&d=PG01

[ben-afficial]

a patent doesnt take the actual thing... it just covers the design,exact size :dance: or the way its made

[DaveSM]

Sadly for you there is also a patent for a blotless paintball marker but I can't remember who owns it.

[ICP]

I think the nova's have a boltless operation patent, though it might be someone else. I was just using the bolt as a general thing. So, basically as long as it is different, than other patents with a switch, it could be doable? Thanks for the info so far, would be great to hear from someone that has been through the patent process. I'll just keep digging for now. All replies are appreciated.

[SteelSoul]

check this out

http://www.icepaintball.com/specifications.htm

[RRfireblade]

Basically....

And be aware that the Patent office is rediculously inconsistant on how they apply logic....

You can Patent a 'New' idea or an 'Improvemnt' on an existing idea.It's entirely up to the examiner to deciede how 'new' the idea is and whether or not at applies to any other fields of invention outside of where you applied for.And whether it's enoguh of an improvement over an existing Patent to warrant a new seperate granting.For instance, PTP got shot down on an application for a paintball Patent due to a Plumbing fitting filed in the 50's,even tho they shouldn't have compared the 2 (completely different ideas anyway) they went there regardless.

What you also don't often see is divisional applications tied to previously submitted claims.That is how SP got the additional claims that gave them Patent coverage well beyond the original PVI Shocker.

As this discussion applies to SP. My suggestion is to not spend to much time or effort into getting around thier IP. They are masters of the system and your going to have to get up pretty early to beat them at thier own game....which they have a Patent on too. ;)

[jewie27]

Can someone basically summarize the whole lawsuit???


Does the outcome mean that no one can make an electro marker now? Is it anything with a switch that SP sued for?

[Lohman446]

Basically....

And be aware that the Patent office is rediculously inconsistant on how they apply logic....

You can Patent a 'New' idea or an 'Improvemnt' on an existing idea.It's entirely up to the examiner to deciede how 'new' the idea is and whether or not at applies to any other fields of invention outside of where you applied for.And whether it's enoguh of an improvement over an existing Patent to warrant a new seperate granting.For instance, PTP got shot down on an application for a paintball Patent due to a Plumbing fitting filed in the 50's,even tho they shouldn't have compared the 2 (completely different ideas anyway) they went there regardless.

What you also don't often see is divisional applications tied to previously submitted claims.That is how SP got the additional claims that gave them Patent coverage well beyond the original PVI Shocker.

As this discussion applies to SP. My suggestion is to not spend to much time or effort into getting around thier IP. They are masters of the system and your going to have to get up pretty early to beat them at thier own game....which they have a Patent on too. ;)


But.. but... but we're paintball players. I mean, we have lots of life experience, and we have determination. Certainly we can overcome them.. I mean what basis do they have for manipulating the patent system... we are players, we can overcome the Gardners... after all, there just patent attorneys with several years of experience :rolleyes:

[RRfireblade]

I mean what basis do they have for manipulating the patent system...


That's the question many long time Patent attorneys are waiting for the USPTO to answer.

It's be cool if we lived in a democracy and had a say in how our governemnt and thier offices are run. :rolleyes:

[Lohman446]

That's the question many long time Patent attorneys are waiting for the USPTO to answer.

It's be cool if we lived in a democracy and had a say in how our governemnt and thier offices are run. :rolleyes:

You do.. in theory you just have to have enough patience to cut through the bureacracy :D . Maybe. Or perhaps thats the downfall of a representetive democracy rather than a direct one, who knows?

[bleachit]

you also have to have enough money or financial backing....



stupid govt.

[ICP]

check this out

http://www.icepaintball.com/specifications.htm


ya, when I said nova, I meant epic. ;) That's the gun I was thinking of, but for some reason said nova, but I think they have a boltless marker too, where the barrel moves back and forth. Anyway, thanx for the info RR and averyone else. I've got a few idea's, one of witch has very little in common with the "standard" style marker, except for a switch, and a valve. Might not work, even if it does, it might not be patent-able ( :tard: ) but I just had a general curiousity anyway.

Is there a patent on the interchangeable bodies on the ion? I had thought of doing it for stacked tube guns about 1.5 years ago, but never got around to doing it. I'm sure it has nothing to do with SP, seeing as I only told one person, but it was kinda funny to me when it came out. Just wondering.

Thanx again for the info.

[craltal]

ya, when I said nova, I meant epic. ;) That's the gun I was thinking of, but for some reason said nova, but I think they have a boltless marker too, where the barrel moves back and forth. Anyway, thanx for the info RR and averyone else. I've got a few idea's, one of witch has very little in common with the "standard" style marker, except for a switch, and a valve. Might not work, even if it does, it might not be patent-able ( :tard: ) but I just had a general curiousity anyway.

Is there a patent on the interchangeable bodies on the ion? I had thought of doing it for stacked tube guns about 1.5 years ago, but never got around to doing it. I'm sure it has nothing to do with SP, seeing as I only told one person, but it was kinda funny to me when it came out. Just wondering.

Thanx again for the info.

The nova does operate as you describe it. It uses a Spool valve, which I believe DYE has a patent for...

Also, as far as we can tell, they have NOT tried to patent the bodies for the ION

[ICP]

pardon my ignorance, but can someone point me in the direction to read about the spool valve as used in paintball, or explain how it works.

[jewie27]

Can someone basically summarize the whole lawsuit???


Does the outcome mean that no one can make an electro marker now? Is it anything with a switch that SP sued for?