pics for pbnation

[srrdude]

i have to agree with footemps.. with no disrespect intented here p8ntballer72... u have 20 posts... and and Jim owns WAS.. so i will believe him unless u steer me otherwise... Please if u have additional info by all means let it be known.

Thank you.

[p8ntball72]

a simple search on the us patent page will show you the epics patent.
then you can make up your own mind on this topic.
I just got off the phone with Jim at Wicked air sportz and have a better idea of his point of view now and will leave it at that.

[srrdude]

i cant seem to find anything on the us patent site about the epic but i will continue searching.

*edit* perhaps a link? or an attachment.. there are many many many matches. I would greatly appreciate it if you could help
thanks.

[p8ntball72]

ok first do the Quick search option.
keyword: paintball
a list of new patents will come up.
Pneumatic projectile launching apparatus with partition apparatus and opposed-piston regulator.

[srrdude]

yes i found it a few minutes ago..

perhaps u could aim me. Srrdude.

[srrdude]

well i had a nice chat with p8ntball72. I must say he is a quite sensible and plesant person to talk to. As far as the alien/epic debate is concerned, i have read the patent for the epic very carefully and it comes down to this:

The idea is the same, execution and method is entirely different. I dont know how this will end up.

[WickedAirSportz]

The idea is not the same. The both use metal, so should there also be a patent infringement for that?

EPIC uses a door that moves forward/backward on the side (like a powerfeed) of the marker. The Alien has a hatch on top that rotates side to side, also moving the ball into the barrel. They both seal the ball inlet tube, but there is prior art for that with many other markers, including pump guns.

[srrdude]

jim, ive backed this thing up for days. but the idea is very close. They are both bolt-less markers. However i do see a distinct difference which is y i argue that the alien is its own sue-safe and unique gun. However i respect every bodies opinion as in the case of p8ntball72.

[WickedAirSportz]

I have a design for a marker where the door is inside of the breech assembly and flips down to allow the ball to pass by, afterwhich closes, sealing the breech. Because of the prior art, I know that even though this is unique, there is simply no way I SHOULD ever be able to obtain a patent for this type of "door".

[srrdude]

ok. I fail to see your point. I side with you except i feel that the idea is still quite similar.

[FooTemps]

Well, isn't the trap door/ hatch plate just the bolt for the gun?
I mean, that'd be like... Kingman suing PMI for having a bolt...

[srrdude]

well the whole idea is that they are BOLT-LESS guns.... so no the hatch place/ trap door is not the bolt. But yes i did argue that it is like spyder sueing pmi on page 2.

[jpkunk]

I cant believe that you guys are still argueing over this marker. Its most likely gona be a flop, so who cares.

[srrdude]

i guess the competion would care because it has a lot of potential. 40+ cps is better than your gun- i can tell you that now. Its no longer an arguement but a discussion. If you dont like it you are always allowed to leave.

And Jack and many other put a lot of hard work so please dont reduce it to "who cares". They do and we do.

[halB]

a flop... unless he lowers the price to where i could buy one