Oh my Gosh...someone got SP darn good..

[Magaman]

Reprogramming a chip off of a Marker is no different than reprogramming while on the Marker... The fact is, as long as there is a Programed Chip that works to fire the Marker programmed before or after being placed on the Marker, SP is SOL...

My question is, what if SP uses a single burn programmed chip? i.e. Non-Reprogrammable...

Hitech, take a look at the bottom of my long post. It shows both patents.

After reading over the "Programmable chip" patent, it looks like they are more concerend about being able to link directly to the gun with a device that is able to transfer data to and from the chip. I couldn't find any place in there where it said you couldn't remove the chip, reprogram it and put it back in the gun.

[rabidchihauhau]

those damages probably aren't the 'punative' part of the final decision.

claims 21 and 39 of the '814 WDP patent obviate the need for claim 10 in the other patent (the one that was found by the jury to be invalid - so SP's web site says);

if you want to have an electronic paintball gun that can have an electronically controlled dwell time and that can be analyzed and programmed remotely, you step on these claims.

The SP press release puts about the best face they can on the situation, although it is directly contradictory to the WDP press release.

[m-98]

I'm not familiar with patent law so I won't spectulate, but what does this mean for AGD?

Edit

This may be a stupid question, but what is meant by reprogramable? Does this mean that SP guns will no longer have Rebound or other modes of fire that can be changed? I'm probably wrong but I just felt that it was best to ask.

[SlartyBartFast]

claims 21 and 39 of the '814 WDP patent obviate the need for claim 10 in the other patent (the one that was found by the jury to be invalid - so SP's web site says);

if you want to have an electronic paintball gun that can have an electronically controlled dwell time and that can be analyzed and programmed remotely, you step on these claims.

So, what I want to know is this:

If someone markets a marker that has the BLATENTLY OBVIOUS functionality of having a reprogrammable chip with an external link and a display screen what are the chances of WDP managing to win in court?

I mean come on.

Serial, USB, IR connections on anything and everything electronic are OBVIOUS. Chips are designed specifically for dozens of different input/ouput options and reprogramming options.

If Jim Drew can get all excited about whatever he called his four wires and two connectors it can't be all THAT special.

Fine. There may be no prior art of using some of these blatently obvious applications in paintball markers prior to the WDP patent, but there are HUNDREDs of cases of prior art in all kinds of pneumatics and electronic control systems.

Trademark violation for size placement and shape of the screen I can understand. But if you slap an industry standard USB, serial, or Firewire connector on the bottom of the grip frame, what's patentable? If you use EXACTLY the pinout for reprogramming a chip as per the manufacturers product data sheet. What the is patentable?

If only I had patented using a solenoid in a marker back in the late 80's when I was arguing with the TWIBS on rec.sport.paintball, or later when I was being laughed at for suggesting that a 555 timer could make the original shocker into a selectfire automatic.....

[FallNAngel]

M-98: If in doubt, ask :)

It means that the chip can't be reprogrammable. You could mess with dwell electronicall through a variable resistor to extend the dwell time (think old Angel LED's). It won't be as precise as digital, but it'll work.

As for AGD, as far as I can tell, this has nothing to do with the electronic gun patent... From what I gather, things haven't changed for AGD. I'm not a lawyer or anything, so I can't say for sure.


*edit*
Thinking again, I'm not sure they'd really even have to go so far as to use a variable resistor. Just use a chip that can only be burned once. Using the chips own memory should suffice in storing the dwell / rebound settings. This basically means the chips can't be reprogrammed is all... they'll just have to do chip or board swaps to update the firmware.

[SlartyBartFast]

It means that the chip can't be reprogrammable. You could mess with dwell electronically through a variable resistor to extend the dwell time (think old Angel LED's). It won't be as precise as digital, but it'll work.

[Muzikman]

Hmm..reading that post makes me wonder. Could you try and get the component mfg's to get involved? By one company holding a patent that will not let other companies use things such as off the shelf switches, chips, LCD screens, etc....could you convince the mfg's to get involved to increase their sales?

[hitech]

Just had an idea. I wonder how Atmels lawyers would react if a manufacturer called them up and pointed out the fact that the NPF/WDP patent is infringing on sales of their various communication components and circuits?

Now there is a very interesting idea.

Anyone have contacts?

[jekyll]

On the other side of this. SP still holds the patent on the "electro" gun. So they can still require a license fee. What I am not sure about, and maybe if there is a patent lawyer in the house they can answer it. If WDP makes a license agreement with company 'A' in regards to U.S. Patent No. 6,474,326 can Smart Parts turn around and require a license fee also?

I doubt either of them can use that patent anymore. If SP tries to sell the rights to the patent to a company NPF can sell it to them for much cheaper so that SP does not get any profit and vice versa. (I could be wrong though, I don't know much about law.)

[ScatterPlot]

[QUOTE=hitech]You could use a 555 timer chip. It won't give you many features, but it would work.
QUOTE]

There was a thread on this a little while ago over in the Workshop I think, and someone said that a 555 would be a bad idea because of some deal with temperature affecting it's capacitance and hence screwing up the time. But that's just what I heard.

[Muzikman]

There was a thread on this a little while ago over in the Workshop I think, and someone said that a 555 would be a bad idea because of some deal with temperature affecting it's capacitance and hence screwing up the time. But that's just what I heard.

The idea is that it can be done. Would it be the best solution is not really the point.

[hitech]

Everyone has been focusing on paintball markers (guns) as the only prior art. Well, in an effort to include everything possible the writers of these patents define a paintball marker as a "pneumatic projectile launching device". The machine that makes Perfect Circle Paintballs is a pneumatic projectile launching device. It just doesn't launch them very far. Tom even referred to it as such (he called it a pneumatic delivery device). However, I believe that it COMPLETELY fits the definition used in patent '814. Now, if it was controlled by any sort of computer prior to the filing of the '814 patent, it would indeed be prior art.

Wouldn't it be nice if their own attempt to be vague were their undoing?

[BeaverEater]

This battle will go on for a long time. To bad we've already lost some companies along the way.

[MindJob]

LMAO.. watch Microsoft get word of this reprogramable microchip and sue the crap out of everyone... then all markers will have a dysfunctional windows program.... wait for about 3K shots and the inevitable reboot and then make your move.

Yeah, then you get the blue screen of death on you LCD screen

[Chris42050]

This battle will go on for a long time. To bad we've already lost some companies along the way.

Aint that the truth.

Also everyone wants paintball to get bigger and have recognition and stuff like that. I have been playing on and off for 12 years. I think paintball was a lot better when almost no one knew about it. This is what happens when you get an activity or sport big and recognized. It gets taken over by big crappy companies looking for money.