Here we go again another lawsuit.

[Jimmykaboots]

Yes Bring Pumps And Mech Semis Back! I hate running through ropes of paint or having my bunker shaking in front of me, scares the bejabbers out of me.

[Beemer]

LMAO

I read this last night on 68cal.

It was bound to happen. The Invert Mini = Ion killer. Im sure SP wanted to be the only single-tubed 9V electro on the market. Hopefully Kee/NPS can take some of their bucketloads of money and invalidate SP's patents.

Boo-hoo, Im crying a river for SP

Ya its all pretty funny aint it? Like the Mini makers wouldnt know there is a Pat. App. for on the HES. But they can use it till its issued and you know they know who has the app in. When they all live in glass houses they shouldnt throw stones.

[Lohman446]

well seems to me that the patent is a U.S. Patent. manufacture your products in another country and SP can kiss your !@#.
its no different than if you base your corporation in another country like the caymans. you can still operate in the U.S. but since your not based in the U.S. you have aleviated your tax responsabilities to the U.S. no more income tax... YIPPPPEEEEEEE!!!!!

You have no clue what you are talking about at least on the avoidance of patents do you? Patents apply to imported products as well.

[Badmovies.org]

Smart Parts = the SCO of the paintball world.

I'll keep doing what I have been doing: not buying any of their products and making sure other players understand that what Smart Parts is doing is harmful to the sport and harmful to them (the players) in the long run.

[teufelhunden]

Smart Parts = the SCO of the paintball world.

I'll keep doing what I have been doing: not buying any of their products and making sure other players understand that what Smart Parts is doing is harmful to the sport and harmful to them (the players) in the long run.

I'll spare the long drawn out circa 2003 argument, but;

Why is it necessarily a bad thing when paintball companies actually act like businesses?

[Badmovies.org]

When you get down to it, patents or copyrights are terrible for society as a whole. The reason they were created is to give someone (or something, in the case of a company) a reason to invent or create something. That way the creator can garner a return for their work, thus encouraging people (and things) to create/invent more. Still, everyone benefits the most once it becomes free to copy.

The US patent system is completely out of whack. Companies are awarded patents for vague interpretations. They never use the patents to make anything, instead leverage them to either secure revenue by forcing others to license the "invention" or crush competition. Tell me how it is good for society if someone patents something without ever intending to manufacture the item? That is, hands down, an abuse of the system. The system is a trust between society and the inventors, with the understanding that society ultimately benefits.

I believe that, if we had seen this sort of behavior early on in paintball, there would be much less freedom of choice (less markers, barrels, etc), more cost, and a lower standard of quality than we currently enjoy.

[Desega]

KEE is an excellent business, and I hope that they don't have much trouble with SP. NPS(KEE) has been in the game too long to take this kind of crap.

[CKY_Alliance]

KEE is an excellent business, and I hope that they don't have much trouble with SP. NPS(KEE) has been in the game too long to take this kind of crap.

I think you are the first person I have ever "heard" state this..most people, especially shop and field owners think the exact opposite and for very good reasons. I don't really feel like going into details though.

[Zneaky]

Smart Parts is an industry leader in the innovation of paintball equipment and is dedicated to the technological advancement of the sport. To learn more about Smart Parts and its innovative technologies, visit their website at www.smartparts.com."

Did you guys catch the end of that: "dedicated to the technological advancement of the sport"

Did the article fail to mention "only when it means $$ for SP". SP could give a crap less about the sport, they only care about $$$$.

Don't forget the PLUG at the end: "To learn more about Smart Parts and its innovative technologies, visit their website at www.smartparts.com"

Z

[paintballfiend]

When you get down to it, patents or copyrights are terrible for society as a whole. The reason they were created is to give someone (or something, in the case of a company) a reason to invent or create something. That way the creator can garner a return for their work, thus encouraging people (and things) to create/invent more. Still, everyone benefits the most once it becomes free to copy.

The US patent system is completely out of whack. Companies are awarded patents for vague interpretations. They never use the patents to make anything, instead leverage them to either secure revenue by forcing others to license the "invention" or crush competition. Tell me how it is good for society if someone patents something without ever intending to manufacture the item? That is, hands down, an abuse of the system. The system is a trust between society and the inventors, with the understanding that society ultimately benefits.

I believe that, if we had seen this sort of behavior early on in paintball, there would be much less freedom of choice (less markers, barrels, etc), more cost, and a lower standard of quality than we currently enjoy.

Fight The Power!!!!

[RogueFactor]

Tell me how it is good for society if someone patents something without ever intending to manufacture the item?

Interestingly, its my understanding that some other countries patent systems require the manufacture of a patented item within a specified amount of time, otherwise it becomes public domain.

The only downside I can see to this is the small inventor who has a great idea, patents it, but does not have the resources for manufacturing. Rather than the inventor having the leverage, now the big company has that leverage because they can wait out a much shorter timeframe in hopes that the inventor cannot produce the item, and it becomes public domain.

This would disincentivize all small inventors, resulting in less innovation except from big companies who, without competition from those small inventors and their innovations, would not need to innovate themselves.

Its the small guys who usually come up with the big ideas.

[Coralis]

I'll spare the long drawn out circa 2003 argument, but;

Why is it necessarily a bad thing when paintball companies actually act like businesses?

Im not sure how this would compare because of the relative complexity differences but imagine if Ford had managed to get a patent on gasoline powered internal combustion engine powering a 4 wheeled carriage and was suing every other car maker for intruding on their patent.....

[SummaryJudgement]

disincentivize

I think that word just gave me a headache Rogue..........

[RogueFactor]

I think that word just gave me a headache Rogue..........

Sorry bro, didnt know how else to say it.

[Pacifist_Farmer]

Interestingly, its my understanding that some other countries patent systems require the manufacture of a patented item within a specified amount of time, otherwise it becomes public domain.

The only downside I can see to this is the small inventor who has a great idea, patents it, but does not have the resources for manufacturing. Rather than the inventor having the leverage, now the big company has that leverage because they can wait out a much shorter timeframe in hopes that the inventor cannot produce the item, and it becomes public domain.

This would disincentivize all small inventors, resulting in less innovation except from big companies who, without competition from those small inventors and their innovations, would not need to innovate themselves.

Its the small guys who usually come up with the big ideas.

I completely understand what your saying, and agree, but I see a different side to this.

Big companies need to hyper innovate, if they don't have the next best thing before everyone else they lose market share, for which they have already paid dearly.

I think a big company is more likely to pay for a concept/patentable technology, than wait it out. SP, through lawsuits, has demonstrated that they don't feel anyone has innovated, rather that they are more likely going to retain market share through intimidation of weaker mfgerers who are developing parallel technologies. No ones really doing anything new their just repackaging existing technologies.