I'm on my phone now so I don't have the links to the patents but Colin's explicitly says that it must assist trigger return. The cheater doesn't have that at all. If someone could pm me Forrest's contact info it would be greatly appreciated.
-
-
I found it, thanks.
As far as the DW's design not being an assist, it can't be judged just on the name, you really need to read the patent to see what it covers.
In my mind, if you add any pneumatic system to a mechanical trigger, it is an assist.Comment
-
I have not seen the hAir setup internally by Colin, so I can not comment as such with accurate knowledge.
I do however have a few years time in studying the PTP version of this application.
I can tell you for CERTAIN that the prior art covers both direct mounted and non-direct mounted trigger assist systems
Explained:
"Direct mounted" - the ram has a linkage of some kind that connects to the AGD OEM sear via the sear arm's hole where the clevis would normally do. This is NOT restricted to the "hole". It covers use of the direct connection of an actuator (ram) to act upon the sear/valve.
"Non-direct mounted" - the ram has no linkage of any kind that connects to the AGD OEM sear/valve. Meaning,.. no direct mechanical connection during the initial phase/state of the action performed by the assisting force (the ram to the sear are separate parts until you drive them mechanically; they make a mechanical connection after that initial phase/state)
Forrest's prior art also covers the use of the assembly in multiple pieces to perform the same action.
I high lighted your original quote because I was curious if you INTENDED on typing it the way you did,.. it was a mistake,.. or thats a part of Colin's patent that I have not seen yet.
Trigger RETURN is a whole slew of other patents. At that point your talking about using a PTP patent and a Boston Paintball Patent (BPS) patent. The BPS patent is a lot more "loose" and has a lot of wiggle room if that type of thing interests you...... Other than myself, there is one other person on this forum I know who can speak about the BPS patents with accurate knowledge of how it works with other parties involved (Tippmann)
You best bet with PTP: "I am interested in using your application in a low volume (sub 100 units), low cost, production so that I can produce a similar product that will spark the interest of a small venue of people still using mechanical markers that do not wish to apply electronics to their markers. What can I do on my end to secure permission from you to proceed?"
Make you statement just as clear as your intention. If you are serious, be prepared to offer them a NDA to give them a "good feeling" that you are in fact, doing what your saying you will be making.
Its business,... treat it as such and Im sure you will be okay.
Edit: If you hit a wall,.. try to "re think" how the patent could be written in the same application. That usually is the way you get your own products made with the same concepts using the same IP but legally not copying someones patented ideas.
Example: Planet Eclipse has a patent on using an optical break beam sensor as a "switch" in place of a actual micro switch on a circuit board in any paintball marker. WDP out right copied this idea and used it for years on their OEM boards without paying a cent to PE. The reason: they added a single piece of metal between the optical switch and the trigger. PE's patent spells out that you can not use an optical trigger to actuate a circuit with a trigger. WDP added the piece of metal (the leaf arm) so they could say "use a optical switch to actuate a circuit by means of an assembly acted upon by a trigger"Last edited by p8ntbal4me; 03-01-2013, 12:43 PM._______________________
Jai "P8ntbal4me" MenardComment
-
Fairly close to what I said.Your best bet with PTP: "I am interested in using your application in a low volume (sub 100 units), low cost, production so that I can produce a similar product that will spark the interest of a small venue of people still using mechanical markers that do not wish to apply electronics to their markers. What can I do on my end to secure permission from you to proceed?"
Thanks for the info, its nice to see that someone actually studied the patents.
Comment
-
I wonder what the reason for squatting on the patent is. I can think of a few, but they are all rather unfortunate. They bothered to produce and sell the 2009 Micro-Mag which was just a redo of there existing Automag based marker. The demand for a purely pneumatic marker equipped with the hAir trigger has to be just as big if not bigger.
The opportunity to market it is there as well:
-"Batteries not Included"
-"Batteries are for [insert derogatory term or feminine product requiring batteries here]"
I could go on.Comment
-
y not call Forrest? they make parts all day and im sure if there is intrest or u give him a cut he would do it, he was always willing to make me parts in the past... that way some joe blow makes it and messes it up. For me i would want Luke or XMT to make it or forrest they have all the knowledge.... but i like the idea so im interestedComment
-
Well if this guy can't/won't do it, I'm going to send the stuff to luke if he's interested. This isn't some joe blow machinist however. Everyone know's who this guy is.Comment
-
I wont make any parts until I work something out with Forrest first. I'm not sure if I want to design something myself or make the cheater...Comment
-
Comment
-
They're not sitting on it per se, they've licensed the technology before to other people but for whatever reason negotiations broke down or were a nonstarter with DW. The information about what happened between them was shaky at best in 2004. Forrest didn't say anything at, and the guy from DW complained a lot publicly without sharing what actually happened, but made it seem as if he didn't feel he should pay anything at all which could have severely hindered negotiations. Looking back on the few threads about it there are more holes than there is information, so it's not really worth speculation anymore.
They are very nice and very reasonable people to work with, and believe me everyone wants to put a few extra bucks in their pocket these days, and the less work involved, the better. Give them a call, or send them an email with very specific information about what you want to do.
Partner with LUKE for. He's already been in contact with them and of all the people on AO offering parts and service he clearly has the best reputation for product quality, support, and timely delivery of products. Even if he makes his own frame maybe you could pay to have the Cheaters made?Comment
-
I've heard nothing but good things about PTP. I've owned a few of their products. I did not me to infer any nefarious intent by speculating on why they might not be moving on this patent. I fully understand them, or anyone else, trying to make money on their IP. Nor do I endorse anyone trying to skate around the patent. This was done to me by a major arcade manufacturer. They signed a non-disclosure then artfully dodged my IP by applying an older technology to achieve an inferior version of the same concept.
While I'm very interested in seeing this get done, I'm not sure what I would add. I'm an artist and software guy who owns a bowling ally. Besides the fewer hands in the pot the lower the cost to consumer. The way I see this working best is AGD (platform) / PTP (hAir) / Luke (design and machining). That partnership could bring a fully pneumatic, built to purpose, electro-killer to market.
I'd gladly help to market it (all 3 parties could use a website overhaul).Comment
-
I've got lots of hats. I make my living as the owner of an Candlepin Bowling Center. As a hobby I've developed a few redemption arcade games (the kind that give tickets). Sometimes I'm a graphic designer, sometimes I'm a web developer. So I guess the answer is yes, all my jobs are fun.Comment
Comment