Smart Parts?? - Page 10

flyweightnate · 03-30-2008, 01:08 PM

Just to answer your question about the sports participation:

Participation has actually declined significantly since the release of the Ion. I'm assuming it's because rentals are no longer competitive, because 500 rounds no longer lasts all day, and because kids don't enjoy getting bonusballed by every electro-wielding neophyte. And I swear, no 12-year-old has ever gogged me with his Ion. It's more of a "I was unlucky enough to run through his stream, and catch one of 200 in the leg".

I play pump; I feel like every shot should count for something. It frustrates me that "everyone can afford an Ion!", when in reality, a Series 6 is cheaper, as it can run off a 3.5oz tank, with a 100rd hopper and 4-50rd pods, and do just as much damage as an Ion with a 88/45, Halo B, and 3000 rounds strapped to the back like we're all going for a 4 day trip in the mountains. These cheap electros are what is wrong with the sport, IMO. And Smart Parts has not only proliferated the cheap electro, but done it in an unfavorable manner, of questionable legality, at best. Therefore, I see absolutely no reason to cut them any slack, in any respect. Blowfish is competitive in tournaments running 5 pumps and 2 semis. Yet the rest of the world thinks we all need 13.3bps, plus a cheater board? Forget it. I just traded my last electro for a pump, and I'm never going back. If I need firepower, I have a cocker that will do just fine.

RealtorTommy · 03-30-2008, 02:01 PM

Let's revist memory lane......

To Whom It May Concern:

I'm the guy that has patent No. 4,770,153, issued to me on September 13, 1988. If anybody is interested, they can look it up and see that it covers an electronic air rifle with an electronic circuit, pressure reduction valve,pneumatic bolt and electric pneumatic valve. I have video from (circa)1985 and 1991 demonstrating actual working prototypes.

I can't understand how SP got their patent since I had the original patent.

Sandy Edelman

FTC V. DAVISON & ASSOCIATES, INC......yes this is correct........

LeopoldStotch · 03-31-2008, 12:47 PM

I know patents have a shelf life, so to speak, but the dates you mention would invalidate SP's patent on electro markers. If SP's patent infringes on yours, of course. I'm sure the patent office would like to see this.

flyweightnate · 03-31-2008, 01:03 PM

That's not Tommy's patent... he's quoting Sandy Edelman, who popped up over at Doc's "Tinker's Guild" with his two cents. Obviously, Edelman's patent was not listed as prior art... Thus the Smart Parts patent is fraud, and punishable as such. Notarized federal document, fraud... does that make it perjury, and a federal offense? Cuz that could be fun.

LeopoldStotch · 03-31-2008, 01:06 PM

That patent was submitted as prior art from SP for their electro gun patent. There must have been enough differences in their eyes to grant SP's.

flyweightnate · 03-31-2008, 01:07 PM

You sure? I looked through the patents and saw no mention of the operation and use of solenoid valves in Edelman's.

LeopoldStotch · 03-31-2008, 01:09 PM

Pneumatically operated projectile launching device - Patent 7100593

There is a laundry list of prior art there, included is the patent mentioned.

LeopoldStotch · 03-31-2008, 01:19 PM

I may be mistaken as to the actual SP patent in question. Does someone know the patent number that encompases the electro gun? I would like to may sure I am reading the correct one. They are so vague that it is hard to tell which is which, and I'm not a patent expert.

RealtorTommy · 03-31-2008, 01:40 PM

Let me clarify...yes Edelman's patent was mentioned....that's what he can't understand how it was approved.......

http://airsoldier.com/~haveblue/tech...S005967133.pdf

http://airsoldier.com/~haveblue/tech...S006035843.pdf

http://airsoldier.com/~haveblue/tech...S006349711.pdf

http://airsoldier.com/~haveblue/tech...S006474326.pdf

http://airsoldier.com/~haveblue/tech...S006637421.pdf

http://airsoldier.com/~haveblue/tech...S006694963.pdf ......touch activated....how many years seen markers with a switch, board, solenoid and battery?
Prior art if submitted....as I haven't seen any...that would have to be a detailed search....

http://airsoldier.com/~haveblue/tech...S007100593.pdf

flyweightnate · 03-31-2008, 01:43 PM

Huh, no joke... somehow I missed that last time I looked for it.

I think I'm more perplexed by the patent scheme now than I was before.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-31-2008, 12:47 PM	#93 (permalink)
LeopoldStotch Rec Poster Join Date: Mar 2008	I know patents have a shelf life, so to speak, but the dates you mention would invalidate SP's patent on electro markers. If SP's patent infringes on yours, of course. I'm sure the patent office would like to see this.

03-31-2008, 01:06 PM	#95 (permalink)
LeopoldStotch Rec Poster Join Date: Mar 2008	That patent was submitted as prior art from SP for their electro gun patent. There must have been enough differences in their eyes to grant SP's.

03-31-2008, 01:09 PM	#97 (permalink)
LeopoldStotch Rec Poster Join Date: Mar 2008	Pneumatically operated projectile launching device - Patent 7100593 There is a laundry list of prior art there, included is the patent mentioned.

03-31-2008, 01:19 PM	#98 (permalink)
LeopoldStotch Rec Poster Join Date: Mar 2008	I may be mistaken as to the actual SP patent in question. Does someone know the patent number that encompases the electro gun? I would like to may sure I am reading the correct one. They are so vague that it is hard to tell which is which, and I'm not a patent expert.