PTP gets patent granted - Page 5

Brewtt · 09-04-2007, 11:52 AM

I think this is totally stupid because it has effectively shut Rainman229 down (out of fear I guess) from doing his pneu-mag conversions for the rest of us.

Not good for the paintball community at all IMO. Only a moron would think this is a step in the right direction for the paintball community.

stevedavidson · 09-04-2007, 02:36 PM

going-home,

Why don't you drop the attack BS?

1. its not my product, so whether someone comes up with prior art or not, it doesn't affect my wallet

2. I don't enjoy being yelled at by people who don't know what they're talking about: its annoying and a waste of time for me when I have to start all over from the beginning trying to explain how thing work to them

3. You're not making any points. I don't know why you think you are. For that matter I don't know why you've self-appointed yourself as the "revealer of mythical prior art". Do you not have anything better to do with your time?

4. Take your crow somewhere else - its not cooked yet.

The links you provided is to technology which is not claimed in the PTP patents. You can wave it around all day long and call it whatever you want to call it, but the claims in the PTP patents remain valid and it is NOT prior art.

I do not need to explain why it is not prior art - nor does PTP.

You don't even have standing if it were to come to a court case.

***

You know, I keep on answering these questions and comments in an effort to get people to understand how these things really work; it takes a lot of time out of my day and it gets EXTREMELY annoying when yahoos continuously, repeatedly and seemingly (in some cases) deliberately confuse the messenger with the message.

If people stop making infringing product because of something I've said - that's a good thing. Its a benefit for the patent holder and for the infringer, since they won't have to deal with possible future legal issues.

If you want to make a pneu-trigger for yourself that doesn't infringe - you have two options: invent a new way of doing it or license the right to do so from one of the patent holders.

If you disagree with the patent(s) that have been granted, you have three options: go take legal action and put your money where your mouth has been, infringe and hope that no one notices (better keep a hefty junk of your profits in the bank for the lawyers) or go invent a better way to do it and get your own damn patent.

Up until now I've tried to be nice and objective and non-confrontational about these issues - but it sure seems like some others don't want things that way. So I'm going to exercise my option and right to simply ignore those who: can't read the law and figure it out for themselves, can't read a patent claim and figure it out for themselves, have some personal axe to grind and fail to use logic or sensibility in their responses or can't tell the difference between someone who is discussing sex and someone who is actively screwing them...

Schmitti · 09-04-2007, 02:43 PM

Be glad that you are at least trying to prove something provable.... you should see how ugly things have gotten over politics, faith... or my favorite was evolution... yeah that got pretty ugly.

Of course the one that really got people blue in the face was the airplane on a conveyor belt... I was almost going to turn in my engineering license after that one... YIKES!

Steve, your time and explanaition is appreciated. I think what a lot of people seem to be getting hung up on is that they can't get over how a modification to an already patented product can be pattentable.... I guess as an alternative example people should look at pens, pencils, toasters etc... many different versions of things that exist that have "improvements" or are variations of earlier designs.

Anyways... folks take it a little easier.

E

HurtCow · 09-04-2007, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schmitti

Of course the one that really got people blue in the face was the airplane on a conveyor belt... I was almost going to turn in my engineering license after that one... YIKES!

IT WILL TAKE OFF!!!

Robertsr · 09-04-2007, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HurtCow

IT WILL TAKE OFF!!!

Says you!

going_home · 09-04-2007, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by going_home

Personally I dont need a pnue trigger but if I did I would make one, because you arent going to.
The better part of a decade now shows that thats the truth.

I personally like Forest, from correspondence, but the whole "as the stomach turns" pnue trigger saga is just over the top. Not just PTP but all 3 patent holders. The whole debacle is just mind numbingly surreal. And then add the feedneck thing, its just gone way way way past ridiculous.

The paintball community has been watching all this, and they have long memories. Doubtful you can change many minds to your opinion.
The paintball community could care less what the patents/laws/lawyers say.
Too much water has gone under the bridge now.
Make a pnue trigger available for sale to paintballers or go away.
No more hollow words and threats. No more sir, no more.

Steve your post hasnt changed anything. It actually wasnt you so much as it was rabidchihauhau over on AO.
But your posts were along the same lines as his.
I can say that many are tired of the same old talk talk talk.
Like I said before, not too many believe what any of the 3 patent holders say when they talk about the pnue trigger.
Its like the adults on the Charlie Brown cartoons.
wah wah wah wah wah wah wah.
People are tired of it.

Make a pnue trigger available for paintballers to buy, or leave us alone. Not trying to be rude, just saying how I feel about the whole
soap opera. Just sick of it all. Stop trying to "educate" people about why things are the way they are, and why they arent going to change.
Thats my opinion. I am pretty certain I'm only one of a large crowd
in that opinion.
Sorry if it stings but thats the way it is. If you cant see why its that way, then you are the one that needs an "education".

Not really aimed at you Steve, but at DW, G-Force, and PTP.
Sorry if you got in the way, but you were the one "educating" people
on the subject.

wolf13 · 09-04-2007, 10:05 PM

another factor is that most of us here are older players who remember the "good ol days", when actual innovations were coming out and there were more then a handful of companies putting out the same boring stuff in a shiny new package. now, we see companies making broad patents to lock up the market, and we've seen companies and products unable to even emerage, and old companies wither because they don't have the resources to take on these patents. the notion that the patents have somehow enriched paintball is laughable to a lot of people here, they see it as the rich getting richer at the expense of innovation, competition, free market and the player. I expect you'll laugh at that idea and say something about it protecting innovation, but in the end, the only ones who can protect a patents are those with the money or who are willing to fork it over to a company with the money. Those that don't; get their innovation stolen or are forced out of the market. this is big buisness, and its what a lot of people here hate about modern paintball. Is it any suprise someone coming on here talking about how great vague broad patents are, is going to get a cool reception from people who like companies like AGD and AKA? Is PTP going to be the next smart parts? To a lot of people, it looks exactly like thats what they are trying to do, and thats enough to turn a lot of prospective buyers in a very niche market off.

BigEvil · 09-04-2007, 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by going_home

Steve your post hasnt changed anything. It actually wasnt you so much as it was rabidchihauhau over on AO.
But your posts were along the same lines as his.

SteveDavidson = rabidchihauhau. Same guy.

blackrain · 09-05-2007, 01:52 AM

One thing I can say about colin, he has age on his side. He was 18 or 19 when I first met him and I was 35 yrs then. I'm almost 45 yrs old now. He already had his gatlin Spyder running lol. Not well, but the principle was there. I expect many new things from deadly wind. Like I said they have age on their side.
Wolf13. I miss the old days too. Everyone made the same stuff and no one cared. That's when wgp,Smart parts,SI/ICD,automag and so on were all friends. You could see them all at big events sitting together. No they are just suing the HELL out of each other. The first law suit I ever heard about in paintball was NW and Carter. "Oh where oh where has my Under Dog gone oh where oh where can he be". Man I miss when they were all friends.
Later,
Blackrain

stevedavidson · 09-05-2007, 08:52 AM

yes, steve davidson and rabidchihauhau are the same person. most everyone knows that's been my nickname for years, so I don't consider using it to be hiding behind an alias or anything like that - and if the post identifying it as such hadn't already been here when I signed on already, I was going to inform going-home of that fact.

going-home - what those companies do with their technology is none of your business. Its good policy to give customers what they want, but there's no law that makes it so.

blackrain - you either misunderstand or mischaracterize what you call the 'good old days'. first of all, those companies were not "all friends" and in many cases, far from it.

secondly, the only reason that the folks innovating back then didn't patent their designs was because the prevailing notion was that it was cost-prohibitive. The only people doing it were the pharmaceutical companies who made the paintballs. The SP kicked things off and set the tone of using patents as a club with their barrel patent and the race was on.

there were huge fights - both verbal and physical - over the issue of copycatting and folks were even more up in arms (as a community) over that then they are now over patents.

Can't have your cake and eat it too: either we chuck the idea of IP protection and accept cheap overseas knockoffs hitting the market 3 months after someone truly creative breaks their stones to give you guys something new and is then forced to close up shop because he can't make a dime off of his invention, or we accept IP protection of technology and all that it entails - restrictions on who can make what, C&D notices, arguments over prior art, etc., etc.

Take your pick. One model leads to anyone with money and overseas manufacturing bringing the majority of products to the market, the other model leads to people who at least seem to care about paintball bringing the majority of product to the market.

09-04-2007, 11:52 AM	#41 (permalink)
Brewtt CHEERS! Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Northern California	I think this is totally stupid because it has effectively shut Rainman229 down (out of fear I guess) from doing his pneu-mag conversions for the rest of us. Not good for the paintball community at all IMO. Only a moron would think this is a step in the right direction for the paintball community. __________________ Dabbling in the recreational paintball arts since 1991.

09-04-2007, 02:43 PM	#43 (permalink)
Schmitti Red=Moderator Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Schen. NY	Be glad that you are at least trying to prove something provable.... you should see how ugly things have gotten over politics, faith... or my favorite was evolution... yeah that got pretty ugly. Of course the one that really got people blue in the face was the airplane on a conveyor belt... I was almost going to turn in my engineering license after that one... YIKES! Steve, your time and explanaition is appreciated. I think what a lot of people seem to be getting hung up on is that they can't get over how a modification to an already patented product can be pattentable.... I guess as an alternative example people should look at pens, pencils, toasters etc... many different versions of things that exist that have "improvements" or are variations of earlier designs. Anyways... folks take it a little easier. E __________________ Gone fishing

09-04-2007, 10:05 PM	#47 (permalink)
wolf13 MCB Member Join Date: Apr 2006	another factor is that most of us here are older players who remember the "good ol days", when actual innovations were coming out and there were more then a handful of companies putting out the same boring stuff in a shiny new package. now, we see companies making broad patents to lock up the market, and we've seen companies and products unable to even emerage, and old companies wither because they don't have the resources to take on these patents. the notion that the patents have somehow enriched paintball is laughable to a lot of people here, they see it as the rich getting richer at the expense of innovation, competition, free market and the player. I expect you'll laugh at that idea and say something about it protecting innovation, but in the end, the only ones who can protect a patents are those with the money or who are willing to fork it over to a company with the money. Those that don't; get their innovation stolen or are forced out of the market. this is big buisness, and its what a lot of people here hate about modern paintball. Is it any suprise someone coming on here talking about how great vague broad patents are, is going to get a cool reception from people who like companies like AGD and AKA? Is PTP going to be the next smart parts? To a lot of people, it looks exactly like thats what they are trying to do, and thats enough to turn a lot of prospective buyers in a very niche market off. __________________ looking for interesting cockers. especially AKA Black Widow, Slide trigger bonebrake, predators and other nice customs as well as perhaps an eclipse sovereign. CustomCockers.com Forum for Sniper 1's to MQ and anything autococking welcome. Pics of some of My Collection of 50+ rare and oddball cockers and other oddities Last edited by wolf13; 09-04-2007 at 11:34 PM..

09-05-2007, 01:52 AM	#49 (permalink)
blackrain MCB Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: America	One thing I can say about colin, he has age on his side. He was 18 or 19 when I first met him and I was 35 yrs then. I'm almost 45 yrs old now. He already had his gatlin Spyder running lol. Not well, but the principle was there. I expect many new things from deadly wind. Like I said they have age on their side. Wolf13. I miss the old days too. Everyone made the same stuff and no one cared. That's when wgp,Smart parts,SI/ICD,automag and so on were all friends. You could see them all at big events sitting together. No they are just suing the HELL out of each other. The first law suit I ever heard about in paintball was NW and Carter. "Oh where oh where has my Under Dog gone oh where oh where can he be". Man I miss when they were all friends. Later, Blackrain __________________ Rogue Leader and founder "TEAM ROGUE" Cell #0 "When all else fails,pull the pin and see what happens next" Just like to make crazy stuff for paintball? Click on the link: http://www.freepaintballplans.com/forum/ My feed back: http://www.mcarterbrown.com/forums/showthread.php?t=745 How Paintballs are made: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...54640369281174

09-04-2007, 02:36 PM	#42 (permalink)
stevedavidson Active Member Join Date: Aug 2007	going-home, Why don't you drop the attack BS? 1. its not my product, so whether someone comes up with prior art or not, it doesn't affect my wallet 2. I don't enjoy being yelled at by people who don't know what they're talking about: its annoying and a waste of time for me when I have to start all over from the beginning trying to explain how thing work to them 3. You're not making any points. I don't know why you think you are. For that matter I don't know why you've self-appointed yourself as the "revealer of mythical prior art". Do you not have anything better to do with your time? 4. Take your crow somewhere else - its not cooked yet. The links you provided is to technology which is not claimed in the PTP patents. You can wave it around all day long and call it whatever you want to call it, but the claims in the PTP patents remain valid and it is NOT prior art. I do not need to explain why it is not prior art - nor does PTP. You don't even have standing if it were to come to a court case. *** You know, I keep on answering these questions and comments in an effort to get people to understand how these things really work; it takes a lot of time out of my day and it gets EXTREMELY annoying when yahoos continuously, repeatedly and seemingly (in some cases) deliberately confuse the messenger with the message. If people stop making infringing product because of something I've said - that's a good thing. Its a benefit for the patent holder and for the infringer, since they won't have to deal with possible future legal issues. If you want to make a pneu-trigger for yourself that doesn't infringe - you have two options: invent a new way of doing it or license the right to do so from one of the patent holders. If you disagree with the patent(s) that have been granted, you have three options: go take legal action and put your money where your mouth has been, infringe and hope that no one notices (better keep a hefty junk of your profits in the bank for the lawyers) or go invent a better way to do it and get your own damn patent. Up until now I've tried to be nice and objective and non-confrontational about these issues - but it sure seems like some others don't want things that way. So I'm going to exercise my option and right to simply ignore those who: can't read the law and figure it out for themselves, can't read a patent claim and figure it out for themselves, have some personal axe to grind and fail to use logic or sensibility in their responses or can't tell the difference between someone who is discussing sex and someone who is actively screwing them...

09-05-2007, 08:52 AM	#50 (permalink)
stevedavidson Active Member Join Date: Aug 2007	yes, steve davidson and rabidchihauhau are the same person. most everyone knows that's been my nickname for years, so I don't consider using it to be hiding behind an alias or anything like that - and if the post identifying it as such hadn't already been here when I signed on already, I was going to inform going-home of that fact. going-home - what those companies do with their technology is none of your business. Its good policy to give customers what they want, but there's no law that makes it so. blackrain - you either misunderstand or mischaracterize what you call the 'good old days'. first of all, those companies were not "all friends" and in many cases, far from it. secondly, the only reason that the folks innovating back then didn't patent their designs was because the prevailing notion was that it was cost-prohibitive. The only people doing it were the pharmaceutical companies who made the paintballs. The SP kicked things off and set the tone of using patents as a club with their barrel patent and the race was on. there were huge fights - both verbal and physical - over the issue of copycatting and folks were even more up in arms (as a community) over that then they are now over patents. Can't have your cake and eat it too: either we chuck the idea of IP protection and accept cheap overseas knockoffs hitting the market 3 months after someone truly creative breaks their stones to give you guys something new and is then forced to close up shop because he can't make a dime off of his invention, or we accept IP protection of technology and all that it entails - restrictions on who can make what, C&D notices, arguments over prior art, etc., etc. Take your pick. One model leads to anyone with money and overseas manufacturing bringing the majority of products to the market, the other model leads to people who at least seem to care about paintball bringing the majority of product to the market.