General

[BretG]

This is all about money. The action started in Feb '08. They went after airsoft distribution in Europe and have now moved into the US markets. The Umarex corporation is tying up all the major firearm manufacturers with trademark deals. Just check out their website. Colt, S&W, and Walther are already their clients. HK is perhaps the biggest and most important one of all.
The US manufacturers are just being squeezed to pay royalties like Umarex. They make a deal and then HK gets their compensation, just like any other manufacturer who's products are being copied without permission.
The milsim aspect of both paintball and airsoft has been so successful that the firearms manufacturers want their deserved cut of the pie. The bigger milsim gets, the more money they stand to make. Milsim pursuit sports are a victim of their own success.

[LK-13]

what happened to talking about the actual topic of the thread your posting in.

the TM7 does look so much like the real Steel HK product i see a valid case there, provided the replication of their appearance is the point of contention.

but Tippmann?
i mean c'mon, the A5 only has a basic resemblance to the MP5, put them side by side and they really are not even close.

although if HK were to start actually producing Paintball Guns/Markers,
it might cause some of the existing companies to wake up and smell the toast burning!

A German Engineered Paintball Gun/Marker........... now we're talkin'!!!

[LK-13]

it might just be time for the Paintball Manufacturers to start making gun/markers that are unique appearance wise unto itself, but with
a themed look that you could see this as being Real Steel.

it doesn't look exactly like any real steel firearm,
but it does look like it should be a real steel fire arm.
the T9 is realistic, but not a direct copy of anything.


my Mag Pistol is kinda sorta realistic:

[Deuce]

Originally Posted by paintman161

I am not even going to argue this in anyway, just one thing. What happened to common sense?

It's obviously never been common, that is apparent more and more every day.

[Cunha]

I think these suites make sense under current laws but the real issue is a goofy copyright laws in general. When does the HK look or the Dye (carter) Muzzle break become public domain? How long does a company get to have rights to the way something looks? "You cant sell hats with checkers on the visor because we copyrighted and popularized that style"

It is almost that absurd so the lines are hard to draw. I feel that copyright laws are bit goofy in the first place but as far as I am concerned get those unoriginal paintball gun designs out of here. I do not want tippmann to go out of business though.

[ilerman]

Originally Posted by dauntless15

where is a 12 year old gonna get his hands on a mp7 ?

You'd be surprised. I saw a video of a kid shoot his dad yesterday not two minutes after his dad was brandishing the same pistol.

Of course this was not a MP7. But whos to say that the same thing won't happen with a AK47....Oh yeah...I nearly forgot it happens all over the world every day with that particular weapon. OOPS

I agree with Eddaka...Teach kids to respect firearms and the problem will be at least partially solved.

LK13 I understand your point about the A5 not looking like a real steel MP5 when compared side by side but try telling that to a cop working patrol on the night shift and the story changes a little bit.

With respect to the lawsuit...I hope HK wins on this one!

[Judge Parker]

Well at least we have G.I. MilSim to look forward too

[Lrrpie-CT]

I think HK's case is tenuous. If the paintball guns and HK arms were externally identical, or even nearly identical, I could agree with their claim. If BT or anyone else used the terms HK, MP7, G36, MP5SD3, etc., there would be an obvious infringement. However, these paintball guns only share some similarities in shape. For example, compare the BT TM7 and the HK MP7. There is a generally similar shape between the two. But, the trigger guards look different. The pistol grips look different. The extending stocks look different. The barrels are different. The sights are different. Mechanically, of course, they are both completely different.

How much different does it need to look to not infringe? If someone were to hand me a BT-4 Delta, I'd never confuse it for an MP5 even though there are some similarities in shape. If I were designing a paintball gun, how would I know if my design were different enough to feel secure that I wasn't infringing on someone's trademark? I'm confident that there isn't even one cross compatible component between any BT gun and any HK gun.

So, for BT's part, they don't use the word HK or any HK trademarks. They don't manufacture any HK compatible parts. BT products could never be confused for HK products. There is a vague similarity in shape. I think it's bogus.

The HK produced document inserted into canceled eBay auctions is crafty.

All products made to look like H&K firearms or bearing images that resemble H&K firearms must be approved by H&K. Licensed products will signify that they are licensed or manufactured by H&K. Unless your items are legitimate H&K products or H&K licensed products, they will be considered suspicious, infringing and in direct violation of H&K’s intellectual property rights.

So, if a paintball gun is black, has a foregrip (fixed or folding), collapsing or fixed stock, picatinny rail, and charging handle, it thus shares similarities with any number of HK products. Thus, all paintball guns incorporating these similarities can only be legitimately marketed with an HK license?

The fact that today is the 65th anniversary of D-Day makes me less inclined to put up with German bullsh1t!

[Harbinger[TG]]

I am still wondering if they will go after the HK (hostile kids) because there original logo was pretty much the actual HK logo.

[chrislognshot]

could say the same thing for nwa. it has ton name for it band weather airline and one other too. to who own right to nwa then