Robinson Arms sues Remington, Bushmaster, RRA
- Thread starter Armedsask
- Start date
- Status
Seriously? Subtle differences? They are completely different firearms in every way you can possibly quantify.
The name thing is a legitimate issue though. This one is just, well, ridiculous. They should sue every other firearm manufacturer for making guns that use bullets!
Last edited:
If they were justified they would have been leveled 6 years ago when the Masada was first presented, or a couple years ago in the case of the Remington. No this looks like a case of "HOLY CRAP!!! THEY DID IT..THE ACR is released on Monday!!!!!!!!!" on RobArms. Even if the lawsuit is justified it will never be in the eyes of customers...Welcome to #### Swan's world RobARms.
I don't feel like I know enough to have an opinion here...I would GUESS though that RA's lawyers had a very long look at the case and I am sure they have a better idea of what they are doing than I do.
I would not assume that the lawsuit is totally frivolous just because I don't immediately grasp the whole thing. It certainly MAY be frivolous...but I am not in a good position to judge that personally.
I would not assume that the lawsuit is totally frivolous just because I don't immediately grasp the whole thing. It certainly MAY be frivolous...but I am not in a good position to judge that personally.
There are earlier prototypes as well. That claim is debunked by prior art.
That is enough for me to say I won't buy their guns then. Straight up!
You two have got to be kidding me
Now that is ridiculous. Companies sue each other ALL THE TIME EVERY SINGLE DAY all year every year. And you're all of a sudden going to rule them out because of legal issues which have nothing to do with the end user? XCR's are incredible. I suggest shooting one before you finalize your decision - if you had, you most likely (99.9%) wouldn't have said that.
To buy one of these in Canada; do you have to buy it through Wolverine Supply or are there other factory direct dealers.
I heard that they will not deal with anyone else (other dealers) in Canada - kind of a monopoly type thing. Don't quite know what to make of this.
Nice gun, but it always comes back down to parts availability. There are way more AR's out there than XCR's even though AR's are restricted and this weighs in hugely.
I heard that they will not deal with anyone else (other dealers) in Canada - kind of a monopoly type thing. Don't quite know what to make of this.
Nice gun, but it always comes back down to parts availability. There are way more AR's out there than XCR's even though AR's are restricted and this weighs in hugely.
Ya ARMS may have lost some of the public opinion battle but won the patent battle and got a nice jackpot of 1.8 million from Troy Ind, so maybe RobArms thinks its their turn. I also see ol #### is taking another whack at the jackpot against LaRue Tactical for patent infringement. Ha ha let them go at it, makes little difference in the big business of US firearms.
Throttle_monkey1
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
The thing question is, are there real patent infringements? Does anyone know if there are or aren't?
Reaper you said they should have done it six years ago. Wasn't the patent applied for in 03' and granted in late '09?
I'm not a legal guru so I'm more interested in learning than slamming anyone.
Reaper you said they should have done it six years ago. Wasn't the patent applied for in 03' and granted in late '09?
I'm not a legal guru so I'm more interested in learning than slamming anyone.
Dude, XCR were issued a patent last October
I am not defending XCR, however it's kind of hard to sue someone for patent infringement without actually having a relevant patent, no?
Logic follows that if I applied for a patent, I wait for it to get accepted or rejected, and if it's granted, I see if there is anyone else infringing on it, and if they are willing to license the patent out of court (Hence the 3 month wait till now, while XCR layers were deciding if they have a case or not). If they are not willing, then I sue.
But asking why Rob Arms haven't sued 6 years ago is silly. They didn't, because they didn't have a patent at the time.
Furthermore, we really have no idea what XCR thinks the infringement consisted of. It's very well possible that they do have a case. Or maybe they want to make a company attractive for the buyout by Remington. Or maybe it's frivolous lawsuit. But in any event, it doesn't affect you as a shooter - XCRs are still being imported into Canada, you can still get parts from Wolverine, so what's with all the excitement?
Oh, and isn't #### Swan/Mark LaRue excitement is not over a patent but over the trademark of characters "18" while in association with an optics mount? Is that even relevant, other then it's a lawsuit?
My 'legal' opinion, such as its worth from a non-lawyer, is that RA has a good case. I read the patent, its clear they've been given a patent for their ambidextrous bolt release/catch.
The release on the ACR is virtually identical, and the prior art for RA's design goes back to the M-96 rifle. They have the prior art, they have the patent, Remington's sole chance of success is to try and motion RA to death.
My prediction: Remington et al. will license the design for a few dollars per rifle.
The release on the ACR is virtually identical, and the prior art for RA's design goes back to the M-96 rifle. They have the prior art, they have the patent, Remington's sole chance of success is to try and motion RA to death.
My prediction: Remington et al. will license the design for a few dollars per rifle.
This is how the game is played in the U.S., You race to the patent office to beat the other guys, than just sit back and collect the royalties, it would be rather naive to think RA is the only one that have ever done this, Reminigton and Bushmaster has done it before as while as many others out there.
still want to buy an XCR with my tax return.. having thought about it over a long boring night at work more power to them. if they have the patent they have the patent. especially if they were infact using it way long ago on other rifles of theirs.
Rob arms has the patent. Why would they bury their heads in the sand while others violate it?
This will probably be settled in Rob arms favour, whether it be within court or outside of it.
Thats why there is a term known as “patent pending“ issued with many commercial products and as such its up to other commercial companies to make sure their products might not possibly infringe in the future if the patent is approved.
LaRue was asked to remove the term “18“ from his quick throw mount, he refused and now is being sued for infringement by ARMS.
Fighting it out in courts - the US way of destroying the competition.
I understand that, however, I don't see how you can patent a bolt hold open like that when it has already been done. As mentioned, doesn't the G36 have a bolt release in the trigger guard? Hell, I had one designed up for my billet AR180B lower probably a year before the XCR was out.
Lee Enfield
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Republic of Alberta
The facts are that if you don't defend your patent, then everyone will use it without paying you a dime.
If you have a patentable item which you do not patent, but someone else does at a later date, then you can be sued for infringement.
If you licenced said patent to someone else (second party), but did not defend said patent from someone else's infringement (third party), then you can be sued by your licencee's (second party)...
Obviously RA is being forced into defending these patents...
The Rollin White patents licenced to S&W are a classic example. S&W gained the benefit of the patent protection while White was nearly bankrupted defending them.
I wish all of you guys decrying RA for defending their legal patents would think things thru for a change.....don't you??
Last edited:
- Status
