M14 Quick bolt release?

WWIII,
Some very good points. I love my R33 bolt release. It is well sized and the upper and lower raised ridge bars provide excellent tactile cues for your fingers.

I made post #90 without reading any of the previous pages. Anyways, I think I would like any of the 3 styles pictured vs the original bolt release.
 
In retrospect regardless of the many different opinions expressed here we should give NEA credit for making this part as it is no easy task designing and getting these custom accessories to the Canadian market at a very competitive price.

NEA must also realize debuting a product and getting feedback whether positive or negative is just par for the course. Also by giving and receiving this type of feedback, nothing is stopping NEA in future from making two versions of this product - one with a wide tab and one with a narrow tab.

BC Tactical, would there be any chance of showing us a picture of your prototype bolt release, an approximate price range and timeline when it will be available for sale.
 
You mean apart from copyright law and the resultant lawsuit that would come from SEI?

.. you'd be surprised how many people give jack sh*t about ripping off someones design. It's nice seeing new product released with the aim of improving upon products and making new advances.

Too easy to be another fly by night operation that just has the peoples republic hack out cheap copies of others engineering.
 
The release is nice but if you want to impress someone how about a scope mount aka the older generation ARMS #18 :D



ARMS18.jpg
 
FWIW, the R33 models are no longer available due, as I recall, to legal issues with SEI.

What? Ummm....Rooster simply stopped making M14 bits(bolt stops, spring guides, kydex cheek pieces, etc)

I'm not sure it had anything to do with legal issues.
 
Last edited:
I heard through the rumour mill it was over copyright problems with the bolt release and his near exact copy of a SEI flash hider. I stand to be corrected though.
 
You mean apart from copyright law and the resultant lawsuit that would come from SEI?

Copyright law pertains to intellectual property and not machine parts. Patent law is quite different.

Making the top tab smaller on the NEA bolt release would not violate SEI’s pending patent on the said M14 bolt release. In order to violate patents/pending patents on machined parts you essentially have to steal an invention and/or make knockoffs of the patented invention or unique machine part for commercial sale.

Since the M14 bolt release is already invented and integral in the M14 and the military patents on the M14 have expired, anyone can make a bolt release for the M14 and commercially sell it. So in this case it essentially boils down to the geometry of the machined part.

I see no duplication of geometry between NEA’s bolt release and SEI’s.
So because the geometry is uniquely different between the two parts even by making the top tab smaller on NEA’s release it would still not duplicate the SEI bolt release geometry thus not violating SEI’s patent.
 
Rummers bloomers - that was the cheek rests and between DWP and Rooster. Rooster is still a member here why don’t you ask him instead of spreading more rummers.

I'm afraid you are very wrong. It depends entirely on how the patent was filed. If SEI submitted it as a GI holdopen with a top protrusion to make closure easier or similar wording it is still a violation.

Cosmetic differences do NOT get you around patent law. Lots of case law supports this.

Canada is a small market for SEI, but if someone marketed the R-33 holdopen in the USA, SEI would definitely file a suit.
 
I'm afraid you are very wrong. It depends entirely on how the patent was filed. If SEI submitted it as a GI holdopen with a top protrusion to make closure easier or similar wording it is still a violation.

Cosmetic differences do NOT get you around patent law. Lots of case law supports this.

Canada is a small market for SEI, but if someone marketed the R-33 holdopen in the USA, SEI would definitely file a suit.

The SEI and the Rooster are externally two completely different looking bolt releases. So if the the R33 is considered infringing on someone elses design I don't see any way that the NEA bolt release also isn't an infringement on SEI's design.

I mean come on, it isn't hard to see there are some major cosmetic differences between the SEI and the R33 and that the NEA is far closer to the SEI than the R33 is.
 
I'm afraid you are very wrong. It depends entirely on how the patent was filed. If SEI submitted it as a GI holdopen with a top protrusion to make closure easier or similar wording it is still a violation.

Cosmetic differences do NOT get you around patent law. Lots of case law supports this.

Canada is a small market for SEI, but if someone marketed the R-33 holdopen in the USA, SEI would definitely file a suit.


1. SEI did not invent the M14 bolt release therefore they do not enjoy protection under patent law as a “new invention“ - meaning anyone can manufacture one.

2. The SEI bolt release design does what the “original M14 design” does - the end result is the same - it holds the bolt open and releases it by pushing on a tab. The difference being the unique geometry of the SEI bolt release - nothing more. This means they enjoy protection for their unique geometry and only if the patent is approved. Just because it may be easier to hold open or close the bolt with the SEI bolt release does not stop other designs from doing the same.

3. The two other designs, NEA and R33 have different “visually distinguishable geometry“ and thus are readily “distinguishable“ from the SEI design. They are not duplicates thus not infringing on SEI’s pending M14 bolt release patent.

Can you understand this or is it too simple for you?
 
1. SEI did not invent the M14 bolt release therefore they do not enjoy protection under patent law as a “new invention“ - meaning anyone can manufacture one.

2. The SEI bolt release design does what the “original M14 design” does - the end result is the same - it holds the bolt open and releases it by pushing on a tab. The difference being the unique geometry of the SEI bolt release - nothing more. This means they enjoy protection for their unique geometry and only if the patent is approved. Just because it may be easier to hold open or close the bolt with the SEI bolt release does not stop other designs from doing the same.

3. The two other designs, NEA and R33 have different “visually distinguishable geometry“ and thus are readily “distinguishable“ from the SEI design. They are not duplicates thus not infringing on SEI’s pending M14 bolt release patent.

Can you understand this or is it too simple for you?

As someone who has actually gone through the patent process, I respectfully disagree with you.

A bolt holdopen that also can close the bolt on an empty mag IS a new design (e.g. SEI is the patent holder!!!). The GI bolt holdopen did not have this functionality so a new patent is pending on the SEI design (or is that too SIMPLE for you??? Man, people on here have less and less manners these days!)

The R33 design, apart from the type of serration on the external surface, though both are serrated, is identical to the SEI part.

The NEA design ADDS functionality in that it doubles the surface area and increases bolt closure leverage. It uses elements of the SEI design, but if SEI chose to sue, NEA would have a compelling legal arguement that their design is functionally and materially different. It has additional capability such as easier use when wearing gloves, improved etc.
 

Looking at the rifle, a sling will snag for sure and tons of crap will get in there.

B AH AH AH A HA :HR:

I will be getting one it looks fantastic and I for one like the idea.

It never ceases to amaze me at all the people that come on and argue with multiple posts about why a new product is bad. I can understand voicing an opinion but some of this goes way beyond a simple opinion. It is quite rude IMHO

Thanks for putting up with horsesh!t. I appreciate seeing new products for the m14 and I am sure many, many others do as well.

:cheers: as a fanboy of Canadian made products
 
Back
Top Bottom