...I hope dlask starts making larue copies next, ..... then they will have fun
ADM already beat them to that one.
New Dlask Flash Suppressors
- Thread starter Clobbersauras
- Start date
ADM already beat them to that one.
I don't see a problem with the Dlask "interpretations" of these AR parts. Since these parts are now essentially non-exportable to Canada anymore, it isn't like Dlask is actually cutting into any of those companies market share. There aren't in the market.
IIRC, the Krinkov style FH/FS was originally designed by the Russians anyway, so Dlask is just as entitled to come up with his version as Noveske. To be quite honest, none of them really appeals to me anyway.
The Vortex FH, is a different story. I love these, and wish we could still source SEI parts in Canada at reasonable prices. However, I saw an early style prong type M16 FH that some guy had been playing around with back in the early 80s. A few tweaks and it could've been a proto-type Vortex. So, did Ron Smith see that same FH and "ripoff" the designer???
Just because someone secures a patent, doesn't mean that they came up with the idea or that others haven't independently come up with the same thing. For items that are simply unobtainable in Canada and/or the company that produces them simply isn't interested in making an investment into the Canadian market, I have zero problems with a Canadian company filling that niche.
Using the same logic to criticize, are we going to start railing against the guys here on CGN with their own metal lathes turning out tactical bolt knobs? I'm sure if we look hard enough, just about every Canadian knob made, can be considered a copy of an earlier design.
Sometimes, it is neat to just say cool, decide not to ##### and simply move on. There is far too much nitpicking these days.
IIRC, the Krinkov style FH/FS was originally designed by the Russians anyway, so Dlask is just as entitled to come up with his version as Noveske. To be quite honest, none of them really appeals to me anyway.
The Vortex FH, is a different story. I love these, and wish we could still source SEI parts in Canada at reasonable prices. However, I saw an early style prong type M16 FH that some guy had been playing around with back in the early 80s. A few tweaks and it could've been a proto-type Vortex. So, did Ron Smith see that same FH and "ripoff" the designer???
Just because someone secures a patent, doesn't mean that they came up with the idea or that others haven't independently come up with the same thing. For items that are simply unobtainable in Canada and/or the company that produces them simply isn't interested in making an investment into the Canadian market, I have zero problems with a Canadian company filling that niche.
Using the same logic to criticize, are we going to start railing against the guys here on CGN with their own metal lathes turning out tactical bolt knobs? I'm sure if we look hard enough, just about every Canadian knob made, can be considered a copy of an earlier design.
Sometimes, it is neat to just say cool, decide not to ##### and simply move on. There is far too much nitpicking these days.
Actually the SEI Vortex is not the same as a early M16 3 prong FH and yes the SEI Vortex has Patents that Ron Smith holds. Ron Smith has in the past successfully won Civil Litigation against several manufactures that have reproduced his Vortex Flash Hider.
I like your logic
So I guess it would be OK for us to Come over and take all your property because by all accounts you endorse theftBolt handle don't have patents as do many other things in our world . Patents that given to products like the SEI Vortex ,OPS Inc, ETC are given Patents not for the exclusivity of manufacturing rights but the fact that these companies have demonstrated it is Technologically Superior to existing products.
Here is a post from Patent office
http://www.cipo.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/cipointernet-internetopic.nsf/eng/wr01090.html#sec6
The invention must show novelty (be the first in the world).
It must show utility (be functional and operative).
It must show inventive ingenuity and not be obvious to someone skilled in that area.
Last edited:
Looks like Noveske is well aware they are being ripped off both in Canada and else where.
A crappy decision by the US State Dept is not liscense for copywrite infringement.
http://www.noveskerifleworks.com/cg...=kx3556p&cat=11&page=1&search=&since=&status=
A crappy decision by the US State Dept is not liscense for copywrite infringement.
http://www.noveskerifleworks.com/cg...=kx3556p&cat=11&page=1&search=&since=&status=
- Location
- on the road again
Good for Dlask.
Infringement
Patent infringement happens if someone makes, uses, or sells your patented item without your permission in a country that has granted you a patent , during the term of the patent.
so i'm guessing, neither Noveske nor Smith Ent has applied to have patents on thier products outside the U.S. ? and why would they when thier own state department has cut off a good percentage of OUTSIDE the u.s. sales.
Looking very closely and with caliper and micrometer in hand.... There are significant differences between the Smith vortex and the dlask vortex, significant enough that a patent protection suit would be too costly and probably be unsuccessful. Improving on an existing product or making a similar product with enough differences from the original is allowed under patent law.
To the best of my knowledge, the dlask vortex is marketted in canada and europe. over 90% of dlasks business exists in Europe..... canadian sales are but a drop in the bucket.
Patent infringement happens if someone makes, uses, or sells your patented item without your permission in a country that has granted you a patent , during the term of the patent.
so i'm guessing, neither Noveske nor Smith Ent has applied to have patents on thier products outside the U.S. ? and why would they when thier own state department has cut off a good percentage of OUTSIDE the u.s. sales.
Looking very closely and with caliper and micrometer in hand.... There are significant differences between the Smith vortex and the dlask vortex, significant enough that a patent protection suit would be too costly and probably be unsuccessful. Improving on an existing product or making a similar product with enough differences from the original is allowed under patent law.
To the best of my knowledge, the dlask vortex is marketted in canada and europe. over 90% of dlasks business exists in Europe..... canadian sales are but a drop in the bucket.
Last edited:
x2 with a Dlarue
more food for thought for those whining about patent infringment
let's take the Rooster33 parts that were very popular here on cgn.....
gas lock navy sight...... smith also makes one of these
m14 scout mount..... smith and springfield make these......
FACT...... Brownells themselves carried the Rooster33 products and sold them on thier website. To the best of my knowledge..... no patent challenges were acted on with regards to these parts. AND if patent violations were in fact taking place..... there's no way in Hell brownells would have been buying and marketting Lazlo's stuff (rooster)
so...... some of you need to go back to the patent office and do your research.
Noveske has a "patent pending" it's stamped right on thier product. This does not mean they have a patent..... this does not mean said patent automatically extends to canada.
Ron Smith JUST won a patent violation suit against the U.S. Military, involving Votex flash hiders..... because the U.S. military directly ripped off his design and had them installed on weapons. This patent suit was possible because they copied it directly...... AND they violated U.S. patent law.....
If Smith enterprise or any other company in the u.s. or elsewhere makes a product... they must patent it in each country seperately.... a patent is not a "global" thing.
let's take the Rooster33 parts that were very popular here on cgn.....
gas lock navy sight...... smith also makes one of these
m14 scout mount..... smith and springfield make these......
FACT...... Brownells themselves carried the Rooster33 products and sold them on thier website. To the best of my knowledge..... no patent challenges were acted on with regards to these parts. AND if patent violations were in fact taking place..... there's no way in Hell brownells would have been buying and marketting Lazlo's stuff (rooster)
so...... some of you need to go back to the patent office and do your research.
Noveske has a "patent pending" it's stamped right on thier product. This does not mean they have a patent..... this does not mean said patent automatically extends to canada.
Ron Smith JUST won a patent violation suit against the U.S. Military, involving Votex flash hiders..... because the U.S. military directly ripped off his design and had them installed on weapons. This patent suit was possible because they copied it directly...... AND they violated U.S. patent law.....
If Smith enterprise or any other company in the u.s. or elsewhere makes a product... they must patent it in each country seperately.... a patent is not a "global" thing.
I believe SEI and Opsinc hold patents outside of the US for there products because a product is deemed not exportable doesnt mean they cannot hold patents in other countries for there product.
Thomas SIE doesn't have a patent on there GLFS and the Rooster 33 GLFS did not infringe on any patent or trademark
One of the first questions a company asks is do we protect ourselves with a trademark or a patent. The second question is how much money do we expect to make vs. the cost of a patent application. Third question is which countries will we apply for patent protection. Fourth question is what resources do we have to determine if our patent has been infringed upon. Fifth question is how deep is our pockets in order to enforce our patent if it is violated.
Patent pending means "we have started the process to patent our idea" it is fairly inexpensive to do. It does not mean "we have submitted the paperwork and payed all the fees for our patent" which is very expensive.
The company may be aware their product cannot be patented but will submit an application in order to try and get a jump on their competitors and "pretend" that they will patent it.
The downside to a patent application is that you have to divulge to the world what is "unique" about your idea - which may be information you want to protect. In that case you might want to trademark and idea and make your money before the copies come out and cut into your market share.
Having a patented idea and being able to determine if a patent has been infringed upon is very expensive. It is a constant cost benefit analysis between how much will it cost vs. how much will we make.
You can almost always design around an existing patent if you have the time, money, and resources. Very little in today's market hasn't borrowed from existing products and/or ideas.
L
Patent pending means "we have started the process to patent our idea" it is fairly inexpensive to do. It does not mean "we have submitted the paperwork and payed all the fees for our patent" which is very expensive.
The company may be aware their product cannot be patented but will submit an application in order to try and get a jump on their competitors and "pretend" that they will patent it.
The downside to a patent application is that you have to divulge to the world what is "unique" about your idea - which may be information you want to protect. In that case you might want to trademark and idea and make your money before the copies come out and cut into your market share.
Having a patented idea and being able to determine if a patent has been infringed upon is very expensive. It is a constant cost benefit analysis between how much will it cost vs. how much will we make.
You can almost always design around an existing patent if you have the time, money, and resources. Very little in today's market hasn't borrowed from existing products and/or ideas.
L
Very nicely put Imar......i would have tried to explain the same thing to some folks here that persist on arguing what i see as a moot point.
I'm an advocate of grass roots canadian firearms industry advancement and i'm not going to stop and check if a manufacturer has a patent on the item they are selling everytime i buy something. I will leave it to those that make the stuff we buy to keep thier own house in order.
Reaper It may have taken Noveske 2 tries to get it right . I can guarantee you Dlask got it right the first time that's the beauty of copying someone else's work you avoid all the extra costs associated with development and go straight into production.
You obviously have no clue what PATENT PENDING means.. a direct rip off is illegal, even in Canada.. regardless of restrictions.. If they are such a cool Canadian company, then they can spend the research time and $$ to develop their own, then sell it. doing something like this, just makes them look cheap and willing to rip off others.
