The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Wildcats And Their Development Jamison Lawsuit SettledGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Jamison Lawsuit Settled | Login/Join |
one of us |
jeffe: you'll find that I already backpedaled on patents of "dreams;" trying to stay close to these Forums, I cited the example of McPherson's super-short cartridges as a weakness in my argument. tiggertate: I agree that occasional abuses do not justify tearing down the entire patent system. I do question whether it's now occasional enough to let the issue drop. There are many who feel as I do, as a review of the business press will reveal. I, too, strongly support property rights, but as I mentioned earlier, its difficult to fit ideas/concepts into the same mould as physical property. I do see the need for copyrights and patents, and I share your concern for real estate owners kicked off their land "for the greater good," an example seen many times in my home town in Illinois. However, my (limited) experience with the current patent system is it goes beyond securing for inventors a decent return on their investment. I've seen examples where it is used as a predatory practice. It's probably fun for the lawyers, but it seems to be a drain on the economy. The big picture question is does this way of securing a return to inventors/investors help the economy more than the monopoly abuses hurt it. I'm not sage enough to know, but I have my suspicions, as you've seen. | |||
|
One of Us |
Sorry, but I have lost MAJOR respect in R.J. Shame on him. American gun producers are already in shambles thanks the the United Socialist States of America liberal courts. With all that said, I can see him "making" the firearms producers use HIS NAME in the cartridges, ie. Jamison Short Mag instead of Winchester Short Mag, but FOR MONEY, when we have LOST SO MUCH ALREADY. Rick Jamison can kiss my ass!!!  BTW, D99, Dana is really cute in your pics. Pretty lady, and beautiful scenery.  I'll stop my rant now.  "They who would give up an essential Liberty for Temporary Security, deserves neither Liberty or Security." ---Benjamin Franklin "SIC SEMPER TYRANNUS" | |||
|
| one of us |
I thought that you had to have a working model before it could be patented. However, if someone mentioned the concept in a published print media before then no patent is avaiable to someone else who tries to patent it later. | |||
|
| one of us |
I couldn't agree more. To patent an idea that wasn't his is pretty low. Cold day in hell when I have own a rifle chambered in one of "his" cartridges. | |||
|
| one of us |
Sorry, but I have lost MAJOR respect in R.J. Shame on him. American gun producers are already in shambles thanks the the United Socialist States of America liberal courts. With all that said, I can see him "making" the firearms producers use HIS NAME in the cartridges, ie. Jamison Short Mag instead of Winchester Short Mag, but FOR MONEY, when we have LOST SO MUCH ALREADY. Rick Jamison can kiss my ass!!! Amen! Jordan | |||
|
| One of Us |
BTW, I just emailed my exact comments to Shooting Times editior Joel Hutchcroft from their contact page ("Letters to the Editor.") Feel free to send your own comments as well, as this is pure  !!!!!"They who would give up an essential Liberty for Temporary Security, deserves neither Liberty or Security." ---Benjamin Franklin "SIC SEMPER TYRANNUS" | |||
|
one of us |
the dimensions of the Jamison 300 and the 300 wsm; the only dimensions the two of them share is a 35* shoulder angle and a 2.860" OAL. All the other dimensions are different; the Jamison 300 is also slightly rebated (but not as much as the WSM or SAUM) with a rim diameter of 0.5430 compared to the WSM's 0.535. Will he go after Remington next?!!!! -------------------- THANOS WAS RIGHT! | |||
|
| One of Us |
EXACTLY!!!  So, PLEASE, send your thoughts to Shooting Times to be heard!!! "They who would give up an essential Liberty for Temporary Security, deserves neither Liberty or Security." ---Benjamin Franklin "SIC SEMPER TYRANNUS" | |||
|
One of Us |
I don't like what Jamison did but I think Winchester should have done their homework. Someone at Winchester made a bad decision and it cost them. | |||
|
| one of us |
What are you talking about? They didn't copy the Jamison Cart's any more than Remington did. -------------------- THANOS WAS RIGHT! | |||
|
| one of us |
dougH9, it was Roy Gradle and the cartridge was the 7mm Gradle Magnum. Gradle also made a left hand conversion of a Mauser that used gear teeth cut into the bolt body, I saw two of them at the Albany gun show last weekend, amazing workmanship. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Thank you Vigillinus. The 7 m/m Gradle would be a dead ringer for the 7 m/m WSM. Short and fat are nothing new. The other thing that stuck out to me was that his shop was in my (still) hometown, Santa Barbara, CA. That was a long time before me, though. I would love to find one of his rifles (guess I should pay close attention at the gunstores!) Doug | |||
|
| One of Us |
You know if that "SORRY" Rick Jamison sues Remington, Brian McDaniel can sue him for stealing his idea with the Black Mesa Express that he developed and was featured in Rifle Shooter way back in 1996!!! It is one of the best designs based on the .404 that I have seen. I love its long neck---it reminds me of a big 6mm Ackley!!!  "They who would give up an essential Liberty for Temporary Security, deserves neither Liberty or Security." ---Benjamin Franklin "SIC SEMPER TYRANNUS" | |||
|
one of us |
This morning's Wall Street Journal (Jan 25, '06) has an article on one current patent fight that discusses how understaff and behind the Patent Office is. The examiner spends only about 20 hours on a new patent application, and if the prior art disclosure is not extensive probably won't find other prior art. For example I expect the Jamison patent examiner did not have PO Ackley's Handbook. The answer is to go to court with the newly discovered prior art and ask that the patent be revoked. jim if you're too busy to hunt,you're too busy. | |||
|
Moderator |
Actually, gents, remington bought a patented round, called the imperial magnums, to make the RUMs from.. they DID their home work. So, to all the detractors... if I took any published and live copyrighted BOOK and changed the title and the first word of every chapter, is it NOW a new work? Or, as software compliers USED to be licensed based off the $$ earned from the software written on them... and those compliers have patents applied... after all, there's only SO many ways you can uniquely hit a keyboard and apply math to make new software... Let's face it, George got screwed by remington... Jamison didn't.. only spends TWENTY hours on a single project? I can see why that's backed up... a stupidly LONG amount of time, given the fact that there's this patent on COMPUTERS and INDEXING software... jeffe opinions vary band of bubbas and STC hunting Club Information on Ammoguide about the416AR, 458AR, 470AR, 500AR What is an AR round? Case Drawings 416-458-470AR and 500AR. 476AR, http://www.weaponsmith.com | |||
|
| one of us |
If what 500grains posted was the verbatim from that patent then it seems to me it is very vague, leaves lots of room for "application" to cartridges. I would love to read the Blackberry patents, if it is true that they are just idea patents, the company didn't have any product that the blackberry is a copy of, then it is bullcrap. And I'll say this, that company sucks being willing to screw thousands and thousands of people out of their blackberry service. They didn't bring the product to market. If they had a viable product and held patents on it they could have gotten financing and gone for it. Why push for an injunction, if they REALLY had firm patents that were infringed upon why not get a cut of profits or a settlement, why push to have them cut out of the picture unless they are willing to then provide a replacement product and service to the American Public. Idea patenting, come on, I have a few ideas for things I know would make money in everyday use in the workplace, I don't go and tell everybody about them because if I ever get a chance I might try to make a prototype etc. if somebody else comes up with the same idea and gets it to market then good on them, I don't deserve anything for having the same good idea. I haven't even tried them outside my twisted brain to know if they hold water or not (actually I do know one would work great). from my understanding it is expensive to get a patent, not worth doing unless you foresee making money with the design somehow OR FROM SUING SOMEBODY FOR DOING IT TOO. Does this Jamison guy deserve something for having the idea? WTF?! Didn't Keith help with the S&W 44mag idea? did they give him money and did he have a patent? Are Jamisons two other patents written any better/tighter? WAS HIS IDEA ORIGINAL? If his idea was not original, or not significantly different and he didn't do anything to bring it to market why does he deserve anything? How can he prove that it was his idea that got the big companies to release their line and not somebody at the company getting the idea from wherever he got his inspiration and trying it out? I can understand why Jeffe is a bit touchy on this, he is currently developing some cartridges, but the difference is that he has firm specs, has made drawings, had reamers produced, produced prototypes. I think he deserves a patent. But I suspect he'd write his a hell of a lot better than that Jamison one 500 posted. Jeffe I have to disagree with you on the lightbulb and phone being dreams. Once you have a working product a lack of infrastructure in place to support it doesn't mean it is a dream. It is a reality, the dream would be if they tried to patent "a phone in every home" or similar. yes, patents are necessary and can be good, but the system is seriously screwed up and some common sense should be used. and don't even get me started on pharmacuitacal companies, not only can I not spell the word but they are the biggest crooks in the world. if the law was changed for them so that modifying existing formularies enough to extend patent protection on them then we might actually get some NEW developments that could help people. Red | |||
|
| Moderator |
OKay, if you ahve a producct that has no use, then how can you claim it means anything? For example <laughing> IBM OS/2 3.0 ... the best oeprating system in the world.. but not on any PCS... i stand by my concepts.. but agree that opinions vary... we'll agree to disagree. jeffe opinions vary band of bubbas and STC hunting Club Information on Ammoguide about the416AR, 458AR, 470AR, 500AR What is an AR round? Case Drawings 416-458-470AR and 500AR. 476AR, http://www.weaponsmith.com | |||
|
| one of us |
no problem disagreeing. I actually agree about products that have no use being dreams. I just don't see the phone and bulb at those points in time as having no use. The one thing I have always wanted to have a patent on was the valves/fittings on urinals, every time I use one I think about whomever (company or person) that holds that just sitting back making profit off me flushing. cracks me up. Red | |||
|
| Moderator |
Red, the phone, for example.. had exactly 2 instances the day it was tried... and only 4 total models, including the other guy that was trying.. zero infrastructure (which is more expensive intially than the phones) was available at the time the phone was patented .. A dream.... nothing as practical as scuba (which could be used that second)... the light bulb.. with edison backing DC power (which couldn't be transmitted any real distance), the light was a limited luxury at best then the jamison rounds -- can readily be made into readily available actions.. a universal solution... jeffe opinions vary band of bubbas and STC hunting Club Information on Ammoguide about the416AR, 458AR, 470AR, 500AR What is an AR round? Case Drawings 416-458-470AR and 500AR. 476AR, http://www.weaponsmith.com | |||
|
| one of us |
Another thing that figures into these patent lawsuits is that the judges that hear them are often not technical, and really hate to hear patent cases. So we get some really bad decisions if you consider the technical merits, and the suposed uniqueness of the patent. | |||
|
| one of us |
Oh yes, OS2 lives on in XP/Pro. | |||
|
| one of us |
Thinking about it further, can you really patent the shape of a cartridge unless it really contributes something unique to performance that has never been seen before? I don't see it. The short PPC cartriges seem to do what the WSM's do. | |||
|
One of Us |
The part that I see as possibly a failure of the US Patent Office and the US patent system, is the failure of the Patent Office to do adequate research before awarding a patent. Any person party to this discussion could have easily informed them that such cartridges and rifles using them have existed in finite fact, not just as ideas, long before Mr. Jamieson filed an application to patent them. Those ideas, I believe, were already in what is called "the public domain". Is it not true that ideas already in the public domain are NOT patentable? s a matter of fact, the the 6 PPC itself is such an example. There were also all sorts of versions of 35 degree shouldered short fat cases in the 1930's and '1940's. So, my beef over this is not that a patent was enforced, but that one may have been awarded for an idea that was already public property. If so, the Patent Office took something that belongs in part to ME and to YOU, and gave it to Mr. Jamieson. Sounds a lot like "Eminent Domain" at its worst, to me. My country gal's just a moonshiner's daughter, but I love her still. | |||
|
one of us |
I think that in this case Jamison got one past a dimbulb patent official. The reason it makes me so angry though is I feel it is slap in the face of so many wildcatters who came before him. Guys who did it for the love and the personal pride of going there own way. It would be intersting to know how many cartridges are even patented. I doubt there are even a handfull. IMO this is as it should be. There is NOTHING new under the sun and to be honest there hasn't been for many years. Not only do I think Jamison doesn't deserve a patent, I think no one should be granted patents for brass cartridge cases unless something about the case design (shoulder configuration, flashhole design, etc.) greatly improves efficiency. Jamison did nothing different than alter the scale of the 6 PPC. There is nothing unique about the 300 Jamison. Gabe | |||
|
| Moderator |
Gabe, here's my brief thinking points on this. 1: George Hoffman was screwed by remington, and should have had at least HIS NAME on the their round. I haven't found a soul, outside of big green, that thinks differently 2: the same comments you made about jamison could apply to the 416 hoffman. 3: your final statement is actually "in my opinion..." Here's the deal .. if it hadn't been covered by another patent, it's patentable... Like it or not, the patent systems protect the LITTLE guy more than the big guy in small inventions jeffe opinions vary band of bubbas and STC hunting Club Information on Ammoguide about the416AR, 458AR, 470AR, 500AR What is an AR round? Case Drawings 416-458-470AR and 500AR. 476AR, http://www.weaponsmith.com | |||
|
one of us |
This guy is in Nebraska and I never knew of him??!!! Man, I need to get out more. | |||
|
| one of us |
The whole thing is kind of laughable....similar rounds were built using 348 Win brass back in the 50's. Heck, I'd be honored if a major manufacturer used any of my wildcats. If Rick was looking to make money off the original idea, he would've sold the rights years ago. Lee Martin www.singleactions.com | |||
|
| One of Us |
I don't think it is quite that simple. It is patentable if it has not been patented before AND - If it is "new", and - If it is not so common as to lie in the public domain (which may be determined by checking to see if any have previously been made AND sold), and - Even if it HAS been previously patented but the current application shows a "15% or more" improvement in function over the existing patent. (Nobody knows for sure how the Patent Office determines if a product has been improved by 15% or more, but "improvement patents" are fairly commonly granted.) My country gal's just a moonshiner's daughter, but I love her still. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Craig Smith owns the company now, but Brian McDaniels WAS the originator. BTW, I lived in Mason City, IA for two years.  I had lots of fun playing in the snow and driving a 1978 280Z YEAR ROUND!!!  "They who would give up an essential Liberty for Temporary Security, deserves neither Liberty or Security." ---Benjamin Franklin "SIC SEMPER TYRANNUS" | |||
|
one of us |
Heck the guy in the office next to me is trying to get a patent on a electronic device right now. Our company patent attorneys are saying that if we have ever shown it, even a beta or partially functional/concept unit, to a customer, then it is 'public' and not patentable. It seems that the rules are WAY too vague, expecially when deep pockets are involved. Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense. | |||
|
| one of us |
I will openly state that I don't know the law involved in this at all. But if as Alberta Canuck stated above, you need to demonstrate a 15% improvement over existing products, that shoots this "patent" right in the head. I have no bones with either the 300 Jamison or the 300 WSM but neither show a 15% improvement in velocity vs. powder useage or 15% decrease in corresponding rifle weight. Like almost every new cartridge for the last 40 years the gains made by the WSM are incremental at best. Heck, you would think that if this cartridge was so revolutionary as to patentable, everyone who buys a 30 cal rifle would be fool to pass it up. Newsflash thousands do every year. They buy cartridges that do almost the exact same things as the 300 WSM. You can't fool thousands of rifle buyers even with an over the top marketing campaign. They see the cartridge for what it is, new, improved, but still just another in a series of tradeoffs. At the end of the day, many if not most veteran rifleman just yawn. IMO this was a wrongly issued patent that shouldn't have been applied for in the first place. Gabe | |||
|
| Moderator |
gabe, actually, the round isn't fairly compared to the 300 win.... think of it this way.. show me the next 2.1" case that matches the 2.5" 300 winmag case? none exist, with the exception of the 30x284 .. which is what it SHOULD be compared to for this purpose jeffe opinions vary band of bubbas and STC hunting Club Information on Ammoguide about the416AR, 458AR, 470AR, 500AR What is an AR round? Case Drawings 416-458-470AR and 500AR. 476AR, http://www.weaponsmith.com | |||
|
| one of us |
Here goes--I think Jamison and companies are skunks to fight over and try to push, junk...Ed. MZEE WA SIKU | |||
|
| one of us |
I sort of looked at the whole WSM line as a passing fad to begin with, and I bet Jamison's lawsuit just hastened their descent into obsolesence. | |||
|
| one of us |
Given the 15% threshold, the WSM doesn't do anything patentable over either the 300 win mag or the 30/284. Rifles for the WSM are only about 6-7% lighter (Browning Abolt hunter) than for the 300 Win Mag. Also, the WSM doesn't beat the 30/284 by more than 100 fps. At 3000 fps the difference is only 3%. Now for perspective, we are talking only a 3% improvement over a cartridge that's almost 40 years old. We are calling that a patentable innovation?  Gabe | |||
|
One of Us |
Me either! Because there are a lot of old wildcats, some from the 1940's even, based on the .348 case, which in itself is just the .50/110 Win. necked down! "Bitte, trinks du nicht das Wasser. Dahin haben die Kuhen gesheissen." | |||
|
Moderator |
As far as the 15% thing, I'd say if you compare the 300 WSM to the 308 win, then you do see about a 15% improvement. That said, I agree that Jamison getting a patent and getting royalties for the 300 WSM is utter bunk, as the 300 WSM isn't the 300 Jamison, and Jamison didn't create anything unique. Just goes to prove the right lawyer and judge can get one over on big business, whether there is merrit or not in the case. Also proves my contention all the folks that write for Shooting Times are worthless gun whores and product pimps. __________________________________________________ The AR series of rounds, ridding the world of 7mm rem mags, one gun at a time. | |||
|
| new member |
Well, looks look at some earlier examples of patent infringement and patents in general. First, Paul Mauser filed a lawsuit in the early 1900's for patent infringements against the ol' USA concerning the 1903 Springfield and won. Second, the firearm genius from Salt Lake City, Utah...John Moses Browning developed firearms for Winchester such as the 1886, 1892, 1894, 1895, Hi-Wall & Low-Wall and others. What many people are not aware of was that only about half of the different firearms he designed for Winchester were never put into productions and he was not receiving any royalty payments for those. He went to Winchester with a new idea for a semi-auto shotgun and Winchester was not interested as it would possibly take away market share of their Winchester Mdl 97(JB design)(oops! my error not mdl 12)pump shotgun. This ticked ol' Johnoff evidently so he went to FN in Belguim....ergo the Browning Auto-5 came about. FN also produced the Browning Hi-Power. The biggest loss to Winchester for their short-sightedness on refusing to build a semi-auto handgun design of JMB's. Browning went to "guess who" - Colt! Which brought about the introduction of the 1911. If you come up with an idea on anything and manage to get a patent because no one else bothered to go thru the patent process..too bad for them or those who came up with the original idea in the first place. If you have an idea and possibly hope to gain "greenbacks" from it......get a patent! First come...first served. If you are able to get the patent(and this process costs money) then you should reap the rewards (if there are any.) Thats just the way things are in our somewhat orderly society. John Moses Browning has shown us the way...both as a firearms genius and as a businessman. Unfortunately, I am neither and so are the vast majority of other people. Thats just the way things are. Best regards, Ol' John | |||
|
| One of Us |
I remember reading about the "Short Fat 30" many years ago in ST.It was based I believe on the .404 Jeffery case.As I understand it Jamison offered the idea to Win and was told more or less that it was not a viable project.Now ten or so years later Win has made a lot of money with the WSM.I have seen lawsuits in the US with less substance.Another example is Carmicheals claim on the 6.5 leopard as his idea,we have been shooting the 6.5WSM for 2 years before his story appeared in outdoor life. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I read on another forum that Shooting Times has bought out Jamison's contract. After the current acticles are printed, he will no longer be writing for ST. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia