Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
One of Us |
Yes, there are statements to the contrary. One can also find in writing that the earth is flat, that the U.S. never sent a man to the moon (it was supposedly all fake film), that the holocaust (SP?) never occured, that the M-1 Garand rifle could NOT be successfully mass manufactured and was too weak to handle full powered '06 loads anyway, etc., etc. My country gal's just a moonshiner's daughter, but I love her still. | |||
|
one of us |
The problem with this line of thought is that the inventor does actually suffer a provable loss...the loss of income they should have made by selling such item to you. That's a real damage. I do not think the 'own use' defense would hold up in a serious court case. Not worth the effort to claim, maybe. Seriously and fully within the law, doubtful. JMO, YMMV! 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 |
Let's try this another way. Think of your favorite song and the artist who recorded that work. Now, does that artist have that work copyrighted? Probably. Does that mean you can't whistle the song for your own pleasure? Most assuredly not. Does that mean you can't whistle it for profit at a public forum. Yes. That's because a copyright, just as a patent protects an inventor, protects the artist in the marketplace but NOT in your private life. So, you can whistle his tune, and you can make your own products, so long as you don't sell to or provide others with either one. He is protected in the market with either, but he has suffered no market loss unless you buy or sell in, or otherwise provide to, the market without his permission. f you do not buy or sell a good in the market, there can be no violation of market law, which is what a patent and a copyright both are. Rather than argue it forever though, I will just say to you again...ask a patent attorney. Any experienced one will set the matter straight for you. My country gal's just a moonshiner's daughter, but I love her still. | |||
|
One of Us |
Not if no sale occurred and no one else illegally profited from such a sale. He has a right to the profit from any sales in the marketplace. He cannot prove any sale to you would have occured in the first place. Hypothetical sales only have hypothetical profits, not real ones. So there is only a hypothetical loss, not a real one. My country gal's just a moonshiner's daughter, but I love her still. | |||
|
one of us |
OK I'll tell you exactly why I can't stand Jameson. HE DIDN'T INVENT THE WSM'S. I'm also aggrivated at the fool at the patent office that granted him one, but that wouldn't be so bad if Jameson wasn't using the bogus patent to extort money from anyone who likes the WSM's. I loathe anyone who manipulates the legal system to get money they didn't earn and don't derserve. Jameson didn't invent the WSM's and so he doesn't deserve a cent from them. The Clinton's used the legal system to try and put Gun Manufacturers out of business. Jameson used the legal system to feed his own greed and achieved a result the the Clinton's were aiming for. At least with the Clintons you knew who the enemy was. Jameson is just a greedy SOB that's extorting money from Me and other shooters who like the WSM's. It's almost enough to make me not ever want to use them.....................DJ ....Remember that this is all supposed to be for fun!.................. | |||
|
One of Us |
Incorrect. The Patent Act contains no exception for "personal use". Further, the patent owner can choose between collecting either lost profits or a reasonable royalty. If he elects a reasonable royalty, then he does not need to prove that he has lost a sale. If the infringement was willful, the patent owner also has a chance to collect treble damages and attorneys fees. ____ Jeff, I am afraid you are off track again. Jamison did not patent reamers so anyone can make a reamer. But if you use that reamer to make a WSM rifle, then you have committed an act of patent infringement and Mr. Jamison could sue you (if he found out about it, if he cared, if he thought it was worth his trouble, etc.). Your prior reasoning seemed to be that if you legally purchased a reamer, then you could use it to make the patented rifle without any liability for patent infringement. That is not the case. You could also use an unpatented screwdriver in making the patented rifle, but that would not excuse you from liability either. And if Winchester/Olin did not succeed against Mr. Jamison, does a small shop gunsmith really have a chance? Even if the gunsmith won, it would never be worth his time or money. Better to stick to making 30-06 and 300 Win Mag rifles. The WSMs are just not worth the headache. | |||
|
One of Us |
Has it occured to you that there may be lots of exceptions not listed in the act which are none-the-less exceptions? As I said before, you guys can believe anything you want....the earth is flat, the pyramids were actually built by Martians, whatever. I still suggest that you need to consult with a real live, practicing, reputable, patent attorney. I have. My training and all the folks I have met who actually hold patents indicate that what I have told you is the way it is. If you wish to believe otherwise, have a ball. My country gal's just a moonshiner's daughter, but I love her still. | |||
|
One of Us |
AC, I am afraid that you will need to consult a more competent attorney than the one who advised you, or at least listen more carefully this time. | |||
|
one of us |
So far I have only noticed one poster on this thread who is listed in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's list of licensed patent attorneys, and I do not believe it was you. Not getting caught and not getting sued because it is a waste of time may be "exceptions," but I would hate to rely on them. If you look up the defintion of "patent infringement" at the PTO website you will see "making" as one of the categories. This is not and should be be confused with legal advice. You mileage may vary. Caveat Emptor. Bene Lava. Objects in mirror are closer than they appear. Consult an attorney of your own choosing. ------------------------------- Some Pictures from Namibia Some Pictures from Zimbabwe An Elephant Story | |||
|
One of Us |
DJ, You doggone sure got that right! | |||
|
One of Us |
I see that Montana rifle Co. offers several barreled actions in WSM calibers. Rusty We Band of Brothers! DRSS, NRA & SCI Life Member "I am rejoiced at my fate. Do not be uneasy about me, for I am with my friends." ----- David Crockett in his last letter (to his children), January 9th, 1836 "I will never forsake Texas and her cause. I am her son." ----- Jose Antonio Navarro, from Mexican Prison in 1841 "for I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." Thomas Jefferson Declaration of Arbroath April 6, 1320-“. . .It is not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom - for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.” | |||
|
one of us |
Rusty, one might then surmise that they have agreed to pay the royalties to Jamison. | |||
|
one of us |
Hey dj, You might not appreciate this, but I agree with you 99.5%. I for sure will never own one. No doubt it is a fine Case Design, but I'll never feed jamison a penny. --- By the way, it is ALWAYS nice to see a collective group of "attorneys" arguing amongst themselves and also not making a penny. | |||
|
One of Us |
It is not an infringement to make somthing for your own use. What interests me is what prior art was cited and how he avoided or improved it. It is not clear what was claimed in the patent other than dimension/ ratios. If that is true then he could have obtained a design patent. No patent is really valid until it has been tested in court. The patent is issued upon the claims made, and the prior art. Good Luck! | |||
|
One of Us |
Wrong. | |||
|
one of us |
This may be true But he did develope the "Jamison" cartridge line which are the same thing, or so the courts appear to agree. There is another thread going at this time over on 24hour campfire discussing this topic once again in which a gun writer claims Jamison went to Winchester with his cartridges and was blown off by them only to have them later come out with the cartridge under a new name. http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?C...age=0&gonew=1#UNREAD This is all inter-net gossip, I have no idea how true it is I`m just repeting what I`ve read. Weather or not he was the first to design these cartridges, he was the first to lay claim. The patent was awarded to him and the courts appear to have agreed to his ownership. I don`t know squat about patent law but I do know if Winchester, Remington or other big company owned the rights to a cartridge and felt a need to demand royalties and none would question their right. I am not backing Jamison as much as it appears I am, but I am standing behind any patent holder that tries to protect their property. This includes Chiness DVD boot-leggers auto industry part copies, ect. I know nothing but what I have read on the web about the case but the courts seem to agree with him for what ever reason, so his case seems to have some merit. As to who really first came up with the WSM cartridge idea, it likely was some old `smith with too much time on his hands back during the depression after pulling a 348 Win case out of a 500 nitro chamber that some knot head managed to get to fire with out distroying the evidence..and no $$ to patent it.. ------------------------------------ The trouble with the Internet is that it's replacing masturbation as a leisure activity. ~Patrick Murray "Why shouldn`t truth be stranger then fiction? Fiction after all has to make sense." (Samual Clemens) "Saepe errans, numquam dubitans --Frequently in error, never in doubt". | |||
|
one of us |
Ultimately, it might be something like with muzzle brakes. KDF patented their muzzle brake system yet everybody makes similar brakes. We've seen similar issues over cartridges in the past. Charles Newton with his cartridges. Gebby with the 22-250 Varminter. Newton's stance contributed to the demise of his cartridges. Gebby's copyright of the "Varminter" title antagonized the gunsmithing trade and got him nothing. Jamison's stance will do him little good in the end, I would think. | |||
|
one of us |
I don't think that Jameson's deal has ever gone to court. I think they just decided that it was cheaper to pay a royalty and pass the increase on to the consumer. There was an article within the last couple months in American Rifleman about the Springfield rifle. They paid a royalty to Mauser for use of some of their patented features. They also were asked to pay a royalty for use of the pointed bullet but refused. They ended up paying something like twice as much in legal fees etc. fighting the spitzer bullet issue than they paid in royalties on the action design. Maybe the thinking about paying royalties to the Greedy SOB Jameson is something to avoid repeating this..............DJ ....Remember that this is all supposed to be for fun!.................. | |||
|
one of us |
I think you will find such things happen all the time. The big company thinks they can take advantage of the little guy because he doesn't have the resources to fight them. Yet somehow here Jamison is resented and a greedy SOB.........all by people who don't have the facts..........I think some people just resent the idea of others making money. Howard Moses Lake, Washington USA hwhomes@outlook.com | |||
|
One of Us |
Does anyone know if Jamison invented and/or patented his line of 404-based 308-length cartridges before Lazzeroni created theirs? | |||
|
one of us |
All this little rumble is going to do, plus the fact that Winchester is not making rifles anymore, is hasten the demise of a set of cartridges which had no real niche to begin with. Personally I say good riddance. Whether Jamison has patent rights or not, there are alternatives available without all the legal baggage that do a similar job, or close enough for government work. If I was Jamison, all I would have done is waive any royalties and just ask Winchester to market the cartridges under his name ie 300 Jamison etc etc. Then he would have a legacy to be proud of. What he has now is no legacy at all, in fact from the drift I read here he is now tainted goods. What did Layne Simpson do when he invented the 7mm STW? Or had someone done it before? If Chuck Norris dives into a swimming pool, he does not get wet. The swimming pool gets Chuck Norris. | |||
|
one of us |
So far there are two theories going around about Jamison and the WSM. 1. Jamison is a greedy SOB who sued Winchester and others because of a questionable patent. 2. Jamison went to Winchester with an idea for new cartriges that he had developed, and Winchester stole his idea without paying royalties. USRAC is done, and would be even if Jamison never came around. I don't know the specifics of this case, but there are many similar cases in firearms history were patents were "stolen" or products modified enough to just squeak by. In short, Jamison might have a valid case, but it has ruined his career. One more question. Are the Remmington short mags also in danger of violating the patents? It seems the patent is pretty vauge. | |||
|
one of us |
Wonder how many firearms wouldn't have been invented if John Browning wouldn't have been patent protected with his first one that Winchester purchased? What if they said, thats not new and made it anyway? Howard Moses Lake, Washington USA hwhomes@outlook.com | |||
|
One of Us |
so true but do we know the number of suits on patent infringement there has been in the last 100 years of the firearms industry? I can assure you that they've happened and never made any press at all. I'm personally aware of some that no one ever heard about so just wonder how many others have happened. The only thing significant about Jamison's patent is that it's getting a lot of press. It's not at all likely anything we'd ever discuss otherwise. While working on developing reloading tools it was interesting to note that design engineers spent more time researching patents than designing tools as it makes no sense to put a product out to feed the competitor. I assure you that there's a ton of patients in the firearms industry and Jamison's is merely the one getting the press. /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Winston Churchill | |||
|
one of us |
That's not a good analogy. John Browning actually invented the firearms that he patented. JAMESON DIDN'T INVENT SHORT FAT CARTRIDGES! The PPC's had been around for quite a few years before he upscaled them and made them into WSM's. His original articles mentioned using the idea of the PPC's on a larger scale. Maybe Ferris Pindell should be suing Jameson. Jameson is nothing but a Greedy opportunist. John Browning was one of if not the greatest firearms inventor of all time.............DJ ....Remember that this is all supposed to be for fun!.................. | |||
|
one of us |
Darn you took my answer!!!! I have no trouble with someone taking their own idea and getting a patent. Browning was the father of new ideas and designs. I have a REAL problem with someone taking ideas of others (who chose to share) and changing the name and then calling them their own and getting a patent. To me it would be like me taking my 280PDK based (improved)case getting a patent and saying the AI, Gibbs etc were in violation. As usual just my $.02 Paul K | |||
|
one of us |
You are right its not the best analogy. However my point was about the need for patents to promote risk taking with respect to new ideas and concepts. Here is a queston I would like to know the answer to. What was the driving force behind the explosion of the WSM's? Howard Moses Lake, Washington USA hwhomes@outlook.com | |||
|
one of us |
I posted the comment on the 24Hr Campfire about RJ & Winchester. I haven't verified it to be true with the principals, but they are not talking either. I think some of you folks need to pay more attention to what Dan has posted on the patents and patent law. I have worked in industries where intellectual property was routinely a part of projects, and so I never worried overmuch about feelings and RJ's situation. jim if you're too busy to hunt,you're too busy. | |||
|
One of Us |
Jamison did not patent short fat cartridges, he patented one with a particular shape, specific dimensions. He showed it to Winchester, they said no thanks and then copied it. I have no hard feelings towards him, it is his patent. If you wanted to push the shoulder ahead .005" you could build that different cartridge and ammo etc. Winchester took an easy route figuring nothing would happen and it did. Blame Winchester for not doing the right thing when it was offered to them. | |||
|
one of us |
Chic, His round was a 338 Short Mag, one that they still haven't produced. The 7 WSM does have the shoulder moved forward. If you read his patent it does cover more than just one round of specific dimensions............DJ ....Remember that this is all supposed to be for fun!.................. | |||
|
One of Us |
dj, Can I say ..... ooops, lol. So maybe the patent he got is rather bogus then. In the words of Emilie Latilla (Laugh In - probably before some folks era) -- "Never Mind". | |||
|
one of us |
Chic, It's a lot of lawyer-ese, but it sure seems to cover more than just the 338 Jameson.........DJ ....Remember that this is all supposed to be for fun!.................. | |||
|
one of us |
Does this mean that all this is just not so? That who ever is claiming this is.....well...you know! | |||
|
Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 |
Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia