For once i dont see whats wrong with this one
They are patenting a trigger that doesnt move - ie you dont pull the trigger - you just touch it and it activates the firing cycle.
As with many of these, however, it seems to me that they go a bit far fetched in parts and hypothesise about what it might do, not what they have the technology to do right now
Mark
They are patenting a trigger that doesnt move - ie you dont pull the trigger - you just touch it and it activates the firing cycle.
As with many of these, however, it seems to me that they go a bit far fetched in parts and hypothesise about what it might do, not what they have the technology to do right now
Mark
Hehehe, I can see it now - game starts and everyone steams up the field shouting "Bang bang bang bang bang bang bang!"Originally posted by Parksy
Okay time to patent the sound activated trigger??!!
Patents are fair enough when people are taking them out for a bit of truely innovative design which they don't want others to rip off, but patenting this kind of tut is getting a bit daft.
Take the situation with hoppers - one company has the patent on break beam activated agitation, another has it for sound activation and another on movement past eyes - effectively preventing any new companies from entering the field without being gouged.
Imagine if Airgun designs had patented the use of HPA in paintball......everyone could still be using CO2 to play.
I heard that AKA are actually contesting one of their patents, will be interesting to see what comes of it.
well a sound activated trigger would be illegal over here anyway..... one ball per PULL. No switches, rollers etc... etc...
And Smart parts have to patent stuff............ they need to pay rent on the massive unsold shocker filled warehouses they are leasing
And Smart parts have to patent stuff............ they need to pay rent on the massive unsold shocker filled warehouses they are leasing
Why does everyone make such a fuss over patents in paintball? In all industry patients are used to protect designs and the designer. Without them designers would get no reward for their efforts and R & D would be non existant in many industries (if a company can not gain a competitive advantage by new deigns they wouldn't bother causing industry to stagnate).
So why is paintball any different?
So why is paintball any different?
Hee - in the health industry I hope that patients are treated, rather than used.
In the medical research industry however....
Back to the point though, I agree (and have done all along) that patents are a necessary part of industry. Yes, it stops companies from blatantly ripping off other peoples designs, but it also forces them to innovate. Fair enough, there are companies who abuse the patents system, but I think SP are getting an unfair amount of grief here... it wasn't that long ago that VL/BE tried to sue Odyssey for breach of something or other, and yet nobody holds a grudge against VL, despite their poor record of loader durability?
In the medical research industry however....
Back to the point though, I agree (and have done all along) that patents are a necessary part of industry. Yes, it stops companies from blatantly ripping off other peoples designs, but it also forces them to innovate. Fair enough, there are companies who abuse the patents system, but I think SP are getting an unfair amount of grief here... it wasn't that long ago that VL/BE tried to sue Odyssey for breach of something or other, and yet nobody holds a grudge against VL, despite their poor record of loader durability?
I think the main problem is that certains patents are not protecting the designers, merely the owners of the patent.
I for one fail to see how smart parts owning the patent on the electro pb marker makes the paintball world a better place.
or is it just me?
or is it just me?