Welcome To P8ntballer.com
The Home Of European Paintball
Sign Up & Join In

Smart Parts Lose To Wdp

John C

John C

Told u So.
Jul 7, 2001
3,764
2
0
Under a pile of boards.
www.spitfirepaintball.co.uk
If he hadnt signed:,

His name should still have been on the patent, but he would not have owned the rights to the invention and WDP would not have been able to buy them off him.

I think...

Either way SP tried to shaft Hensel and that was a bad idea. Professors tend to be quite clever people
 
L

Lucky.One

New Member
Dec 1, 2003
81
0
0
suckago
www.lucky-paintball.com
that is not really it.

Anyone could have dug the Doc and paid him off. Think about it.
If you dug hard enough with any patent, you might come up with a technicality that may effect the validity.

Smart parts may be hated but who is to say WDP will be any better or the two together might be double trouble.

Wdp claims the invented the LCD in the paintgun but the CYber9000 was the first (it appears on warpig prior to a year to WDP claims).

The drama is not yet done but it was hilarious for the judge to quote the damning quotes that make billy and adam look ummm silly?.
 
Jon S

Jon S

London Faction
Sep 22, 2003
764
36
53
London
www.jaysto.com
So then what are the implications of a joint ownership (pardon my lack or legalese), would both need to agree on any actions taken, then? I can see how this has been a blow to SP's position but I agree that it doesnt mean the end of the story.

Edit: Everywhere else is linking to this thread, I think we ought to thank ITN for his scoop :D (Thanks!)
 
Flash-Bugout

Flash-Bugout

doin' other stuffs
Jul 6, 2001
1,282
0
61
need to get hold of Tank for an exit
I'm waiting on getting excited over this until we know the implications of the joint ownership of patent thingy - for all we know WDP could just take half of SPs royalty/agreement monies...

(I doubt that they would, but you never know)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom