SmartParts can't ship guns?

[John C]

Originally posted by QuackingPlums
I know! That's what I mean! How far do SP have to go to prove that a board isn't programmable? I'm confident enough with a soldering iron/bath to replace any PIC on any board, SMT or otherwise, and program the new one with any code I want.

The hard thing to work out is exactly what the rest of the board is doing. At least with code protect enabled then in principle, I'd have to dig out my oscilloscope and do some reverse engineering, rather than just looking at somebody else's hard work...

In practice of course, I'd just look up "defeat PIC code protect" on google...

Maybe they use the older parallel programmed chips most of which are OTP.

Whether the code is accessible or not isnt really the issue, the issue is whether it is reprogrammable and how they define reprogrammable.
As flash says if they consider adjusting values held in memory(such as dwell) as reprogramming the device then they cant make a board that isnt covered by the patent.
If on the other hand it specifies that only the program code is reprogrammable then they could get around it with OTP chips.


I know how people supposedly crack the code protect on PIC chips and Im not sure its any more than a myth.

It would be fun to try but I dont have access to that kind of equipment!!!

 

[Flash-Bugout]

Originally posted by manike
Claim 39 is very interesting. I need to put some more effort into reading the patent and claims.

Claim 39: A paintball gun in communication with a remote terminal, the paintball gun comprising:

an input;

a pneumatic system coupled to the input for firing one or more paintballs;

a memory storing a set of program instructions for controlling the valve dwell time of the pneumatic system;

a processing unit coupled to the memory and the input, the processing unit executing the set of program instructions relating to controlling the valve dwell time of the pneumatic system.
----------------

So this means any marker with a data port and adjustable dwell, but only if the dwell is adjusted by the "remote terminal" - ie something that isn't part of the markers circuit board/buttons.

[edit]

link to the patent in question as I dont think it's been linked to yet on this thread.
[/edit]

 

[Tom Allen]

the remote terminal could consist of a set of push buttons

 

[manike]

Originally posted by Flash-Bugout
Claim 39: A paintball gun in communication with a remote terminal, the paintball gun comprising:

an input;

a pneumatic system coupled to the input for firing one or more paintballs;

a memory storing a set of program instructions for controlling the valve dwell time of the pneumatic system;

a processing unit coupled to the memory and the input, the processing unit executing the set of program instructions relating to controlling the valve dwell time of the pneumatic system.
----------------

So this means any marker with a data port and adjustable dwell, but only if the dwell is adjusted by the "remote terminal" - ie something that isn't part of the markers circuit board/buttons.

Why does it mean that exactly?

Isn't that scenario what happens when you initially program the board? Or does it get around it because the board isn't in the gun when first programmed? Or is that contributory anyway... some answers are not yet determined.

Just curious.



Evil.One, no comment You still owe me a beer first.

 

[John C]

Yes in order to program the chip a remote terminal is pretty much essential.


Maybe its not so much the board isnt in the gun when its first programmed, than the chip isnt on the board when it is first programmed??

 

[Tom Allen]

The way i see it is, if the chip controls the dwell and is reprogrammable (eg, you can change the dwell setting) then it falls within this patent.

 

[Flash-Bugout]

I think the initial programmign of the board is covered by

A paintball gun in communication with a remote terminal

as the board when first programmed most likely is not in the marker (he says making wild guesses at marker manufacturing techniques - Manike - care to help me out here ). Not only that, but surely if it's the initial programming of the chip/board - then that's "programming" not "re-programming".

 

[Tom Allen]

Nothing really says anything about "initial" programming. The remote terminal could be an infra red link, the buttons, a plug in terminal. The remote terminal could be something as simple as a switch. The only definition is that it is remote from the chip.

 

[Sherman]

.
old news, post deleted.
.

 

[Pump'n'Splat]

Originally posted by Tom Allen
The way i see it is, if the chip controls the dwell and is reprogrammable (eg, you can change the dwell setting) then it falls within this patent.

That'd make it incredibly hard to carry on manufacturing the marker range that Smart Parts have though, wouldn't it??? and as they're clearly carrying on does this mean that they're manufacturing markers with no dwell setting adjustment?

It all seems very odd that they can carry on with such a broad coverage by this patent, surely it's not as simple as a patent that controls a programmable board......