SmartParts can't ship guns?
- Thread starter Lucky.One
- Start date
well since i only been balling like 6 months top's and most of that i havnt been playing can u fill me in on what they have done ?
looks like wdp (NPF?) have got the marker market by the balls now. What other manufactures use these reprogrammable microprocessors? is there a way for sp/other company to use another style of processor?
The jist of it, they enforced an ambiguous patent and closed down production of several manufacturers guns. This was enforced by a spate of legal letters to manufacturers stating they had infringed sp's patent.
This patent has been proved not to be owned by sp, but the damage has be done all the same.
This patent has been proved not to be owned by sp, but the damage has be done all the same.
Well NPF could stand for National Paintball Fields, Which is the field near birmingham they run and own. Maybe they registered this company with it or something?
My understanding was that WDP owned NPF anyway.
My understanding was that WDP owned NPF anyway.
Nope.
But its up to WDP if they choose to enforce the patent in each case.
With Smart parts trying to sue them then its quite reasonable for WDP enforce the patent against them.
Whether WDP enforce the patent against other manufacturers, some of which have paid money to Smart Parts is up to them. But in the past WDP have allowed other companies to use their technology without charging.
I would also like to see WDP shut down Smart Parts completely.
But I suppose the fact that Smart Parts will be subsidising my next angel will have to be enough...
Lets hope so.
That would be 'contributory infringement' and not allowed.Originally posted by Kitch
I guess we shall see sp ship guns with the bits that are affected by the patnents missing, and perhaps people wacking in morlock boards, it's only for 15 years anyway
Interesting times ahead.
It'd be nice to see SP get the licence, but at an inflated price...basically their own dog jumping up and biting them in the hand, and justly so for what they tried to do to a lot of other companies.
I feel that WDP did what they did to teach SP a lesson and again justly so.
It'd be a shame to see SP markers fall off the radar, they *are* good markers. And Rambo, there's no reason why SP still wont support current markers and bring out aftermarket parts, accessories and peripherals for the current markers, hte way I read it, it' the microprocessor control that is patented.
I hate SP and their business practice, but I love my impulse
I feel that WDP did what they did to teach SP a lesson and again justly so.
It'd be a shame to see SP markers fall off the radar, they *are* good markers. And Rambo, there's no reason why SP still wont support current markers and bring out aftermarket parts, accessories and peripherals for the current markers, hte way I read it, it' the microprocessor control that is patented.
I hate SP and their business practice, but I love my impulse
Not entirely true, they charge a per-marker fee for companies manufacturing markers with LCD screens as they have a patent on that.
However as they were the first to come up with this and are charging reasonabley it is very different to what S.P. did.
All those who say that what S.P. did was only good business, i would say what WDP did was good (and fair) business, what S.P. did was unfairly exploit an idea that wasn't their's. A world of difference.