Bass Fishing HomeBass Fishing Forums

Go Back   BassFishin.Com Forums > Serious Conversation Only > General Bass Fishing Topics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
Old 02-06-15, 11:19 AM   #1
bassboogieman
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
bassboogieman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Parkesburg, Pa.
Posts: 3,762
Default what is your opinion?

Post deleted.

Last edited by bassboogieman; 02-06-15 at 06:09 PM.
bassboogieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-15, 09:56 AM   #2
AUFred
BassFishin.Com Veteran Member
 
AUFred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Prattville, Alabama
Posts: 781
Default

I wish it had not been deleted. Too few topics.
AUFred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-15, 10:59 AM   #3
mikechell
BassFishin.Com Active Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 464
Default

Hmmmmmmm.
My opinion ...
Life's too short to waste it on anger and sadness. The government makes it hard to live by that, but I do my best.
mikechell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-15, 03:12 PM   #4
joedog
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: JANESVILLE,WI. 53545
Posts: 3,415
Default

I read it before Bruce deleted it..

AND YES BRUCE ZMann has gotten way out of line with their product protective policies.

For those who missed it.
The basic was how far Zmann has gone to protect thier Chatterbait by going all the way down to taking hobby lure makers to court for using a 'blade' similar to the chatterbaits.

Bruce bring it back.
More important is, why did you delete it.
If someone wants to 'stay happy'....just don't read it.
But there are alot hobby lure makers here,or were here and as Bruce said, if chatterbaits are so good, let them sell on thier own merit not by the courts, rather by the anglers.

Maybe
Yamamoto should take every hobby 'stickbait' maker to court too.

Bruce you made some great points and I didn't even feel it was that negative, myself.

Bruce you are a GREAT POSTER and A GREAT ASSET TO THE SITE.
__________________
"Fishing isn't life or death... it's more important than that."

Last edited by joedog; 02-07-15 at 10:44 PM.
joedog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-15, 08:47 PM   #5
keithdog
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
keithdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: IN
Posts: 8,308
Default

I think Bruce was worried about the guys in the big black Suburban.
__________________
Just one more cast, and then some!
keithdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-15, 11:22 PM   #6
mikechell
BassFishin.Com Active Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 464
Default

You can only be sued for trademark infringement if you sell your copies. You can make your own copies all day long, stockpile thousands if you wish. GIVE them away to your friends.
As soon as you make one dime off one of them, you're now selling and "infringing".
Any story about a company suing a hobbyist is balderdash, because a true a hobbyist doesn't sell. If someone IS being sued, they aren't true hobbyists.
mikechell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-15, 12:52 AM   #7
joedog
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: JANESVILLE,WI. 53545
Posts: 3,415
Default

I fine this thread very interesting in the fact people believe they have the right to break the law and not be held accountable. The reason the patent law exist is to protect our rights as US citizens to come up with a idea and keep anyone from using it that does not pay the patent holder. I believe by law anyone on here can invent something apply for a patent and protect it. The fact you want to get on here a ***** about you have the right to break the law and ZMAN doesn't have the moral right to come after you whether you are a big company or small one is a joke. The fact is you don't have the right as a person or company to make a patented product whether you buy parts and build it your self is still breaking the law. The only reason the patent holder doesn't come after everyone is it cost to much for each case. You want to come on here and brag you break the law and we should just say poor poor person they got sued. That is a joke if you don't want to get sued don't infringe. Joey Watts is a joke to get on here and admit he did it and cry. Zman should file a slander suit against him. I believe if you don't want a DWI don't drink if you don't want a law suit for infringing DON"T infringe

Daniel Nussbaum
General Manager, Z-Man Fishing Products
dnussbaum@zmanfishing.com


Hello, I am the General Manager at Z-Man Fishing Products and was just directed to this thread. It appears that there is some misinformation out there about our patents and trademarks, and I wanted to take a moment to introduce myself and explain a bit about our intellectual property and what it covers.

We have several different trademarks and patents that apply to the Chatter Bait series. First, we have registered trademarks on the ChatterBait brand name and several other related "Chatter" marks (e.g., ChatterFrog, ChatterBlade). Those essentially prevent others from using the "ChatterBait" name to describe other products (kind of like cola companies can't call their soft drink "Coke"). Second, we have a registered trademark (also known as trade dress protection) on the hex-shaped ChatterBlade; this essentially covers the non-functional yet distinguishing hexagonal shape of our blade and precludes other companies from using a blade shaped like a hexagon. Finally, we have two utility patents that cover the bladed-swim jig design of our ChatterBait brand bladed jigs. Essentially, a utility patent protects how something works, and among other things, our patents protect the direct head-to-blade connection that was pioneered by the ChatterBait line of baits. Each patent contains numerous claims and therefore cannot be easily simplified here, so I would refer anyone here to the patents themselves for further details. I am glad to provide copies of the patents and copies of industry press releases we have distributed to make others aware of them as well as do my best to help explain what the patents cover, though please understand that I am not a patent lawyer myself.

Regarding our patent enforcement efforts, it appears that there is a great deal of incorrect information out there concerning companies being contacted by lawyers, lawsuits being filed, and the like. In the past few years, our goal has been to contact other lure companies directly, one person in the tackle industry to another, to explain our patents and what they cover. I have personally reached out to a number of companies to make sure they were aware of and understand our trademarks and patents and what they cover. In almost all cases, others in the industry have been very understanding and have voluntarily stopped making and selling infringing products once they became aware of our intellectual property and what exactly it covered. Frankly, many folks out there, particularly smaller companies, did not have a very good understanding of utility patents, how they work, and what they cover, and it has taken some explaining to get some folks up to speed. That's completely understandable, and overall, I've been very impressed with how professionally and respectfully most folks in the industry have handled this and been willing to work with us to make sure they're in the clear. Our aim is to be a responsible player in the tackle industry and treat others respectfully, an it is clear that most others share this goal as well.

There is obviously a perception out there that we "go after" only small companies, and having been on the front lines of this effort, I can honestly say that is not accurate at all. The difference is that most larger companies have a solid understanding of patents and how they work, so once they became aware of the patents, they have phased out their bladed jig without any kind of uproar. In the 5 1/2 years that I have been with Z-Man, attorneys have been involved in only two very blatant cases, neither in the past couple of years. I have personally reached out to a number of companies, both smaller than and larger than Z-Man, and have worked with them to understand our trademarks and patents and what they cover.

Ultimately, our goal is to produce high quality products that flat out catch fish, and we've taken a number of steps in the past few years to improve the quality of our products. I feel like we're making better ChatterBaits now than ever, and the number of top tournament finishes in tour-level competition this year on our products by anglers like Brett Hite, Bryan Thrift, Gerald Swindle, and Paul Mueller at the Classic (none of whom are sponsored by Z-Man) speaks to the effectiveness of our ChatterBait lures. We are continuously looking at ways to improve our products and always welcome any kind of constructive feedback that you as anglers are willing to provide. Please do not hesitate to contact me directly with suggestions, recommendations, or issues you've experienced. We are currently working on several new Chatter Bait products that should launch within the next 6 months to fill some of the voids in our product line. We completely understand the frustration when an angler is no longer able to purchase a product that has worked for him or her in the past, and our aim is to broaden our bladed jig product line and offer top-notch products at a reasonable price that are easy for anglers to get their hands on.

Thank you for your time reading this and considering this. I do not regularly monitor this board, so if you have questions, please e-mail me directly at the e-mail address below. I will be traveling for the ICAST show for the next week, so my apologies in advance if it takes me a little while to respond.

Thanks,

Daniel Nussbaum
General Manager, Z-Man Fishing Products
dnussbaum@zmanfishing.com

And

A few have asked about whether Z-Man invented the ChatterBait lure or purchased the brand, and that is something I can definitely explain to avoid some of the misinformation floating around. The ChatterBait was invented by Ron Davis and his father in South Carolina. They originally came up with the idea for the direct head-to-blade connection, filed the patent application, and actually started making the baits in their garage here in South Carolina under the RAD Lures brand. Z-Man's background was at the time primarily in the silicone skirt business, and RAD Lures was a skirt customer of Z-Man. After demand started increasing rapidly and RAD Lures could not keep up, the Davises enlisted the help of Z-Man to manufacture and distribute ChatterBait products. After a couple of years, Z-Man purchased the rights to the ChatterBait line. Ron Davis continued to pursue the patents which ultimately were granted, and those patents have been assigned to Z-Man. If you look at the patents themselves, you'll see "James Ronald Davis" listed as the inventor. To be clear, Z-Man did not purchase the Chatter Bait line then decide to patent the idea after-the-fact. My understanding is that this would not be allowed by the patent system - "inventorship" is a requirement of obtaining a patent, and one cannot obtain a patent on someone else's idea. The Davises had an original lure idea, started making baits in their garage, took the right steps to prevent it from (legal) copycatting through the patent system, and turned it into a profitable venture. As fishermen who have probably all thought about different lure ideas, I think we're all probably a little bit envious!

In response to some of the comments regarding our products, I also would like to mention that we've done a great deal to improve the quality of our products over the last couple of years while still offering ChatterBait products at a reasonable price point. For instance, we have upgraded the hook on our Original ChatterBait to a custom needlepoint hook and improved the plated blade finishes and paint used on the heads. Just this year, we've upgraded the clip on the Original ChatterBait to make it stronger and less likely to open up. Our ChatterBait Elite uses a 5/0 Gamakatsu hook at the request of a number of anglers. We have made several other tweaks over the year to improve the baits, and all of these changes are based on feedback from our customers and pros. We have some great improvements and higher-end additions to our product line in store for the next year. If you haven't used a Z-Man ChatterBait for a while, we hope you will give our newest baits another shot.

My goal in posting here was essentially to provide a little bit of background on our patents (that is what the original poster asked) and introduce myself as a point of contact if there are any questions about our patents, or if you care to offer feedback on our products. There is still some incorrect information being thrown around on this thread, but my goal here is not to get into any kind of back-and-forth. Frankly, I just don't spend much time on forums like this, but I'm certainly glad to discuss further on an individual basis. With ICAST coming up this week, I likely will not be checking back here, so please feel free to reach out to me via e-mail if you have further questions or concerns.

A sincere thanks for the opportunity to explain a little bit about our patents and trademarks as well as the history of the ChatterBait product line via this forum.

Thanks,

Daniel

for those interested in the full discussion,

http://texasfishingforum.com/forums/...02/type/thread

Just so everyone understands,
I have no problem with Zman or the Chatterbait.
I buy Zman plastics and for my purpose they are best for what I use them for.

This is the reason I thought Bruce had a good topic.
So it can be understood and people/companies understand whats law and whats personal opinion.
Nothing more, nothing less.
I know anglers here make bladed jigs because I got some.

I also take my hat off to Daniel for addressing the topic!
He sounds like a neat individual and did a GREAT job of explaining Zmans stance.
I even learned alot!!!!
And feel I have become a better person with more knowledge that would have never happened unless Bruce had brought it up.
In fact, after reading Dan's responses, I even feel that some of my first post was in error and was prompted by misinformation and with that misunderstanding developed a personal opinion on the subject.
Thank you again Bruce.

Again, I just felt it was a great topic for discussion and was surprised that Bruce felt the need to delete.
Better understanding is usually the end result of discussions and the more people know the better person they usually become.
__________________
"Fishing isn't life or death... it's more important than that."
joedog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-15, 11:01 AM   #8
bassboogieman
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
bassboogieman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Parkesburg, Pa.
Posts: 3,762
Default

CORRECTION JOE: My issue was not that hobbyists and custom lure makers were being pursued, harrassed or sued by Z-man. That that was a possible perception or that my post was thought to be a rant against that company was the reason I deleted it (see last paragraph).

THE ISSUE, was not about making and selling chatterbait clones, or getting sued, it was about Zman's latest assault under the banner of patent infringement. They have been successful in having the jig head with an open eye removed from the market. I have no issue with them using their patent for protection from millions of Chineese lure clones (or American manufacturers either). I don't care if Zman gets protective of it's blade, other shapes perform equally well. But now the jig head is not available, so those "hobbyists" you speak of CANNOT make lures for their personal use, unless of course they attach the lure blade to the jig head with a split ring and that (negartively IMO) affects the action of the lure and the ability of the blade to contact the jig head (the "chatter" part of the lure's name).

Patenting a lure is one thing, extending it to components that can be used for other purposes is a bit much. The R-bend wire used in spinner baits is not unique to a specific brand, neither is the use of titanium or stainless steel wire in the same lure, willow leaf blades (direct comparison to the hex chatterbait blade) is a component readily available. Round, football, oval, etc, jig heads appear in several brands with the jig eye at various angles - so why is a jig with an open eye considered proprietary to a Chatterbait? The Senko has been mentioned, and the list goes on.

Maybe I should not have taken the post down, then there may have been less confusion as to my point. But I originally put it up in an attempt to generate some discussion but it got 18 views and NO comments so I took it down because I thought it was seen as a "rant" and ignored as just my bashing Zman, which was not my intention. I got more attention after the post was deleted than when it was up.

Last edited by bassboogieman; 02-10-15 at 11:37 AM.
bassboogieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-15, 12:31 PM   #9
lilmule
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
lilmule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Buchanan,Tn
Posts: 2,685
Default

I agree patents protect general portions or unique not those common in use.
Spinnerbaits.buzzbaits are almost imossible to patent.
I know as tried to patent my own lure,the bends are not patented or protected nor can they be,on mine the blade configuration alng with the bends would have cost was 1.800 for a temp 1 year pat,up to 20 k for the real thing,most of which goes to att not the patent lic.They send you the paperwork you fill it out,complete with drawing etc.Meraning you still do most of the work.In order for anyone to copy I believe it is 5 things must be different yet again bends angles etc not counted.As to how a company got the open eyelet under copywright havnt a clue as other things could be attached other than their blade.Sounds more like a misuse of corporate power to corner a certain part of the market and aimed at those who cannot afford expensive attorneys in order to achieve it.
Money and lobbiests other wise companies like hummingbird whom I like couldn't swallow up every small sonar and map company out there.Then again some companies repantent same thing years later due to patents being usefull after they pass a certain time frame,they simply patent a different part of the same thing in order to attempt to protect all.How many years ago did the blade come out?What of other makers in general bayou boogie etc.Are they paying an infringement fee doubt it as blade has different shape etc.
lilmule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-15, 01:21 PM   #10
mikechell
BassFishin.Com Active Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 464
Default

The most humorous part of this whole thing, to me is, I don't even like the chatter-bait. I've tried it for extended periods, just like I have with other "fad" baits. In Florida, I never caught anything notable with it and have long since quit using it.

I am also unsure what a "jig with an open eye" is. There are so many jig-head styles out there, what makes that style so different?
mikechell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-15, 01:53 PM   #11
bassboogieman
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
bassboogieman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Parkesburg, Pa.
Posts: 3,762
Default

Definitely not a "fad" bait. Definitely a producer around here, and it's been hot on the Potomac river for years both for bass and snakeheads - virtually everyone who fishes that river in the spring has a few on board. In Canada the pike won't leave one alone, neither will bass both largemouth and smallmouth, I would not go to Canada without a couple dozen of that style bait in my tackle bag, I've gone through a half dozen in a day when the pike are hungry - they do not run right with a titanium or steel leader.

Open eye jig head is self explanatory, it's eye is open to allow attachment of blades (in a chatterbait) or a swivel or anything else someone wants to add, then the eye is squeezed closed.

These have been removed from the open market. You can get them with the eye closed as in a regular jig, but to attach a blade you need a split ring - actually two - to have the blade perpendicular to the jig head and thus moves the blade too far away to contact the jig and make noise, an inherent feature of the original.

Z-man says the open eye attachment method to connect their blades is protected under patrent- it's comparable to claiming that using a swivel to attach the top blade of a spinner bait is patented so it cannot be duplicated, or a clevis to connect the lower blade on a spinner bait or a piece of plastic tubing used to secure a trailer hook, and on it goes.

Last edited by bassboogieman; 02-10-15 at 02:18 PM.
bassboogieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-15, 03:41 PM   #12
mikechell
BassFishin.Com Active Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 464
Default

Oh ... open eye, I get it now. I was thinking position on the head.

Thanks
mikechell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-15, 10:04 PM   #13
coldbasser
BassFishin.Com Active Member
 
coldbasser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 380
Default

Great thread I learned a lot and I use Z man and will continue to use them
Cheers
__________________
Canada where men are men and sheep r nervy
coldbasser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-15, 11:09 AM   #14
Tavery5
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
Tavery5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,427
Default

Seems like the easy way for the makers of these heads that are in violation of patent infringement is to use the same material but mold it in a closed eye fashion and let us cut them open using a dremel or some other means.

I make a lot of baits that use these heads, and some that use a split ring to attach the blade, I much prefer the direct attachment to the head.

I understand the right to protect your idea but I think that this one in particular has gone a little to far.
__________________
They call me Ishmael
Tavery5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-15, 12:12 PM   #15
lilmule
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
lilmule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Buchanan,Tn
Posts: 2,685
Default

I really don't see how a bend or lack there of can be patented,open r bend spinnerbaits are not protected or closed loop.And the open hook concept has been around a long time,I still have some treble hooks with an open end, in a pinch while on the water if you mess up or bend a treble can temp replace with an open end treble and bend the wire closed.No don't think it would hold up for to many 40 lb stripers or muskies but can make a lure usefull for bass fishing the rest of the day,if its the only one they are banging.
And that has been around awhile,whats the difference hook versus wire it wasn't patentable or considered patentable.
lilmule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-15, 12:43 PM   #16
bassboogieman
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
bassboogieman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Parkesburg, Pa.
Posts: 3,762
Default

There is a discussion ongoing over on Bass Boat Central about this topic. Some good discussion and some trolling (agitation) but in general there is some good "chatter" going on with a little "baiting" too. I'll make it easy for you.
http://www.bbcboards.net/bbc-lounge/...ke-winner.html
bassboogieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-15, 06:46 PM   #17
joedog
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: JANESVILLE,WI. 53545
Posts: 3,415
Default

Bruce, Dan joined the conversation today at the bbc board you listed above and didn't address the open eye jig situation.
So do me a favor and you ask the question.
It's a great question!

Actually it reads pretty much as what I posted.
__________________
"Fishing isn't life or death... it's more important than that."
joedog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-15, 07:52 PM   #18
bassboogieman
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
bassboogieman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Parkesburg, Pa.
Posts: 3,762
Default

It's been asked a couple times in different ways and it was ignored. The respose was a cut & paste, with a line or two to make it current, right from the corporate playbook. If you read the whole thing there are several points in the response that are plain spin if not outright lies and deception.

Daniel did admit that Z-man sought and enjoys a "legal monopoly" with their chatterbait. We all know a monopoly is not good for the consumer, that is why there are not many in existence, but certain monopolies are good for consumers, like public utilities but even some of those protected utilities have seen some of their practices removed in order to allow completion within the geographical regions they serve. Everyone understands a monopoly that controls a product does not have competitors to deal with, has little incentive to improve their product because they have a captive consumer.

As I said here and there I understand a company protecting itself from cheap foreign imports that would be an exact copy or clone. Patent protection to a lure is not a problem, but claiming patent protection to a component that is generic in nature (open eye jig head) and NOT unique to the lure (their hexagonal blade) is too much. Having the jig head removed from the open market is not protection of Z-man from patent infringement it is infringement of a consumer's right to have access to that product. IF they use it to make a chatterbait clone, THEN Z-man can go after them. They cannot deny access to a product because of what it MIGHT be used for. With their though process we could not buy ammunition because we MIGHT want to shoot another human being.

The logic escapes me as does why the few that agree Z-man is perfectly right in protecting their productt have such a narrow view and do not see the bigger picture. As I said at BBC, what if Ford had developed or purchased the rights to disc brakes? Would any of them been happy, as a consumer, if they could only get disc brakes on a Ford? The issue is not the chatterbait LURE, it is about Z-man using a generic component to make their lure then claiming that generic unit is now proprietary because THEY use it - HOGWASH!

Last edited by bassboogieman; 02-15-15 at 08:30 PM.
bassboogieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-15, 08:11 PM   #19
joedog
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: JANESVILLE,WI. 53545
Posts: 3,415
Default

Ya, I read the whole thing.
I totally agree with your point.

Folks also don't understand just how costly getting a patent is.
And there are so many different types of patents
Most people can't afford the cost before selling some of the product and then someone with deeper pockets have already beat them to the punch.

After seeing the cut a paste response from Dan....my hat quickly went back on.
Joey Watts was in the post from the forum I shared too.

Again, thanks for the post!
I learned alot!
__________________
"Fishing isn't life or death... it's more important than that."
joedog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-15, 09:00 AM   #20
lilmule
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
lilmule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Buchanan,Tn
Posts: 2,685
Default

While it is within reason to protect a product,the open eylet concept has been around awile,they didn't invent it,the jig head has been around awhile,just when placing together is it a product that is slightly different..Lures of yesteryear had some of these features in pike lures,blade shape being different is all and more designed to spin but not all.
Open closed bends are not generally a patent option,or spinnerbaits would all have to pay a royalty to someone.Open eyelets for swimbaits close they create a hinge when 2 are used,open treble hooks to replace on a temp basis while on the water(eagle claw).
Under patent laws even so long as so many differences one can copy a bait and be legal.As not an exact copy.About the only ones to or that can afford pattents are companies.My Double barrel bass busters were patentable,yet some features such as bends not so.Cost was like 2k for 1 year temp,16-20 for the real thing.With underwriters taking a fair size cut for a small portion thereof.
In part I see a possible change in patents due to most likely $ pumped in by lobbiests and in general anti trust laws as some companies have bought out almost all close completion.
lilmule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-15, 09:14 PM   #21
nofearengineer
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
nofearengineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southwest IN
Posts: 5,630
Default

Please try to remember that without the promise of a period of patent-enforced monopoly in which to reap the benefit of research, overhead, tooling, and marketing investments...many products would never see the light of day. So yes...monopolies can indeed be beneficial to consumers.
__________________
Many men go fishing all of their lives without knowing it is not fish they are after.
nofearengineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-15, 11:47 AM   #22
mikechell
BassFishin.Com Active Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 464
Default

I don't know about "monopolies" ... but patents are definitely beneficial, for all the reasons you mentioned, nofear.
If a company couldn't at least recoup it's expenditures, why bother inventing something? Plus ... NO company is going to take a loss voluntarily, nor should it be expected to. Would you want to work for no pay? It's called "return on investment" ROI ... and no person nor any company should expect a 0 or negative ROI.
mikechell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-15, 01:05 PM   #23
bassboogieman
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
bassboogieman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Parkesburg, Pa.
Posts: 3,762
Default

Bryce, I missed your point. It is not about monopolies or patents. It is about claims of patent infringement, particularly concerning components not specifically included in a patent. Specifically in this instance an arky style jig head with the eye (line tie) open.

Z-man claims they patented the direct connection of a blade to a lure (I have not seen them claim a patent on the jig head itself). I do not know if that claim has been upheld by a court decision but if it has then the suppression of the sale of a jig head with an open eye cannot be justified because it infringes on that patented concept. The jig head itself can be used for other purposes and unless and until someone puts a blade on it and closes the eye there is no foul. But the sale of those jig heads has been curtailed, I believe under false pretexts, and you cannot buy them for any purpose. No individual can determine another's intention when they purchase a product with multiple uses. Only after they actually utilize a component to duplicate a patented product or concept should they be subject to patent infringement claims.

A representative of Z-man has said (after some intense discussion on another forum) they may reconsider their claim concerning the open eye jig head itself and it may again become available. But it is not clear if they will revoke their claim of patent infringement or now that the sale by others has been curtailed, they will become the sole source of this component. For now you cannot purchase or sell that component, who may sell it in the future remains to be determined.
bassboogieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-15, 11:44 AM   #24
nofearengineer
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
nofearengineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southwest IN
Posts: 5,630
Default

Bruce, I wasn't speaking to the specific merits of this case. I don't fish chatterbaits, and really don't know much about them. I was just chiming in because the conversation was headed in the "big, dirty, rotten, evil corporations and their monopolies" direction.

To me, it would seem that patenting a simple split in a ring is too "simple" for a patent. But I guess a judge thought otherwise.
__________________
Many men go fishing all of their lives without knowing it is not fish they are after.
nofearengineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-15, 01:12 PM   #25
mikechell
BassFishin.Com Active Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 464
Default

Sorry ... just gotta do it.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	DeadHorse2_zps14887d0e.jpg
Views:	362
Size:	109.6 KB
ID:	9092  
mikechell is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Disclosure / Disclaimer
Before acting on the content posted, you should know that BassFishin.Com may benefit financially and otherwise from content, advertising, links or otherwise from anything you click on, read, or look at on our website. Click here to read our Disclosure Policy and Disclaimer.


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
2013 BassFishin.Com LLC