Anchor DIY

[Uncle Bob]

When all is said and done, if it's so good pack one up and send it to Steve and ask him to run it through the same tests that he did with so many other contenders.
There is even bits of Rex's Excell in there!

[transmitterdan]

Originally Posted by Bonaparte-eu

I am in EU not in U.S.

Ps.U.S. Patent is pending. Is not aprooved

This is for personal use not for selling.

Patent law in the US and most other countries makes no distinction for personal use. You obviously know very little about patents.

[transmitterdan]

Originally Posted by travellerw

As a multiple patent holder.. This thread makes me laugh.

So many people have no idea how a patent works, or even what it is.. Someone even posted the patent number, but obviously never went and looked at the actual patent filing. That patent number doesn't even bring anything up on the patent website. Not even pending status!

No matter, for the guy who posted the design and cutting files. EXCELLENT, GOOD WORK. As long as you are releasing it for personal use and not selling a product, or the design files, you are doing exactly %100 what a patent is intended for. You are not doing anything illegal or "unethical" at all.

I think you should check with a patent attorney about that last bit. In the US, a patent is a complete monopoly on the patented device. No one else may distribute drawings of a patented device (so-called inducement to infringe). There is no freebie in US patent law for personal use either.

[Paul L]

35 U.S.C. § 271(b) states: “Whoever actively induces infringement of a patent shall be liable as an infringer.”

Mantus owner anchor patent
HIGH-PENETRATION, HIGH-HOLDING POWER, STOWABLE MARINE ANCHOR
United States Patent Application: 0130036963

[travellerw]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

I think you should check with a patent attorney about that last bit. In the US, a patent is a complete monopoly on the patented device. No one else may distribute drawings of a patented device (so-called inducement to infringe). There is no freebie in US patent law for personal use either.

Oh, I don't have to check with an attorney. "Patent Pending" does not grant an individual (or corporation) patent rights. We only have proof of patent pending status from the original corporations website, however can find no filing in a full text search of the USPTO database. As far as we know, the filing has been rejected (not novel, prior art infrigement, ect.). Hell, the patent may have been submitted as a "Provisional Patent" and never acted upon within the year limit. At this point, as far as we know, no patent rights exist.

Furthermore, there is nothing in this post that would be considered an infrigement. The OP didn't distribute drawings of the patented device, he distributed drawings of his own device. His device was based on prior art, of which the prior art is based upon prior art (purely guessing as the patent filing is not available). It would be a very easy argument as he is not only using different materials, but a different construction method (completely welded). I don't beleive any good patent attorney would think any different.

Now back to your original statement. True there is no provision for "personal use", however, there is provision for "experimental uses". While the US patent law is more strict on this provision than the rest of the world, it still exists. I'm not a lawyer... BUT, I'm pretty sure you would have a tough time finding one that would argue against this being "experimental".

Now with all that said.. Let me take a small moment to actually educate people on how it actually works when you hold a patent. No, a patent is not some magical shield that will sick a team of government lawyers on infringers. Discovering infringement and enforcement is %100 up to the patent holder (or people they retain). Once you discover an infringer, then you need to ensure they are actually infringing on your art (usually lawyer fees start here). Once that has been determined there are multiple paths a holder may take. The best case scenario is an agreement and usually a license fee. The worst case scenario, is an actual court date. Not only will a court date cost you money, but its risky. The infringer might have MUCH deeper pockets. In that case, they could work at drawing out the case in an effort to bleed you of money. However, much worse, they employ a team of researchers that comb the patent archives and find an obscure prior art filing that "could" be used to invalidate your patent. In that case, you are left with a big legal bill, and an invalidated patent while the "infringer" continues profiting.

[sailjumanji]

No, he distributed CAD and cut files for both the original Mantis, and his Storm anchor.

[travellerw]

Originally Posted by Paul L

Mantus owner anchor patent
HIGH-PENETRATION, HIGH-HOLDING POWER, STOWABLE MARINE ANCHOR
United States Patent Application: 0130036963

That patent is listed at "Abandoned"... It never went beyond the "application" state!

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by travellerw

That patent is listed at "Abandoned"... It never went beyond the "application" state!

Interesting. I didn't see the status listed. Can you post a link?

[travellerw]

Originally Posted by sailjumanji

No, he distributed CAD and cut files for both the original Mantis, and his Storm anchor.

Hhhm.. Please tell me where he listed the CAD files for the original Mantus (important to spell it right). Its possible I missed it, if so I would like to know..

Not that it makes much difference. I can't find an actual patent for Mantus anchors that has been granted. Actually. Its quite funny, but I found a really nice patent for Manson anchors. Crazy, but the Manson patent looks very much like a Mantus anchor.

United States Patent: D763775

[travellerw]

Originally Posted by Paul L

Interesting. I didn't see the status listed. Can you post a link?

Its not obvious on the US patent website, but go back and look at the filing again. Notice that it has a "Application Number" but no "Patent Number". This is not always an indication of an abandoned patent (could still be pending), but the "Filing Date" is far enough back that its %99 abandoned.

However.. That is not a %100 gaurantee. So instead do another search on the patent website using "KUTSEN; GREGORY" in the "All fields" search. You will find 3 patents issued to him, but not the one listed.

Finally.. Simply "Google" the application number. The very first link will lead you to the google patent database where that patent is listed as "Abandoned". (Yes Google's patent database it better than the US patent office one).
https://patents.google.com/patent/US20130036963

[Paul L]

Not surprising the Google patent search is easier

[sailjumanji]

Originally Posted by travellerw

Hhhm.. Please tell me where he listed the CAD files for the original Mantus (important to spell it right). Its possible I missed it, if so I would like to know..

Not that it makes much difference. I can't find an actual patent for Mantus anchors that has been granted. Actually. Its quite funny, but I found a really nice patent for Manson anchors. Crazy, but the Manson patent looks very much like a Mantus anchor.

United States Patent: D763775

I think it was second post that he linked to another site/forum, and it was posted there.

[Panope]

Originally Posted by Uncle Bob

When all is said and done, if it's so good pack one up and send it to Steve and ask him to run it through the same tests that he did with so many other contenders.
There is even bits of Rex's Excell in there!

Steve has been busy with other things lately.

Boat is high and dry. Might not splash this year.

Steve

[Bonaparte-eu]

I have original Mantus CAD file. But i did not posted original Mantus CAD on the web. All of ass have pirate movie, program or music on PC. And use it. Is the same sh*t.










I have posted CAD for better anchor than is Mantus.

[Bonaparte-eu]