Salvodiving v Halcyon

Dell Motes

O.K. , I think I missed some news somewhere.
Did Sartek win the patent infringement suit?
Also, the suit was against the entire industry, a very large list initially, but was wittled down some overtime. Actually, a much larger list than Carmichael ever sued. Funny, no one berates Sartek for going after everyone and costing what has to be in the millions by now, for what my understanding will most likely be an invalidated patent claim.
Fickle world, to say the least...............

onetime

Well, considering Halcyon was using pure Sartek lights rebranded as Halcyon and then began making their own from that exact design, there's little to argue about whether they used Sartek's design.

Additionally, the patents being enforced by Halcyon are ridiculously vague and probably would lose in a real patent fight but most of the manufacturers they're going after can't afford to go to the wall in a fight over it. Basically, they patented non-removable ballast weight placed on the lower back to give a diver a heads up position. That is far from a unique concept and previous patents likely cover it but to fight it they have to challenge the patent (some named in the suit may just be doing that but only time will tell).

In the end, I believe Halcyon is pretty clearly defined by its actions. Take a Sartek product and make it themselves while violating the law. Take a Barry Miller product and make it themselves while probably violating the agreement that brought Barry there in the first place.

onetime

I thought they did. Read the news about a year or so ago I thought. If not, then I retract my statement.

Genesis

Last time I checked Sartek didn't sue anyone who didn't make lights though.

Carliegh Rae Corp. (Carmichael, Halcyon, et.al - its a convoluted mess of intertwined ownership and officers there), however, did sue someone (Oxycheq) over a weight patent when Oxycheq didn't actually make weighting systems, and then (if Oxycheq's reports are correct) demanded during settlement negotiations all current stock of their wings and a permanent injunction against future production of same....

Gee, what do you think that one was about?

__________________
"A venturesome minority will always be eager to get off on their own, and no obstacles should be placed in their path; let them take risks for Godsake, let them get lost, sunburnt, stranded, drowned, eaten by bears, buried alive under avalanches - that is the right and privilege of any free American."
http://www.denninger.net
http://www.diversunion.org/liability.htm - Fix the Diving Cert racket

onetime

For some reason I can't seem to edit. So, for the third or fourth time...

Halcyon was the only company to rebrand the Sartek lights and then with some minor changes to the Sartek design start selling the same design.

Additionally, IIRC, didn't Halcyon attempt to sue Sartek and that's what instigated Sartek to enforce their patent?

decoweenie

I am sure Halcyon regretted that decision. Don't mess with Patrick!

__________________
"...after a while you get bored offering advice to a bull that like to keep butting the fence with its head rather than walking through the open gate..."

- Rebreather World PM

cool_hardware52

My laymans understanding of US Patent Law:

The PTO does little or no reseach regarding Prior Art. As a result many patents are issued that will ultimately be found to be invalid.

The patent holder however is now armed with a club to swing at competitors, many of which many not be able to afford to litigate the validity of the patent.

The patent holder is efffectively protected from counter suits because they hold a patent.

Sound familiar?


Tobin

__________________
www.deepseasupply.com

Genesis

The filer for a patent, however, has an affirmative obligation to list all prior art of which they are aware.

The problem is that, just as with virtually all other areas of the law, prosecutions for perjury in this regard are basically nonexistant.

The only time someone gets nailed for perjury in this country is when its politically convenient.....

__________________
"A venturesome minority will always be eager to get off on their own, and no obstacles should be placed in their path; let them take risks for Godsake, let them get lost, sunburnt, stranded, drowned, eaten by bears, buried alive under avalanches - that is the right and privilege of any free American."
http://www.denninger.net
http://www.diversunion.org/liability.htm - Fix the Diving Cert racket

onetime

Well, I wouldn't go quite so far as that with regard to perjury...
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=592866

As far as the patent application goes, there's a lot of wiggle room there. All they have to say is that they weren't aware of it, they don't have to go searching for things that's presumably the Patent Office's job.

Of course, I agree with coolhardware's assessment of how they work. I know they do a slight investigation of all the applications comparing it to other patents but they rely too strongly on publication of "pending" patents and the patent challenge process to catch patents that are or will be improperly awarded.

Dell Motes

Actually, the patent system is an "honor" system.........
The examiners have no clue what may already be on the market, they research previous claims awarded etc. and it is up to the filer to state the
'unique" aspects of their claims. The PTO then either agrees or dismisses any claims depending on prior art, claims previously awarded and/or things deemed "obvious to those skilled in the art", such as it would be rather hard to claim "a round cylinder as a pressure vessel" being unique to an underwater light design. That is obvious to "those skilled in the art", and virtually anyone else for that matter.