I want to see patent numbers and read exactly what the patents otherwise it
is all hot air and hearsay.
Mark N1UK
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Lux" <jimlux@earthlink.net>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, 15 June, 2013 12:39 AM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower Jack?
On 6/14/13 8:08 PM, K8RI wrote:
On 6/14/2013 3:55 PM, Larry wrote:
Patents are renewable if I recall. I don't know if they changed when
they changed trademarks. Trademarks are good as long as the owner is
still alive and other rules (used to be 28 years and renewable once). I
have lost touch with the IP law stuff.
Too bad they changed the patent laws as I've been using the tower clamo
for nearly 30 years and figured any one who wanted to builfd one could.
Actually a patent doesn't prevent you from building one for your self
to use.
sure enough, the law does prohibit building one for your own use (35 USC
271). there is an exception if you're doing research on the patented item
(e.g. to improve it), but not for just plain old use.
The classic example is a hammer. If the claims are sufficiently broad
(e.g. a device held in one or two hands, moved in a swinging motion to
apply a force), you could make a hammer in order to compare it to your
pneumatic hammer, but not to build a house (or, more interestingly, to
form the metal for your new pneumatic hammer) You can build it to
"compare" for research, but not to use.
The key is "use" (as opposed to "sell" which is also prohibited) { the
actual wording is something like "made, used, sold, offered to sell or
imported"
Keeping this all nice and ham radio related, a classic example is the
Vibroplex bug. Lots of knockoffs, and Vibroplex went after the users
(e.g. commercial telegraphers), as well as manufacturers.
ANd, sadly, there was a recent Supreme Court decision that casts the
"research exemption" into doubt, after some 150+ years.
Madey vs Duke, 2002
" In short, regardless of whether a particular institution or entity is
engaged in an endeavor for commercial gain, so long as the act is in
furtherance of the alleged infringer's legitimate business and is not
solely for amusement, to satisfy idle curiosity, or for strictly
philosophical inquiry, the act does not qualify for the very narrow and
strictly limited experimental use defense. Moreover, the profit or
non-profit status of the user is not determinative. "
So you could probably built a towerjack (assuming the patent exists and is
still valid) for the purposes of testing it (in the context of a bonafide
experimental process) but not just for assembling/disassembling your
tower. If you were to set up a "tower jacking" contest of some sort,
perhaps that would fly?
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|