Powered by Outside

Should specialized be allowed a patent?

PB Forum :: Bikes, Parts, and Gear
Should specialized be allowed a patent?
  • Previous Page
Author Message
flag sonicsloth
Posted: Mar 8, 2009 at 15:33 Quote
what is your opinion? should specialized be allowed to have a patent on, basically, the position of a pivot? america appears to be the only country that has granted them what many people concider an unfair patent. this would suggest that other countries don't believe the pivot position to be a patentable idea. yet no-one denies the idea belongs to specialized, do they? so what do you think?
flag
Posted: Mar 8, 2009 at 15:36 Quote
yes if used in a similar way
it effects wheel path and the way the suspension works
however if used by simple single pivot then no
so yes in cases of other FSR style designs
flag nwthumbs
Posted: Mar 8, 2009 at 15:43 Quote
i personally don't care you want to know why????

A) I live in Canada so any bike that has the same pivot position(devinci)I can buy any ways
B) Its not that the us is the only one to grant the patent its because the us is the only place they applied for one
C) The only specialized bike i ride is my hard rock and i don't plan to buy another one
D) There are far better choices out there

rant over
flag typecaRl
Posted: Mar 8, 2009 at 15:43 Quote
sonicsloth wrote:
what is your opinion? should specialized be allowed to have a patent on, basically, the position of a pivot? america appears to be the only country that has granted them what many people concider an unfair patent. this would suggest that other countries don't believe the pivot position to be a patentable idea. yet no-one denies the idea belongs to specialized, do they? so what do you think?

To be honest a lot of specialized designs ie frames, suspensions linkages etc etc are actually Meridas. Merida own 40% of specialized and basically Merida is the factory where all the specialized come from. Merida believe it or not is the second largest bicycle manufacturer in the world. Obviously Giant are the largest. So guess what Im saying is if specialized do have a patent on anything then they prob brought it from Merida.
flag jonbikes
Posted: Mar 8, 2009 at 15:53 Quote
I see nothing on Merida's website that suggests they have anything to do with Specialized, and this is the first I have ever heard of it. Got any sources to back that up with?

As for the patent, I think they should be allowed it. Really, it is a pretty smart idea, if they put the research into it then it should be all theirs IMO.
flag Giant-Rider-Sam
Posted: Mar 8, 2009 at 15:57 Quote
jonbikes wrote:
I see nothing on Merida's website that suggests they have anything to do with Specialized, and this is the first I have ever heard of it. Got any sources to back that up with?

As for the patent, I think they should be allowed it. Really, it is a pretty smart idea, if they put the research into it then it should be all theirs IMO.

Im completely the opposite...if theyre allowed patents on something like the position of a linkage...how is there going to be any room for new companies to come along and let the biking world expand with new products...

Sam
flag blueeyedbiker68
Posted: Mar 8, 2009 at 16:00 Quote
they have a patent because of their R&D on the design.Its to protect their hard work from just plain being hijacked by the competion when they are the ones who put the hard work into it.

http://www.motocrossactionmag.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=news&mod=News&mid=9A02E3B96F2A415ABC72CB5F516B4C10&tier=3&nid=DEECF290064245968723324C25A0976A

and MtB'n was conceived in California on Mt Tam,.the Repack Race,.ever heard of it?
flag sonicsloth
Posted: Mar 8, 2009 at 16:09 Quote
oh, just to keep the record straight, i don't really have an opinion on it one way or the other, but i thought it to be an interesting topic - some of my friends feel quite strongly about it.
flag jonbikes
Posted: Mar 8, 2009 at 16:10 Quote
Giant-Rider-Sam wrote:
jonbikes wrote:
I see nothing on Merida's website that suggests they have anything to do with Specialized, and this is the first I have ever heard of it. Got any sources to back that up with?

As for the patent, I think they should be allowed it. Really, it is a pretty smart idea, if they put the research into it then it should be all theirs IMO.

Im completely the opposite...if theyre allowed patents on something like the position of a linkage...how is there going to be any room for new companies to come along and let the biking world expand with new products...

Sam

In my mind you are just contradicting yourself. You say they shouldn't be allowed a patent on something like pivot placement because it would not allow new companies to come in and let the biking world expand with new products. You can't expand and use old designs at the same time.

Also, something like pivot placement can make a HUGE difference, and it is not something that Specialized just closed their eyes and pointed to a spot on the rear triangle and said "lets put a pivot here, patent it and call it FSR"; they spent a lot of time and money developing the system. On top of that, it is not illegal for other companies to use their design, they simply have to pay up to be able to use it. Just look at Norco, all their bikes are FSR.
flag flikende
Posted: Mar 8, 2009 at 16:23 Quote
spesh should be allowed the patent, because that is how it works in the industry. thats why bikes like lapierre cant be sold in the us, because it violates the patent. spesh was the one to apply it, probably after they bought from horscht leitchner(the guy that created it)if they bought the patent, then its theirs to use. this also leads to similar designs like the maestro system and the dw-link. even though they are both 4-bars, they have different mounts and pivots. if it was the same, then it would violate the patent.
flag sonicsloth
Posted: Mar 8, 2009 at 16:38 Quote
I can see that in the beginning a patent is a good idea. but now that the benifits of four-bar are so widely accepted and easy to see that companies are now tripping over each other to incorporate it into their designs without infringing each others patents - the latest rocky mountain design is testiment to that - the design is 5mm away from fsr infringement. which appears to have many people thinking "well why do these companies have patents on these positions when it is obvious to anyone that that is a good place to put a pivot? it doesn't take a genius to work that out! and why should they get exclusivity just cause they were the first to think of patenting it?" again - this is not my views, just the rantings of people i've been talking to that made me start this thread to see what other poeple think.
flag jonbikes
Posted: Mar 8, 2009 at 16:39 Quote
I can assure you that the design of the Flatline is far from the FSR system.

It's not that other companies can't use the FSR system, they just have to pay a toll for it.
flag flikende
Posted: Mar 8, 2009 at 16:45 Quote
jonbikes wrote:
I can assure you that the design of the Flatline is far from the FSR system.

It's not that other companies can't use the FSR system, they just have to pay a toll for it.
try telling that to ellsworth
flag m47h13u
Posted: Mar 8, 2009 at 16:50 Quote
If there is one thing the biking industry could grow from it's Specialized losing their patent rights on FSR. Then the U.S. would have a whole bunch of new bikes to choose from. The market would grow and there would be more competition. I wonder if like for copy rights you can void a patent with proof of previous use.
flag sonicsloth
Posted: Mar 8, 2009 at 16:53 Quote
jonbikes wrote:
I can assure you that the design of the Flatline is far from the FSR system.

It's not that other companies can't use the FSR system, they just have to pay a toll for it.

i was refering to the new altitude - sorry i should have been more specific. the chainstay pivot evades the fsr patent by a mere 5mm, sitting within rocky mountain's patent. the new design has sparked a lot of debate.
  • Previous Page

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.055111
Mobile Version of Website