pardon my ignorance, but i am so confused by all these new rules floating around about the jammers. what is going on, why cant we discusss certain jammers and which are affected?
sorry about this, its really bothering me
pardon my ignorance, but i am so confused by all these new rules floating around about the jammers. what is going on, why cant we discusss certain jammers and which are affected?
sorry about this, its really bothering me
apparently it's summat to do with an anonymous company threatening legal action over something they've never proven in court.
Read the rule here:
http://www.radardetector.net/Confere...nes-19917t.php
Talk about your laser jammer(s) till your heart is content, just don't recommend one...
RadarBusters.com
Motorcycle Mounts and Accessories
Also Join me at -
Twitter: RadarRoy
Facebook: Roy Reyer
Legal action was never pending, read my post. It was our legal advisor that recommend it to avoid it legal actionOriginally Posted by charles charlie charles
RadarBusters.com
Motorcycle Mounts and Accessories
Also Join me at -
Twitter: RadarRoy
Facebook: Roy Reyer
ok, i was under the impression that certain jammers could not even be mentioned.
but say i post a thread like "which should i get, blinder or lpp", basically nobody can tell me which to get because that is breaking the rule?
I hope there is some closure either way. WE are the ones suffering worrying about what we can and can not say. If a company feels strongly that their product does not violate a patent then they should prove it.
RIP Duncan my BELOVED black lab son 8/7/99-3/23/11. I will miss you DEARLY.
http://www.criminalcustomzshop.com/
LET THE BIRTH OF MANY TESTING GROUPS HAPPEN!
You want to know what it is like doing something for the love and passion and not for the mighty dollar then look up GOL!
buyradardetectors rocks!
I'm sure that will come at some point, but the people that they have to prove it to is not to us, but the people that they alledge infringe on their patent.Originally Posted by happya$$
RadarBusters.com
Motorcycle Mounts and Accessories
Also Join me at -
Twitter: RadarRoy
Facebook: Roy Reyer
Actually,
The people they have to prove infringement to, is a US Court.
Specifically US District Court at the lowest level.
Blinder or Lidatek can allege that X, Y, or Z "infringes" on their patent.
(I mention Blinder and/or Lidatek simply because they hold 1 and 3
patents as assignees - that I've been able to find - we can throw in
Veil as they hold one specific patent on "the green stuff" - aka LIDAR
absorbing coatings)
X, Y, or Z can allege that they "don't infringe".
Until a court of proper jurisdiction RULES that some device infringes
on the patent, it doesn't infringe. Legally, that is.
Until it's adjuducated it's a "Purse Fight" - nothing more, nothing less.
Until a US Court rules on the infringement of a US Patent, Roy is at no
legal risk, and whomever is telling him otherwise needs to send their
"legal degree" back to K-Mart. Furthermore, since he doesn't SELL,
doesn't allow SALE, and doesn't promote sale himself of any of these
other jammers - I fail to see any cause against him.
Some "lawyer" is very unfamilair with the law as it applies to the internet.
Further, if someone is hit with a patent infringement suit, the first thing
they should do is request a re-examination of said patent(s) by the USPTO.
A re-examination is cheap, there are 1000's of reasons that can be found
to invalidate a patent.
Further, a device can LOOK like it infringes on this or that patent, but upon
closer examination does not.
I'll take coatings for example.. a coating with a different absorber chemistry,
or a different concentration of absorber, or other differences WOULD NOT
be infringing. Veil should blame this on whomever wrote the claims in
their patent app, not someone who wants to make a better product.
It seems that a few companies are thriving by trying to use threats of
patent litigation to quash legitimate continuance of the art. That is total
and unabashed BS which seriously calls for a return to "Western Justice". :twisted:
Cheers to Roy for dealing with this BS in any case!
Jim C.
Excellent post Jim C. I think Roy is just a businessman who doesn't want his competition promoted, or validated in any way on his web sight. I can somewhat understand this concept as a businessman myself. Except all of the legal crap that (as Jim C. said) doesn't even make good sense. I wish Roy didn't hide behind all the patent law mumbo jumbo, and just came right out and said I don't want my competition looking too good on my sight. Period. I'd respect that way more.
Those that don't remember history are destined to repeat it.
The world's history is full of examples were attempts where made to silence the people. Eventaully the "Truth" does come out.
Something to think about........"patent queens".......... :wink:
Bookmarks