Vanes - feedback

kokes

New member
Hi,
I was challenged by one member here. He holds a UK issued patent for flexible attach vanes, worldwide.

UK patent office made matters little easier on itself and ignored my prior art. They just issued it. I need to have it revoked within 18 months. Can someone chime in with an advice? I published the invention in multiple places, including youtube. I have also sent several pieces into the USA and perhaps elsewhere for third party testing back then, and I gave out some around here. If the vanes don't go, the turbine won't get its popularity, and it will hinder the energetics. It crucially important to many of us, if not most.

Inventors will not be inventing as much while others are allowed to patent against them. It is not a good motivation.
Jan Kokes

This is from 2016 vvv
screenshot2.png screenshot.png
 

Timid Toad

Moderator
Staff member
Supporter
Fonz Awardee
Ironman
If you can demonstrate that your design is different (because, lets face it the patent holder can't patent someone putting 2 or 3 fletchings on a shaft) you won't be in breach.
 

kokes

New member
Timid Toad, my friend, you are the best. I just went through technicalities:

The body is reversibly deformable such that a friction fit is provided between the body and an arrow shaft when the body is engaged with an arrow shaft. This allows the device to be easily and quickly removed and replaced on an arrow shaft.

This to me means device patented is meant not to be glued. My vanes, on the other hand, provide convenient grooves to squirt a superglue into.

So the vanes as I have them are ok. Broadheads are ok, should I do them (not any time soon). The sliding front mounted vanes are not ok, and that is a shame, since I am, as far as I know, the first person to ever have tested the idea. Sort of like a pioneering research. So I will still want to renounce the patent. It will cost me some and maybe more. From my, inventor's point of view, I'd say that the patents are an efficient obstacle. Good for a company that needs to rise its value, yes, but for progress, worthless. Worse. There are very few inventors that are also businessmen, and there are very few businessmen who are also inventors. Patents are good for businessmen.

edited typo.
 

kokes

New member
I had four more designs to choose from today. They all avoid the known patent issues. Against my own invention. Yuck. I gladly chose one design. I find it much better. It felt very satisfying. I have done some rudimentary functional testing, and I modeled a rough sketch to make sure they won't gain much weight. As for sizes, I think I can start by perfect fit for X10 and continue with other arrow shafts, always perfect fit. Clients will be choosing their arrow shaft from types available in a menu. Or suggest a new type. That's all. Thank you for the inputs. I am back at square one in some sense, but it was indeed important to me, and strangely satisfying, too. I had been looking forward to it for a very long time.
 

tabashir

Supporter
Supporter
Glad to hear you moving forward. A few comments on the patent issue.

Note, I'm not a lawyer. I qualified as one 30 years ago but decided I wanted to make things instead :)

1 - In almost any dispute, it is almost always better to negotiate a solution without resorting to lawyers. It will cost both sides a lot less and still leaves the lawyer option on the table if need be.

2 - The patent seems to have been applied for in 2020. Your YouTube video clearly shows that your design was in progress and published, at least in part in 2017.

3 - From the EPO's own website at: EPO - What is prior art?
"Prior art is any evidence that your invention is already known. Prior art does not need to exist physically or be commercially available. It is enough that someone, somewhere, sometime previously has described or shown or made something that contains a use of technology that is very similar to your invention."
Note this is a summary, not a legal statute or judgement, but it shows the principle that they will be applying.

4 - This would, in my opinion, make it very difficult for the patent holder to rely on the patent in your case, and in fact I believe in doing so, they would open themselves completely up to getting the patent set aside. The reason being that if they argue that your device is the same as the patent, then clearly your device, having been disclosed some time before the application would count as direct prior art by their own admission.
If alternatively they tried to argue that their patent is novel or different from yours, then by definition, the patent would not apply anyway.

5 - There is a lot in that patent. It could be that although there is some prior art in your case, for the majority of their filing, what they claim is perfectly valid. For this reason, although what you have already done you would have a defence for, if you change that too much and it starts to resemble the device in the filing, then you could run into problems.

I re-iterate that I'm not a lawyer, getting some proper legal advice would be advisable if the patent holder decides to take it further.
 

kokes

New member
That is what I figured. I didn't realize the extent, that I cannot be sued, really. So I don't need to knock the patent off. So now what do I do. I have designed sub-grain vanes meanwhile. They are lighter and they will grip the bow string. ?
1grainvanes.png
 
Top