![]() |
Speed Worms
I heard an interesting little rumor while at the Bassmaster Classic. It
seems that one company decided to get into the soft frog market and made one that was really close to Horny Toads. Zoom had a "Cease and Desist" order issued and production was stopped. However the company that wanted to sell the frogs holds the patent on the speed worm tail design. They in turn had a Cease and Desist order taken out for the Speed Worms by Zoom. I don't know if this is true for certain, but I did hear it from several different sources. So, if you like Speed Worms, you might want to stock up now while they're still available. -- Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers http://www.outdoorfrontiers.com G & S Guide Service and Custom Rods http://www.herefishyfishy.com |
Speed Worms
If that's the case, then there will be a bunch of fighting going on.
The Horny toad made by Zoom also uses the speedworm tail on it's legs. Not sure if it's identical, but it sure is close. Now you also have Mann's who uses a new frog with similiar legs. They also use the tough heads which is something I thought up way before Mann's ever used them( believe it or not). But who knows, they may have been designing it for years. I think it will be so hard for anyone to issue a cease and dissest order on something like that due to the fact that it can be modified ever so slightly that it absolutely keeps any copyright infringement out of the works.. me thinks at least. Anyway, I love speedworms and always keep a huge supply of them on hand. they produce many many fish. "Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers" wrote in message ... I heard an interesting little rumor while at the Bassmaster Classic. It seems that one company decided to get into the soft frog market and made one that was really close to Horny Toads. Zoom had a "Cease and Desist" order issued and production was stopped. However the company that wanted to sell the frogs holds the patent on the speed worm tail design. They in turn had a Cease and Desist order taken out for the Speed Worms by Zoom. I don't know if this is true for certain, but I did hear it from several different sources. So, if you like Speed Worms, you might want to stock up now while they're still available. -- Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers http://www.outdoorfrontiers.com G & S Guide Service and Custom Rods http://www.herefishyfishy.com |
Speed Worms
OhioFishking wrote:
I think it will be so hard for anyone to issue a cease and dissest order on something like that due to the fact that it can be modified ever so slightly that it absolutely keeps any copyright infringement out of the works.. me thinks at least. That depends a lot on whether it's a design patent or a utility patent. If the latter, the protection is pretty strong. It also protects against modifications and adaptations that it 'teaches' to anyone 'skilled in the art'. But I believe the original patent was a design patent, so it may not have as much stopping power. Its existence though, should negate Zoom's claim. Patent law is a funny thing though, and this one will likely come down to who has the determination, endurance and pocketbook to outlast the other in court. |
Speed Worms
"RichZ" wrote in message SNIP Patent law is a funny thing though, and this one will likely come down to who has the determination, endurance and pocketbook to outlast the other in court. That seemed to be the general consensus down in Birmingham too, but it might make availability of speed worms a problem for a while. That's why I thought I'd let people know to stock up until things get sorted out -- Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers http://www.outdoorfrontiers.com G & S Guide Service and Custom Rods http://www.herefishyfishy.com |
Speed Worms
Rich, you seem to be the layman patent guy, so I have a couple of questions:
1) What about all the lures that are virtually identical to the Senko? 2) What about a company like Lurecraft, which makes a mold for a Horny Toad-like lure and even uses the Horny Toad name in its catalog? http://www.lurecraft.com/catalog.cfm...ogs/5x821:1908 "RichZ" wrote in message ... OhioFishking wrote: I think it will be so hard for anyone to issue a cease and dissest order on something like that due to the fact that it can be modified ever so slightly that it absolutely keeps any copyright infringement out of the works.. me thinks at least. That depends a lot on whether it's a design patent or a utility patent. If the latter, the protection is pretty strong. It also protects against modifications and adaptations that it 'teaches' to anyone 'skilled in the art'. But I believe the original patent was a design patent, so it may not have as much stopping power. Its existence though, should negate Zoom's claim. Patent law is a funny thing though, and this one will likely come down to who has the determination, endurance and pocketbook to outlast the other in court. |
Speed Worms
Marty wrote:
Rich, you seem to be the layman patent guy, so I have a couple of questions: I'm not Rick, but I know patent law better than most, as I deal with it daily 1) What about all the lures that are virtually identical to the Senko? Gary never filed for a patent on the Senko, he didn't think it was worth one,, it took 6 years of almost zero sales before the Senko took off, then it was too late to file for a patent. 2) What about a company like Lurecraft, which makes a mold for a Horny Toad-like lure and even uses the Horny Toad name in its catalog? They "could be" in some AWESOME trouble, (there is patent case law where you can't instruct, or provide assistance to anyone for the purpose of infringement) if Zoom goes after them,, there again they could have invented the thing for Zoom, and part of the deal is to allow them to sell the molds to individuals, or they could have even licensed the design from Zoom, as Zoom knows less than 1/10 of a percent of fishermen mold their own lures, or Zoom just does not think it's worth the effort to go after them. Of course Zoom may not even know about Lurecraft and their catalog. Using the "name" Horny Toad, violates Zoom's Trade Mark, unless they have permission -- Rodney Long, Inventor of the Mojo SpecTastic "WIGGLE" rig, SpecTastic Thread, Nutri Shield insect repellent. ,Stand Out Hooks ,Stand Out Lures, Mojo's Rock Hopper & Rig Saver weights, and the EZKnot http://www.ezknot.com |
Speed Worms
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 11:19:59 -0600, "Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers"
wrote: "RichZ" wrote in message SNIP Patent law is a funny thing though, and this one will likely come down to who has the determination, endurance and pocketbook to outlast the other in court. That seemed to be the general consensus down in Birmingham too, but it might make availability of speed worms a problem for a while. That's why I thought I'd let people know to stock up until things get sorted out Yeah you ****ing spammer.......stock up folks from my spam site.....here`s the link.........By golly!! |
Speed Worms
What does this mean for someone who wants to start a lure-making
business. If they build up an inventory of lures that look like a brand name, are they going to get hit with patent infringement lawsuits until they go under? 2) What about a company like Lurecraft, which makes a mold for a Horny Toad-like lure and even uses the Horny Toad name in its catalog? They "could be" in some AWESOME trouble, (there is patent case law where you can't instruct, or provide assistance to anyone for the purpose of infringement) if Zoom goes after them,, there again they could have invented the thing for Zoom, and part of the deal is to allow them to sell the molds to individuals, or they could have even licensed the design from Zoom, as Zoom knows less than 1/10 of a percent of fishermen mold their own lures, or Zoom just does not think it's worth the effort to go after them. Of course Zoom may not even know about Lurecraft and their catalog. |
Speed Worms
"Greg Lumpkin" wrote in message
oups.com... What does this mean for someone who wants to start a lure-making business. If they build up an inventory of lures that look like a brand name, are they going to get hit with patent infringement lawsuits until they go under? Look and feel lawsuits are tough to win, but they can still eat you up with legal costs. Microsoft is very good at this type of tactic. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Speed Worms
Greg Lumpkin wrote:
What does this mean for someone who wants to start a lure-making business. If they build up an inventory of lures that look like a brand name, are they going to get hit with patent infringement lawsuits until they go under? If they build lures that are under "active" patents, the answer is yes, and only "one" lawsuit, on just one lure, will put them under. Most new lure companies are based on their own "new" lure designs, they can't compete with the major companies, why try to, unless you can sell something they can't ? What if you come up the the be all catch all lure, you file for a patent to "protect" your lure from others profiting from it (cost you thousands to get that patent issued), after all, your the one who came up with it. and start a little company making them, it is very hard to get your lure into stores, because they don't know you or your company. Then Zoom , who is heavily in the market, they knock off your design and make millions from all "your" work. You sell very few because you just could not compete with Zoom's marketing. This is why we have a patent system, so that inventors can profit from their work. Companies "must" go after "all" infringer's of their patents, even if the little guy can't hurt them in the market, if they don't go after them or license to them, then the BIG companies can freely make and sell their patented items, they can claim that company number one is not defending their patent, thus it is public domain (case law has been made on this , you can't selectively go after infringer's, you just can't go after those with deep pockets, you must go after "all" infringer's, or you could loose your patent rights) -- Rodney Long, Inventor of the Mojo SpecTastic "WIGGLE" rig, SpecTastic Thread, Nutri Shield insect repellent. ,Stand Out Hooks ,Stand Out Lures, Mojo's Rock Hopper & Rig Saver weights, and the EZKnot http://www.ezknot.com |
Speed Worms
|
Speed Worms
I just want to build and market fishing lures. Nothing fancy and I'm
not looking to get rich. I'm not even looking to innovate and set the world on fire, just get paid a little for doing something I like and that cotributes to a hobby that I enjoy. I will come up with my own lure names, etc. I have never imagined building something and claiming it was something else. I wasn't raised that way. In order to build thse lures, I will, most likely be using components from places like Jan's, Barlow's, Lurecraft, etc. I was just woried that if I use their components and build up an inventory of let's say, spinner baits, am I going to get a visit from a lawyer representing Booyah? Greg There is a thing called "in the public domain", those things are not patent enforceable. For example, you and I both carve out custom Mallard duck decoys, they are both identical to a Mallard duck...either one of us would have a hard time enforcing a patent on them. We could however copyright a name "Joe's custom duck decoys"....but the words, custom, duck, and decoys are considered in the public domain, and I could copyright, J&M custom duck decoys. So if you built a lure that imitated a "shad", no problem...you can't patent the "shad" part. But if your's is manufactured in a unique original manner, or has some original unique design, those characteristics would be patentable....enforcement is a whole other ball game though :). I certainly wouldn't be afraid to manufacture and sell lures that looked like other companies lures....but I wouldn't incorporate any of their patentable "uniquely original" features, nor use the unique name they might use. You can't just patent a "frog", a "fish", or a "worm"...unless of course you developed a unique hybrid (I believe there are some (what ever that oriental carp is called) fish that are patented...not sure). This is just a layman's opinion based on several personal "infringement" court battles I have had...and won, I might add :). Both were copyright infringement cases, probably much easier to address than patent claims though. JK |
Speed Worms
Thank you. I have zero understanding of patent and trademark law, although
the subject interests me. There are a lot of crankbaits that look very similar to each other. There are numerous soft jerkbaits that look like a Super Fluke. It seems hard jerkbaits all look like each other. At any rate, let's get back to the Senko. Suppose he patented it. What would be the limit to which an imitation could go? Would we have a Tiki Stick, Stik-o, Yum Dinger, etc? "Rodney Long" wrote in message ... Marty wrote: Rich, you seem to be the layman patent guy, so I have a couple of questions: I'm not Rick, but I know patent law better than most, as I deal with it daily 1) What about all the lures that are virtually identical to the Senko? Gary never filed for a patent on the Senko, he didn't think it was worth one,, it took 6 years of almost zero sales before the Senko took off, then it was too late to file for a patent. 2) What about a company like Lurecraft, which makes a mold for a Horny Toad-like lure and even uses the Horny Toad name in its catalog? They "could be" in some AWESOME trouble, (there is patent case law where you can't instruct, or provide assistance to anyone for the purpose of infringement) if Zoom goes after them,, there again they could have invented the thing for Zoom, and part of the deal is to allow them to sell the molds to individuals, or they could have even licensed the design from Zoom, as Zoom knows less than 1/10 of a percent of fishermen mold their own lures, or Zoom just does not think it's worth the effort to go after them. Of course Zoom may not even know about Lurecraft and their catalog. Using the "name" Horny Toad, violates Zoom's Trade Mark, unless they have permission -- Rodney Long, Inventor of the Mojo SpecTastic "WIGGLE" rig, SpecTastic Thread, Nutri Shield insect repellent. ,Stand Out Hooks ,Stand Out Lures, Mojo's Rock Hopper & Rig Saver weights, and the EZKnot http://www.ezknot.com |
Speed Worms
Marty wrote:
At any rate, let's get back to the Senko. Suppose he patented it. What would be the limit to which an imitation could go? Would we have a Tiki Stick, Stik-o, Yum Dinger, etc? It would depend on the patent that was granted -- Rodney Long, Inventor of the Mojo SpecTastic "WIGGLE" rig, SpecTastic Thread, Nutri Shield insect repellent. ,Stand Out Hooks ,Stand Out Lures, Mojo's Rock Hopper & Rig Saver weights, and the EZKnot http://www.ezknot.com |
Speed Worms
"Rodney Long" wrote in message ... Marty wrote: At any rate, let's get back to the Senko. Suppose he patented it. What would be the limit to which an imitation could go? Would we have a Tiki Stick, Stik-o, Yum Dinger, etc? It would depend on the patent that was granted -- Rodney Long, Inventor of the Mojo SpecTastic "WIGGLE" rig, SpecTastic Thread, Nutri Shield insect repellent. ,Stand Out Hooks ,Stand Out Lures, Mojo's Rock Hopper & Rig Saver weights, and the EZKnot http://www.ezknot.com I think most worms would be hard to patent. Forget the first salt impregnated worm, but the manufacturer figured he could not protect it with a patent, so has a patent on the salt injection application. |
Speed Worms
Calif Bill wrote:
I think most worms would be hard to patent. Forget the first salt impregnated worm, but the manufacturer figured he could not protect it with a patent, so has a patent on the salt injection application. Larew's Salt Craw. He patented it, never enforced it. Two owners of the company later, they did start enforcing it. Collected a licensing fee from everyone using salt, or stopped them. That's why the zoom and other packs say "mfg under patent ###" on them. The patent expired several years ago. The patent wasn't on the means of injecting it, but on the concept of adding it in the first place. Here's a link to the patent. http://shrunklink.com/?ttn |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:00 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2006 FishingBanter