First T3 TSS 18 ever ......

[NightDrifter05 10+ year member]

Aren't there like four JD's posting on this forum? Frankly, its hard to tell who the right one is //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

I'm not to sure if the one that posted is actually the real JD. I mean he didn't threaten to sue anybody or throw away any subwoofers.

 

[denim 5,000+ posts]

Another good read.

 

[profundus-sanus 10+ year member]

I'm not to sure if the one that posted is actually the real JD. I mean he didn't threaten to sue anybody or throw away any subwoofers.

def wasn't the real one then

 

[ciaonzo 5,000+ posts]

I've got a hunch that was the real JD.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Good to see the real guy posting, thanks for the clarification. There's soo many impersonations of your name.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif
May have over-exagerated by saying "lol in face" but thats how it seemed to me.

I will still stand by T3 not going anywhere come the 6.5 year mark. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/veryhappy.gif.fec4fed33b4a1279cf10bdd45a039dae.gif

Who said T3 was going anywhere, in 6.5 years, or at any time? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

You dont seem to be contributing anything beyond the 'heresay' in this thread, and making bold statements for a company whom you obviously dont speak for. So... why are you trying to speak for them? Are you just that big of a T3 fan, or do you have a personal involvement in this discussion? So far you just look like a rabid fan.

I knew I should have offered $50 to have this thread deleted.

 

[Corey J. 10+ year member]

This is just dumb...........I was posting about a new sub i got and this shit became of it ! What a stupid way to ruin a thread ..........dumb ***** .........TY very little ! There is NO reason to take it to this level .........FN haters !

 

[80INCHES 5,000+ posts]

Audiopulse went under not TC... As far as I'm awar TC will be back up in a couple months using the same basket with color options and it will be readily available like it was back then. I know plenty of people who still buy baskets, top assmblies and woofers from TC including myself.
What they had was a fire sale to get rid of Audioulse.

whoa how did u know this...only a few folks knew about that...

but anyway....i hope thilo comes out like he did be4 he started jacking prices to the moon ...when everyone can get a high quality sub for a dam good price

when the lms5400 15 was costing 4and change not 8and change

ahhh the good ol days...cmon thilo u can do it..i know u still have connects

80

 

[hornedfrog1985 5,000+ posts]

Honestly I'm excited to see what T3 has to offer.

 

[JohnathanDemuth]

Just another little note for those who second guess our rights. Does anyone realize who owns the "10 and 12" patent or the actual toolings??

Copies from the U.S. Patent Office are below.

Notice where it directs you to the fact that it only protects the general ornaental design and pattern of appearance. It does not protect the structural or utilitarian features.

These two patents are a mistake and actually should have been one in the same. So the way I see it, they can use ours and we can use theirs....Not to mention our 4 years of branding with it already..... and the THOUSANDS of baskets we stock.

U.S. Department of Commerce

Patent and Trademark Office

--Patents

Commissioner for Patents

P.O. Box 1450

Alexandria, VA 22313-1450

Definition of a Design

A design consists of the visual ornamental characteristics embodied in, or applied to, an article of manufacture. Since a design is manifested in appearance, the subject matter of a design patent application may relate to the configuration or shape of an article, to the surface ornamentation applied to an article, or to the combination of configuration and surface ornamentation. A design for surface ornamentation is inseparable from the article to which it is applied and cannot exist alone. It must be a definite pattern of surface ornamentation, applied to an article of manufacture.

In discharging its patent-related duties, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO or Office) examines applications and grants patents on inventions when applicants are entitled to them. The patent law provides for the granting of design patents to any person who has invented any new, original and ornamental design for an article of manufacture. A design patent protects only the appearance of the article and not structural or utilitarian features. The principal statutes (United States Code) governing design patents are:

35 U.S.C. 171

35 U.S.C. 172

35 U.S.C. 173

35 U.S.C. 102

35 U.S.C. 103

35 U.S.C. 112

35 U.S.C. 132

As I said, we are very prepared for whatever we must do to protect our patents, our rights and our hard work for 4 years of branding a name.

Respectfully,

Johnathan

 

[JohnathanDemuth]

Regardless of what readers may think, my comments and actions have always been respectful toward all parties involved. All of which I personally appreciate and consider friends in the industry. The feeling may not be mutual, but this is how I feel. A simple phone return call and a handshake could solve a lot.....

Scott should return my calls.

Respectfully,

Johnathan

 

[NDMstang65 10+ year member]

Just another little note for those who second guess our rights. Does anyone realize who owns the "10 and 12" patent now? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif How about the actual toolings??
Copies from the U.S. Patent Office are below.

Notice where it directs you to the fact that it only protects the general ornaental design and pattern of appearance. It does not protect the structural or utilitarian features.

These two patents are a mistake and actually should have been one in the same. So the way I see it, they can use ours and we can use theirs....Not to mention our 4 years of branding with it already..... and the THOUSANDS of baskets we stock.

U.S. Department of Commerce

Patent and Trademark Office

--Patents

Commissioner for Patents

P.O. Box 1450

Alexandria, VA 22313-1450

Definition of a Design

A design consists of the visual ornamental characteristics embodied in, or applied to, an article of manufacture. Since a design is manifested in appearance, the subject matter of a design patent application may relate to the configuration or shape of an article, to the surface ornamentation applied to an article, or to the combination of configuration and surface ornamentation. A design for surface ornamentation is inseparable from the article to which it is applied and cannot exist alone. It must be a definite pattern of surface ornamentation, applied to an article of manufacture.

In discharging its patent-related duties, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO or Office) examines applications and grants patents on inventions when applicants are entitled to them. The patent law provides for the granting of design patents to any person who has invented any new, original and ornamental design for an article of manufacture. A design patent protects only the appearance of the article and not structural or utilitarian features. The principal statutes (United States Code) governing design patents are:

35 U.S.C. 171

35 U.S.C. 172

35 U.S.C. 173

35 U.S.C. 102

35 U.S.C. 103

35 U.S.C. 112

35 U.S.C. 132

As I said, we are very prepared for whatever we must do to protect our patents, our rights and our hard work for 4 years of branding a name.

Respectfully,

Johnathan

Should have been one and the same patents and are one in the same are two completely different stories. The courts will see two different appearances (As one is a 4 leg, and one is a 6 leg which in an appearance patent is obviously different in appearance which is why there are two separate patents) as well as two unique patent numbers that are different. You may own the 4 spoke appearance, which is not any concern of ours; have fun with it. You do not own the 6 spoke appearance. (D451499 is different than D455733, the first of which you do not own because it is a different patent number and a different design than the second of which, you may very well own D455733 and I applaud you for purchasing it, however they are different patents and that is how they are filed) The "Grandfathering" angle that you may attempt to use is great the only problem with that is that grandfathering of any intellectual property is only taken into account if one used a design prior to the design being filed and patented (Which your company wasn't even a thought in your mind when that took place). After which you could only hold a license to use it. However, when one sells a patent they sell the original patent that was filed, not the licensing or agreements that the original patent holder agreed to. So, if it does go back to the original state of the patent that it was issued in once the patent was sold...that means you have to get licensing from the new owner of the intellectual property in order to use it without having legal issues. Because, It is two unique and separate patent numbers, Two unique and separate appearances.

http://beta.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/assign.htm
"The assignee, when the patent is assigned to him or her, becomes the owner of the patent and has the same rights that the original patentee had."

"The owner of a patent may grant licenses to others. Since the patentee has the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale or selling or importing the invention, no one else may do any of these things without his/her permission. A patent license agreement is in essence nothing more than a promise by the licensor not to sue the licensee. No particular form of license is required; a license is a contract and may include whatever provisions the parties agree upon, including the payment of royalties, etc."

Regards,
[/QUOTE]

 

[PsychoTheRapist 5,000+ posts]

When the shit goes down, you better be ready! (you better be ready)

 

[JohnathanDemuth]

Should have been one and the same patents and are one in the same are two completely different stories. The courts will see two different appearances (As one is a 4 leg, and one is a 6 leg which in an appearance patent is obviously different in appearance which is why there are two separate patents) as well as two unique patent numbers that are different. You may own the 4 spoke appearance, which is not any concern of ours; have fun with it. You do not own the 6 spoke appearance. (D451499 is different than D455733, the first of which you do not own because it is a different patent number and a different design than the second of which, you may very well own D455733 and I applaud you for purchasing it, however they are different patents and that is how they are filed) The "Grandfathering" angle that you may attempt to use is great the only problem with that is that grandfathering of any intellectual property is only taken into account if one used a design prior to the design being filed and patented (Which your company wasn't even a thought in your mind when that took place). After which you could only hold a license to use it. However, when one sells a patent they sell the original patent that was filed, not the licensing or agreements that the original patent holder agreed to. So, if it does go back to the original state of the patent that it was issued in once the patent was sold...that means you have to get licensing from the new owner of the intellectual property in order to use it without having legal issues. Because, It is two unique and separate patent numbers, Two unique and separate appearances.


Regards,

Also, It would be a shame to bankrupt ones self to spend the endless amounts of money in bringing a federal patent lawsuit that is not warranted nor needed.

We should all get along..... and I feel that the two parties involved should be discussing this..... not their engineer or employee.

Respectfully,

Johnathan

 

[JL Audio 5,000+ posts]

Also, It would be a shame to bankrupt ones self to spend the endless amounts of money in bringing a federal patent lawsuit that is not warranted nor needed.We should all get along..... and I feel that the two parties involved should be discussing this..... not their engineer or employee.

Respectfully,

Johnathan

have you been outside to wax the old dumpster yet?

 

[NDMstang65 10+ year member]

And another quote:
A design patent application may only have a single claim (37 CFR § 1.153). Designs that are independent and distinct must be filed in separate applications since they cannot be supported by a single claim. Designs are independent if there is no apparent relationship between two or more articles. For example, a pair of eyeglasses and a door handle are independent articles and must be claimed in separate applications. Designs are considered distinct if they have different shapes and appearances even though they are related articles. For example, two vases having different surface ornamentation creating distinct appearances must be claimed in separate applications. However, modified forms, or embodiments of a single design concept may be filed in one application. For example, vases with only minimal configuration differences may be considered a single design concept and both embodiments may be included in a single application.

Regardless of what readers may think, my comments and actions have always been respectful toward all parties involved. All of which I personally appreciate and consider friends in the industry. The feeling may not be mutual, but this is how I feel. A simple phone return call and a handshake could solve a lot.....

Respectfully,

Johnathan

A tire is a tire, a basket is a basket, a door knob, is indeed a door knob.

That is all correct, But.

It has two different patent numbers, and two different appearances. One has more than a 10% variance in change than the other one does, which is why it had to be filed under two unique and separate patent numbers because it is looked at as two separate designs.

One of which, your name is not on, has never been on, and never will be on.

Also, It would be a shame to bankrupt ones self to spend the endless amounts of money in bringing a federal patent lawsuit that is not warranted nor needed.We should all get along..... and I feel that the two parties involved should be discussing this..... not their engineer or employee.

Respectfully,

Johnathan

We should all get along...cool concept. You should take that one to the holy land that hundreds religions have been fighting for for thousands of years and see how that works out for you.

Regards,