Carl wrote:
I'm not a patent law guy either, but the devil is in the details...or more specifically, the claims...their
specific claims. If they claim a stiffening mechanism associated with the bladder, for example, then that's one thing you can't do (without requesting to license their design). There's more to it than that, but hopefully you get the gist.
It is also in what the patent holder is willing to fight for and make concessions for in terms of payment / recognition.
Example - the "Horst Link" patent called for two essential elements; 1) a chainstay pivot near the rear dropout
and 2) a pivot above and behind the BB shell.
Specialized chooses to focus on the first element only when enforcing this patent and zealously goes after anyone with a chainstay pivot on their bikes, even if the contested design does not have a BB pivot above and behind the BB shell. IOW, if you had a BB pivot that below and in front of the BB, you would not be violating their patent, even if you have a chainstay pivot....but you can bet you would hear directly from Specialized's lawyers very quickly.
But then Specialized offers up very low "licensing" deals that makes disputing their allegations essentially pointless. You'd spend more money trying to prove you were right than you would ever pay in licensing fees.
Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!! "If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams
