This came up from the most recent PowerCranks thread. Anyway, it seems this idea has caught some attention. So what say you, copy? Improvement? Flattery by imitation?
from what I can tell the differences between this and power-cranks are Locking feature and color. Otherwise, I think all the pro/con argument would be the same as it is for PCs.
For all we know PC and SC are somehow aligned with each other. At any rate, I don’t think a discussion would really be any more enlightening than the usual PC vs anti-PC group.
This came up from the most recent PowerCranks thread. Anyway, it seems this idea has caught some attention. So what say you, copy? Improvement? Flattery by imitation?
http://www.smartcranks.com/main.html
SmartCranks are simply ripping off the patent and they know it. they wanted to license my patent and get exclusive rights to all of Europe and offered me all of $1000 a year for that privilege. When I turned them down they did SmartCranks. For those of you who think I am a crook, these guys are the real deal. As soon as (or shortly thereafter) my European patent issues they will be out of business.
funny thing is that they mention that smartcranks increase rpms…
which goes against what any PCer has experienced…
PC’s increase RPM’s when people go back to regular cranks. That doesn’t mean they are more efficient or faster. In fact, it is a big problem from a racing perspective, which is why people are starting to race on their PC’s, to make sure they stay within their PC capabilities.
The lock-out feature looks like an advantage but actually hurts the product from a training perspective. Of course, it is an advantage from a rehab perspective which is why we offer it also.
For those of you who think I am a crook, these guys are the real deal
Ah, the ripping off of intellectual property. Sad, but common. A trip to Shanghai will prove that. I don’t think anyone here thinks you are a crook, some might just think you are a crank… 
Frank…crooks aside, I like their “locking feature”. This is something that I asked of you two years ago and I still think it is useful today. If smartcranks were available 2 years ago, I would have given them some serious consideration !
Actually Frank, in this day and age, there are very few companies that start/invent something ‘new’ without having consulted many lawyers specializing in patents. I’m sure this company has done that… the fact that they offered you a mere $1000 per year is partial proof. If they were serious, their offer would have been more… um… ‘sincere’. Their lawyers probably said anything over $12,000 per year, let’s go to court. Unless their angles of engagement are EXACTLY the same as PCs, you’re going to be throwing out a good deal of money on litigation. Just the fact that SmartCranks has a locking feature… well… I’d suggest you consult YOUR lawyers before you start talking about who is going out of business… might be throwing more ‘inaccurate’ info out there!!
JB
Frank…crooks aside, I like their “locking feature”. This is something that I asked of you two years ago and I still think it is useful today. If smartcranks were available 2 years ago, I would have given them some serious consideration !
If you had done that you wouldn’t have transitioned and be as good as you are today. People who use the lock-out feature regularly for those long rides seem to never get beyond the 2 hour endurance stage. How does tat help an IM athlete?
We do sell our share of lock-outs to athletes. Usually the serious ones who are scared by the transition stories and are afraid of losing fitness. We don’t think most need it but it is available for those who want them. And SmartCranks were available 2 years ago. They thought everyone would flock to them if theycould just undersell us. Didn’t happen. And now with the weak dollar they can’t even undersell us. My “spies” tell me they may not be in business much longer.
Actually Frank, in this day and age, there are very few companies that start/invent something ‘new’ without having consulted many lawyers specializing in patents. I’m sure this company has done that… the fact that they offered you a mere $1000 per year is partial proof. If they were serious, their offer would have been more… um… ‘sincere’. Their lawyers probably said anything over $12,000 per year, let’s go to court. Unless their angles of engagement are EXACTLY the same as PCs, you’re going to be throwing out a good deal of money on litigation. Just the fact that SmartCranks has a locking feature… well… I’d suggest you consult YOUR lawyers before you start talking about who is going out of business… might be throwing more ‘inaccurate’ info out there!!
They know they are violating the patent. changing the color or adding a feature doesn’t invalidate my patent. My patent is very broad. They are counting on the fact that litigation is expensive so not worth the effort. They chose the wrong sucker. They will lose when I choose to pursue it and they know it. I don’t have to make my case to you or anyone else here. I know the facts and they do also. As soon as the suits start to fly they will quit, if they don’t quit on their own behalf before then. If they choose to fight, so be it.
Frank
Frank. I do agree that my “transition would be longer”. That being said once adapted, the lock out feature would be nice, especially for “B” and “C” races, where you might choose to leave the cranks on rather than swapping back and forth :-).
In any event, if you have patented the “concept” of decoupled cranks much like Scott did with the “Aero Position”, you would be in a strong position (at least that is what my collegues on the IP side of the house have to say, and they represent all the biggest semiconductor companies in the world, so they know a thing or two about “broad” patents). If the actual implementation is patented, there tend to be ways of getting around those patents.
In any event, you might be better off cross licensing your patent to all the big crank makers, broaden your market share, and bring down the price to all consumers and get a nice chunk of royalties, much like Scott USA did with the likes of Profile, Syntace and others. Everyone wins
are these the models that you advertise for the rev-master? I didn’t think those would work on a regular bike.
I suppose it would be worth it to someone who only had one bike and didn’t want to change out the cranks for a B or C race.
“They will lose when I choose to pursue it and they know it.”
So… you’ve waited for TWO YEARS already… when ya going to pull the trigger there big dog?? Frank, you really are tooooooo much sometimes!! I’m pretty sure you HAVE talked to your lawyers haven’t you… bet they gave you an ‘estimate’ of what it is going to cost you to get to court didn’t they?? Lots of zeros hu?? Did they also mention that the longer you wait, the less of a case you are going to have… especially being that you have KNOWN about their product the whole time??
If nothing else Frank, you do provide some ‘entertainment’ here!!
Take Care!!
JB
Hey Frank
I read all the power crank posts because I think they get very funny. Now I will never know if your cranks will make me fast then I am, I’m doing fine with out PC. But you would do you self a big service and make a better reputation for your self if you would lay off all the “PC’s will make you leap over tall building in 4 months” stories
Lay off the pie in the sky stuff!
bikedude…
Frank, what exactly does your patent entail? Any way for it to be posted here, or accessed some other way? Are the smartcranks not patented as well then? Meaning, I could take apart their cranks to figure out what they are doing and build them myself and the only person to worry about might be you…in a couple years 
?
My patent simply consists of placing a one way clutch in each crank arm to turn the cranks into independent cranks. You can read the entire thing here:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?TERM1=5860329&Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=0&f=S&l=50
SmartCranks claim to have a patented locking mechanism. Big deal. Even this isn’t what it seems as my attorney tells me that the Swiss tend to issue patents willy nilly and then only do searches once a conflict arises. The locking mechanism does not get around my more basic patent as it is added on, not simpler. Further, a patent does not protect you from people making their own, as long as they don’t sell them and it only protects you in the country in which it is issued. Anyone here is welcome to read the patent then to make their own pair for their own use without worrying about me coming after them. It is only when you sell them that you violate the patent.
I currently have patents in the US, australia, Canada, and Japan. All of Europe is currently pending. Once I get the European approval I must then go to the expense of having it filed (including translations) for each country I want protection in. It is not an inexpensive process but it is the only protection against the crooks. If I weren’t going after petents in these other countries SmartCranks would be perfectly legal there and all I could do is prevent him from importing them into the US, if a US patent is all I held. When one gets a patent one must decide on the potential value of it. I decided this was a basic (difficult to design around) and important device and am getting patents in a large portion of the civilized world.
Further, a patent does not protect you from people making their own, as long as they don’t sell them
Not entirely correct–to fill you in on your rights, a patent gives the holder (I think that would be you) the right to exclude others from making, using, or selling the invention claimed.
Of course, whether or not it is practical to pursue individuals making copies of your invention is another thing entirely.
Further, a patent does not protect you from people making their own, as long as they don’t sell them
Not entirely correct–to fill you in on your rights, a patent gives the holder (I think that would be you) the right to exclude others from making, using, or selling the invention claimed.
Of course, whether or not it is practical to pursue individuals making copies of your invention is another thing entirely.
You might be right but I thought it was similar to record copyright. You may make copies for individual use but not distribute them, even if for free (NAPSTER). It doesn’t matter. Anyone here want to make one pair for your own personal use, you have my permission. Good luck.
Frank,
Regardless of whether people like you and your product or dislike you and your product… this sucks. You worked hard to develop and market your invention… have devoted your life to it. Best of luck to you. Hope you get your European patent and put them out of business. The American way…
Good luck!!!
Andy
Frank, why don’t you patent the process of riding a bicycle with independent cranks, which you have invented. This seems like it would be a far more “all encompassing” patent. As mentioned, this would be like Scott patenting the concept of riding a bike in the aero position (from what I understand, their patent was not for the original Scott DH aerobar, but for the position that it put the rider in).
this would be like Scott patenting the concept of riding a bike in the aero position (from what I understand, their patent was not for the original Scott DH aerobar, but for the position that it put the rider in).
How did that work out for Scott?
You know what this all means, don’t you?
We’d all better RUN out and BUY SMARTCRANKS NOW before they go out of business!!! Or then again, hold off from buying PCs now, in hopes of getting those SmartCranks at a fire sale discount later.
Either way, thanks for the tip, Frank!