 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Merlin
Date: 2007-01-26 18:53
Is there room for yet another ligature design?
I've just come up with an idea for a ligature design. It'd be flexible, would apply even pressure to the reed, be impossible to over-tighten and not slip off the mouthpiece.
Probably would sell for about $30 USD, without a cap.
Thoughts?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2007-01-26 19:07
Count me in. Send me a sample.
Add "can be applied even when blindfolded".
(If it requires a special kind of cap, by all means include one. I'd rather pay 35$ for a matching kit than hunt for weeks for a suitable complementary cap)
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2007-01-26 19:12
Merlin, OF COURSE, please recall the moustrap, see Kira's thread above [as of now] for my feelings re: this well-plowed field, and a way to [possibly] ?ascertain? its patentability. My usual suggestion concerning a "potentially-patentable" idea, is for you to record your idea in writing/drawing with signature and date, and have someone sign/date as "Read and Understood by". Then you can safely communicate your idea to knowldegable friends/makers etc, and embark on its development. Quite a process, and substantial cost, to ask for issuance of a patent !! Glad to help a bit. Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cuscoclarinet
Date: 2007-01-26 20:15
Merlin,
Don has left out a very important piece of information in his posting regarding an an informal patent. Either the person signing has to be a notary, and place his seal on the drawing accordingly (about $30 or so), or you must seal the "patent" in an envelope, place some sort of "tamper proof" seal across the flap (I've used plain white elmer's glue or a blob of sealing wax before) and mail it to yourself. By this method, the postmark becomes the "official date of patent" and while there are still loopholes, it does afford some insurance in the event of having to take legal action or having legal action taken against you.
Aside from that his advice is solid and, like tictactux, I'd be happy to test your ligature after you've done "patented" it!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Merlin
Date: 2007-01-26 20:45
David Spiegelthal wrote:
> But how does it SOUND, Merlin?
>
> ![[grin]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie5.gif)
>
Depends on what type of floor you drop it on, Dave.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2007-01-26 20:57
Yeah, but the real question is how artistic are the scratches it leaves on the mouthpiece.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Merlin
Date: 2007-01-26 21:09
Ken Shaw wrote:
> Yeah, but the real question is how artistic are the scratches
> it leaves on the mouthpiece.
I believe I can say that this ligature will leave completely different scratch marks (if any) than any other lig on the market.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cuscoclarinet
Date: 2007-01-26 21:54
I designed a lig like that once while in a quick fix. Sadly, a patent attorney friend of mine told me I'd get sued if I started trying to say I invented the rubber band! In the meantime I'm working on a similar design right now. It's adhesive coated cloth that's even silver so noone need to know that it's not a metal lig! (I quack myself up sometimes)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2007-01-26 21:59
Thank You, cuscoclarinet, you are correct in the [prob.?] more "modern" invention/protection methods. I've been retired from corporate patent work for quite a while, so have gotten out-of-date as a pat tech, not atty, I guess. My next bit of advice would be to consult a pat atty, whereby I believe that diligence would result. Its a pleasure to contact a patent-knowlegable clarinetist. Regards,Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Merlin
Date: 2007-01-27 14:09
Mine's certainly not a rubber band. I have a feeling it'll be patentable, but I'm in Canada, so I'm not sure where I should do that.
I designed a lig like that once while in a quick fix. Sadly, a patent attorney friend of mine told me I'd get sued if I started trying to say I invented the rubber band! In the meantime I'm working on a similar design right now. It's adhesive coated cloth that's even silver so noone need to know that it's not a metal lig! (I quack myself up sometimes)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2007-01-27 14:32
I would say that you can patent it in America. I have been searching for a few things that I have created and I have found US patents from many many inventors in Europe. Don't know if they have patents in their own countries too...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2007-01-27 14:45
skygardener wrote:
> Don't know if
> they have patents in their own countries too...
In almost all cases they do ... and it's a major problem for inventors. You have to patent your invention in all the countries you'd like to sell or manufacture in to protect your invention. A patent in a country only protects the invention in that country. It is a very expensive proposition to cover an invention in all countries.
The other drawback to patents is that it is only a document that allows litigation in case of someone infringing - it is not a guarantee of winning the litigation. There are a lot of ways of losing your patent, most of which have to do with you not having as much money as the person or firm infringing. But, once in a while, the little guy wins - and wins big, as Robert Kearns did with the intermittent windshield wiper. After many years, though.
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2005/02/25/005398.html
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2007-01-27 14:54
Mark- "You have to patent your invention in all the countries you'd like to sell or manufacture in to protect your invention."
Yes. That's true. There is also a kind of "world wide" patent coverage that is possible to apply for. It is not really worldwide, but includes a number of participating countries, EU, USA, Canada, Japan, S. Korea and several others.
-s
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2007-01-27 15:04
Since I'm not knowledgable about Canadian patent practice, my advice would be to consult a local pat attorney [or your Patent Office] . Likely they will tell you to file for a Canadian patent, and then if you wish to, file for a US pat [counterpart] preferably within the statutory period [it used to be 1 year, but rules were changed in the 1990's, at least here {US}]. I [we?] did not recognise your location, so much of the advice we gave above may be open to question. 'Nuff [too much?] said. Luck, Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2007-01-27 15:11
skygardener wrote:
> Yes. That's true. There is also a kind of "world wide" patent
> coverage that is possible to apply for.
You're referring to the WIPO Patent Law Treaty I assume. It's not quite a "world-wide" patent but it's a start for protection and harmonization of legal rights.
In any case, for anyone looking for a patent, after doing your own due diligence (to avoid having to pay attorney's fees for basic research that might show that your idea isn't patentable), you'll need to retain a reputable attorney or solicitor to assist. While the documents et al. are all readable and filable by "mere mortals", the language and such on the documents must necessarily be as bullet-proof as possible. It just so happens that I'm going to visit with a friend today who thought he had a patentable idea. After a quick patent search via Google I found a couple of existing patents that would have kept his idea from being patentable. A patent attorney wanted a $1000 retainer to get started - with a little research we avoided that payment.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bruno
Date: 2007-01-27 23:02
Better yet, mail it to yourself "registered mail, return receipt requested", and let the post office smack a rubber stamp "registered mail" over the flaps and envelope joints as they always do.
T.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ljp
Date: 2007-01-28 01:52
The US patent office will patent anything. You just need to be able to afford the lawyers to defend the patent. This might sound cynical, but it reflects current practice. Blackboard recently got a patent on elearning technology that was developed by many institutions and individuals, drug companies patent folk remedies, and lets not forget the patents on genes and gene therapies. I'm preparing a patent application for using organic material to remove fecal matter from the rectum area. I hope to do a joint venture with a law firm; however, I don't know how to keep them from stealing the idea.
Larry Phillips
http://www.clubwebcanada.ca/l-pphillips/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2007-01-28 14:37
Hi L P -Yes, you do sound quite cynical . The US, IMHO, has always been an "examination" country, not a "publication" country in my 20 some years experience as an inventor and engineering tech/pat searcher in our Patent Division. Since many [most?] patents are of an "improvement" character, much of the "specification" must be devoted to the prior art [not being re-patented] with the "whats new and different" given in the claims based upon the "statement of the invention". Please accept my and other's opinions, without "flames", we all have the right to express them. GBK/MC, please edit or delete as you may wish. Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ljp
Date: 2007-01-28 18:23
Don Berger wrote:
>. . . The US, IMHO, has
> always been an "examination" country, not a "publication"
> country in my 20 some years experience as an inventor and
> engineering tech/pat searcher in our Patent Division. Since
> many [most?] patents are of an "improvement" character, much of
> the "specification" must be devoted to the prior art [not being
> re-patented] with the "whats new and different" given in the
> claims based upon the "statement of the invention". . . .
The possibility of patenting a "device for fastening a reed to a clarinet" is being discussed in this thread. The threads discussing litagures and the fact that people have been attaching reeds to clarinets and other woodwinds for a least 200 years using a variety of materials and methods suggest the patent office should assume prior art and reject any and all litagure patents. Further, I doubt there is any part of a clarinet that should be patentable. This is particularly true when the threads indicate "improvement" is a matter of personal perception and essentially can't be established.
The problem is the US patent office will grant patents when there is prior art and those patents are enforcible until they are overturned at considerable expense. Just ask Research in Motion about the Blackberry patents.
Larry Phillips
http://www.clubwebcanada.ca/l-pphillips/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2007-01-28 19:15
ljp wrote:
> Just ask Research in
> Motion about the Blackberry patents.
RIM settled out of court, so nothing was settled in that patent dispute.
Mark C., former partner in a company that sells Blackberrys.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ljp
Date: 2007-01-28 19:47
Mark Charette wrote:
> ljp wrote:
>
> > Just ask Research in
> > Motion about the Blackberry patents.
>
> RIM settled out of court, so nothing was settled in that patent
> dispute.
>
> Mark C., former partner in a company that sells Blackberrys.
Yes NTP and US courts used patents eventually ruled invalid to extort over $600 million from RIM. For those unfamiliar with the case I have attached links to a few articles about the settlement. The idea that invalid patents are enforcible in the US just boggles the mind.
http://nwm.mobilepipeline.com/shared/article/printableArticleSrc.jhtml?articleId=174900039
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11659304/
http://www.techworld.com/mobility/news/index.cfm?NewsID=3913
I do think a discussion of the US patent office is off topic and will refrain from posting follow ups.
Larry Phillips
http://www.clubwebcanada.ca/l-pphillips/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2007-01-28 20:15
TKS Larry, I was considering looking into those litigations. I did much infringment/validity [special/deep] and state-of-art searching, well beyond pre-ex depth, and participated in discovery efforts in a number of suits, and was amazed at the legal complexities and settlement details I was privileged to know. Your ref. to invalid pats is confusing to me, and seems incorrect, but as you said, shouldn't be discussed here, right, MC? Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2007-01-30 22:01
"and reject any and all litagure ...."
Is that a metaphor....!
"Litagure".....a device for fastening a reed to a "mouthpiece" (aka lawyer)
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mk
Date: 2007-01-31 01:48
they should call you merlin the magician if you can pull it off....
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
