Ultimate motor? Patent questions.

[Nappylady]

XBL2 is an Adire brainchild, right? (XBL2 is where they split the voice coil gap in order to attain a more linear BL curve for a given excursion.) And it's patented, right?

I once heard about a voice coil technology that I think JBL patented--where two voice coils are wound on one former in opposite directions, and there are two VC gaps--one in the top plate and one in the bottom plate--so the inductance of the voice coils cancels each other out. Has anyone heard of this? Any linkage?

and of course, *I* have an idea that I think could be used to make a better suspension system that would allow for the same excursion and Cms, but much, much less lateral movement--and thus, a very small voice coil gap. AFAICT, no one has used my idea yet.

I'd really like to build a motor using all three of these ideas together, but I fear patent issues. If I just build the thing for my own amusement, and don't try to make any money off it, I'm okay, right?

Also, if I disclose my idea to the world, (on this forum), that means I can never try to patent it, right? This also means that no one else can ever patent it, right?

You guys are the best...

[baggystevo82]

Hi, not sure of the laws relating to what happens if you post your ideas on here, but you can build whatever you want for yourself and your own use
Good luck!
Steve

[SY]

If you disclose the idea here, you have one year to apply for the US patent. You give up the ability to patent in most other countries. You can disclose it to other individuals or companies for discussion or other purposes if you have a secrecy or other sort of non-disclosure agreement with them and that the disclosure is marked as "confidential" or can otherwise be shown to be a disclosure under the secrecy agreement.

[Vikash]

JBL Differential Drive (or DD). Pic here.

No idea about the patent issue, but I personally have had many sleepless nights thinking of new ways to make a motor with superior properties. I think you need to be quite advanced with all this to come up with something that has better characteristics than the available stuff, so I wouldn't worry about patent issues just yet. But then again, may you have got something....but how will you know if you don't share

[baggystevo82]

Hi Vikash,
That looks like quite a nice idea, a bit like Ducati's desmodronic valve drive, one cam and rocker pushes the valve down, and another pulls it back up, meaning you can get away with weaker valve springs and therefore less friction and higher revs and therefore more power. Maybe it would work like that in a speaker....?
Steve

[DanWiggins]

Nappylady posted:

XBL2 is an Adire brainchild, right? (XBL2 is where they split the voice coil gap in order to attain a more linear BL curve for a given excursion.) And it's patented, right?

Our idea, and still patent pending. Getting a patent issued can take 2-5 years.

I once heard about a voice coil technology that I think JBL patented--where two voice coils are wound on one former in opposite directions, and there are two VC gaps--one in the top plate and one in the bottom plate--so the inductance of the voice coils cancels each other out. Has anyone heard of this? Any linkage?

Not invented by JBL, but used by them. Invented by a company called Hyperdynamics. There's a few variants on it, too, related to how the voice coils are aligned with respect to the gaps. Inductance isn't cancelled, but it is lower, and linear.

and of course, *I* have an idea that I think could be used to make a better suspension system that would allow for the same excursion and Cms, but much, much less lateral movement--and thus, a very small voice coil gap. AFAICT, no one has used my idea yet.

Suspensions are really the only "big problem" left with drivers!

I'd really like to build a motor using all three of these ideas together, but I fear patent issues. If I just build the thing for my own amusement, and don't try to make any money off it, I'm okay, right?

Now, I am NOT a lawyer (nor do I play one on TV), but in the US at least you cannot even build a patented item without infringing. The invention is to be fully described so that someone skilled in the art (loudspeakers, in this case) could read the patent and understand what is going on. But if you build one - even if for personal use or educational use - it is an infringement.

Now, realistically people aren't sued for building one for personal use, but that is NOT guaranteed. Usually you fly under the RADAR and it's not a problem.

And we've explicitly stated on this forum that we'd waive our right to prosecute those who build personal/research versions of our technology.

Also, if I disclose my idea to the world, (on this forum), that means I can never try to patent it, right? This also means that no one else can ever patent it, right?

Again, the whole IANAL thing, but in the US you have 12 months to actually file from the first instance of publication/description of the invention. So you can still patent it, even after you describe it. You just have a very limited time to make that actually happen.

And by publishing the idea, you do make it so that no one else can patent it. Basically you get 12 months of exclusive time to decide if you want to patent it. One day past 12 months, and it's public domain, regardless of what you want to do.

You guys are the best...

Compared to what?

Dan Wiggins
Adire Audio

[Vikash]

I think the main DD advantage is of less distortion, and not more power. Infact I'm not sure it has any BL advantage. More L, but B is reduced because of two gaps. But interesting analogy with the Ducatti.

[baggystevo82]

Now, I am NOT a lawyer (nor do I play one on TV), but in the US at least you cannot even build a patented item without infringing. The invention is to be fully described so that someone skilled in the art (loudspeakers, in this case) could read the patent and understand what is going on. But if you build one - even if for personal use or educational use - it is an infringement.

Really?! I never knew or was aware of that. That has to be one of the silliest laws Ive heard of though...
Steve

[Vikash]

I think I've said those exact words in another thread. But I've only heard of this applying in the US. It figures

[SY]

but in the US at least you cannot even build a patented item without infringing. The invention is to be fully described so that someone skilled in the art (loudspeakers, in this case) could read the patent and understand what is going on. But if you build one - even if for personal use or educational use - it is an infringement

I'm not a lawyer, but have had some experience with patents. This is not correct, to my understanding. The patent laws allow the construction of a patented device or use of a patented process for the purposes of experimentation.