Its good that somebody is doing that, because God knows that I don't have the time or the patience to do it. Heck, I wonder why I build speakers at all. My Chinese client wants as much of my time as possible, and they pay well. It's not the small change from selling loudspeakers. As a fair warning to poeple, either I will stop making them, or the price is likely to go way way up. The current situation just isn't worth it to me.
I had one guy ask if I could demo the speakers by bringing them to his home - about 500 miles away - I just chuckled. He said that he would "compensate me" for my time and I chuckled again. I said, just buy a pair and if you don't like them throw them away - you'll save money.
Last edited:
"In the event of failure so to mark, no damages shall be recovered by the patentee in any action for infringement, except on proof that the infringer was notified of the infringement and continued to infringe thereafter, in which event damages may be recovered only for infringement occurring after such notice."
Wow, that reads very rotten. So you have to play Cop and watch everyone. If you don't find the counterfeiters, then they are free to rip you off unless you inform them they are infringing?
Actually it's more than reasonable..
It's the concept of "notice".
The "remedy" is to mark (or label) the patented good. (..like a dog marking it's territory. 😛 ) To put in perspective the concept of notice.. consider any illegal action (which isn't malum in se) - like a speed sign. Imagine if there were no speed signs to tell you the speed limit, and you were driving through just such a zone for the first time at less than the federal limit.. and got busted. Is that fair?
Failing that, you then are left with the "police" action.
Frankly though, you have to "play cop" anyway, because if you aren't aware that someone is infringing then how would you know to file suit?
BTW, you can only collect damages if the patent is "good" - and that can always be debated. Remember, it's not if you think the patent is good, or the patent office thinks it's good, but rather what the court system thinks. The court will of course "weigh" the evidence and from it make a reasonable determination, but perhaps its definition of "reasonable" isn't quite what yours is. 😱
I see! Your point being that I have to mark the product or there is no infringment! Or at least none until they are found out and notified. Correct? But if the product IS marked then infringment is immediate - regardless of notification? That IS a very good point!
http://www.socalip.com/MarkingArticle.pdf
My initial impression (I'm not an authority on this) is that there is an issue regarding contructive notice and actual notice, and that infringement after actual notice becomes WILFULL infringement that may achieve higher damages than contructive notice provided by marking.
Without any notice, there MAY be not be any damage award for infringement (again, not an authority on this).
Infringement of your patent may have more potential in the plug itself, as in constructive infringement. In other words, the making and selling of the plug itself, to be used in a horn.
My initial impression (I'm not an authority on this) is that there is an issue regarding contructive notice and actual notice, and that infringement after actual notice becomes WILFULL infringement that may achieve higher damages than contructive notice provided by marking.
Without any notice, there MAY be not be any damage award for infringement (again, not an authority on this).
Infringement of your patent may have more potential in the plug itself, as in constructive infringement. In other words, the making and selling of the plug itself, to be used in a horn.
Last edited:
I have been wondering why no one can build and sell waveguide designs for < $1K, yours being almost the low costs options actually and now you might be leaving it to greener pastures. I know Tweak City Audio is coming out with a low cost pro audio waveguide speaker in a month or so. Its definitely a tough business.
Its cool and great to read your comments about "compensation" for your time is worth more then the speakers. Congrats with business success overseas. There is a ton of money in the world for those who take advantage of it.
Last edited:
It is still curious.
Many folks have used foam within and/or around a horn and appearently did not bother to patent the "idea". For instance, In the Quadratic Throat patent by Hughes, there is no mention of foam. But in the actual product (from Peavey), the mouth is clearly lined with foam.
The trick has been also used by DIYers and pro-sound guys for years.
But I guess you now get to claim it as your own
Maybe it goes like when farraday shielding in drivers were patended, about 25 years ago
Noone used it, until now when the patent has expired
And by the patent we have been set back 20 years of devellopment in speaker design
So maybe we meet again and talk about foam plugs, in 20 years 😛
Noone used it, until now when the patent has expired
And by the patent we have been set back 20 years of devellopment in speaker design
So maybe we meet again and talk about foam plugs, in 20 years 😛
The way that I do it, it is my own. I guarantee you've never seen it done that way before. You can't call what I do "just using foam", thats a pretty weak argument.
If you can find "prior art" then publish it! Here! It will make the patent worthless, which I am sure that you'd love to do if you could.
Ahh - if I'm not mistaken many people are gaining huge benefit from my invention - right now! (All my customers). It's NOT 20 years away.
You know, I tend to agree completely. There would be a good business in that and its a more complicated infringment as you say. It's just not a business that I want to do.
There was also no mention of the OS waveguide from which the whole concept derived. I consulted for Peavey and they just ripped off the idea with no mention of me at all. You'll get no sympathy for them from me.
Hmmm, " ...love to do it if you could"
No, not interested. Go ahead and take credit for whatever you choose. It won't bother me.
What's the beef?
Any application of foam that was used prior to Earl's application date, and is not covered under other patents, can be freely done. Neither Earl, nor anybody else can prevent that. If it accomplishes the same purpose, Earl's specific method is not needed.
One can claim that his invention is useless, but then there is no point in doing it, so the patent is immaterial. There are plenty here that claim just that. One can claim that compositions other than his will work equally well. But if that's the case, then anyone is free to do that. Again, the patent is immaterial. If in fact, Earl's specific combination of method and material is unique and useful, then he's entitled to claim it and prevent others from using it.
Technically it's infringement, even for a private individual to apply it to their own use without permission. As a practical matter, who's to stop someone? Pretty unlikely that Earl is gonna come knocking on people's door, if they are halfway discrete. If one manufactures and advertises, it might be a different matter. But this is DIY, after all. Now, I'm not suggesting that anyone infringe. Rather, if someone really wants to try it, they might just PM Earl and ask him. Maybe offer a modest consideration for permission. If it's not worth that effort, then it's not very important, and not worth worrying about, is it?
Sheldon
I used the wrong term. I should have used the phrase "contributory infringement" when referring to making and selling the plug alone.
Hi Gedlee,
Is the foam plug really a huge benefit? I ask because if I had to guess, I would say that you speakers measure very good and sound very good without the foam. I'm not saying the foam doesn't make it better, but a smaller amount rather than "huge"?
.
The thing that you have to remember is how hard it gets to make the last little improvments in something. It's like the difference between a Stadivarius Violin and a common one - it's that last few % improvement that makes the difference. So in this sense the improvement is "huge".
To my ear it's also quite significant - an improvement that anyone can hear and that everyone would prefer. There are lots of far more expensive modifications to an audio system that don't stand up to this criteria.
To my ear it's also quite significant - an improvement that anyone can hear and that everyone would prefer. There are lots of far more expensive modifications to an audio system that don't stand up to this criteria.
I've built a bunch of horns and waveguides with the foam. In my experience, the applications where it made the largest improvement were in loudspeakers where the horn was faaaaaar from ideal.
For instance, the difference with this QSC horn was subtle:
But with this USD Audio horn, the difference was hyoooooooge. The foam basically transformed it.
The QSC "curve" is close to perfect, and the waveguide is shallow. The USD horn has a ninety degree bend which creates a notch around 2khz, along with massive asymmetry. The USD is practically a worst-case scenario.
I ran the USD horns in my car for about two weeks, then threw them back on the shelf, because my own designs sounded superior. But with the foam, this rather unsophisticated horn is really quite amazing. The difference is night and day.
Check out my "Homster" thread and my "GNIB" threads for some measurements.
Project GNIB - Grand National in a Box - Page 3 - DIYMA.com
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/151376-homster-how-i-learned-how-fix-horn.html#post1919671