AKA to stop making Vikings and Excals? SP strikes again?
- Thread starter Gadget
- Start date
Aving read the thread on pbnation if what they say is true and there is prior art the would SP take on the U.S Navy in a law suit against them the evidence is there that SP are in the wrong was the company even around then in the 1971 heres the text to do with the Navy inventing the trigger that SP have said they invented :-
Here is the text
US3695246: PNEUMATIC MACHINE GUN WITH PHOTO CELL INTERRUPTED CIRCUIT
Country: US United States of America
Inventor: Filippi, Ernest A.; Newhall, CA
Watson, Jack B.; Newhall, CA
Hughes, Larry E.; Newhall, CA
High
Resolution
Low
Resolution
8 pages
Assignee: The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of the Navy
other patents from UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, NAVY (597270) (approx. 13,239)
News, Profiles, Stocks and More about this company
Published / Filed: 1972-10-03 / 1971-06-10
Application Number: US1971000151681
IPC Code: F41F 1/02;
U.S. Class: Current: 124/072; 042/106; 124/032; 124/048; 124/051.1; 124/077; 124/082; 273/317; 434/019;
Original: 124/011; 124/032; 124/048; 124/051.R; 124/030.R; 035/025; 273/106.R;
Field of Search: 124/011,32,48,50,51 R,51 A 035/025 089/33 E
Priority Number: 1971-06-10 US1971000151681
Abstract: A pellet firing pneumatic machine gun wherein a toothed wheel carries pels from a hopper and conveyer assembly to a position adjacent one end of a barrel through which the pellets are propelled by an air blast from a solenoid valve, the periodic energization of which is effected by a photo-cell exposed to a light source, wherein the light source is placed on the opposite side of the periphery of the pellet delivering wheel from the photo-cell such that upon rotation of the wheel, the teeth thereof act to interrupt light from the light source falling on the photo-cell. In addition, a pellet slitting device mounted on the other end of the barrel, wherein the device includes adjustable blades which score the skin of dye containing pellets shot from a gun to render the pellets more frangible upon impact.
Attorney, Agent or Firm: Sciascia, Richard S. ; Pease, John W. ; David, Harvey A. ;
Primary / Assistant Examiners: Pinkham, Richard C.; Stouffer, R. T.
Family: None
First Claim: Show all 4 claims
What is claimed is: 1. In a pellet propeller operable from a source of A.C. electrical power and a source of compressed air and including a motor, a toothed wheel adapted to be driven in rotation by said motor for conveying pellets from storage means to a firing position adjacent a barrel, and firing solenoid valve means for releasing a blast of compressed air to fire each pellet, the improvement comprising:
a light source disposed on one side of the periphery of said wheel;
photo-cell means mounted on the opposite side of the periphery of said wheel such that light from said source falling on said photo-cell means is periodically interrupted by teeth of said wheel and said photo-cell provides an electrical output which fluctuates at the frequency of the passing of said teeth; and
circuit means responsive to said fluctuations to effect energization of said solenoid valve means in timed relation to rotation of said wheel.
It says everything in this to disapprove SP
Here is the text
US3695246: PNEUMATIC MACHINE GUN WITH PHOTO CELL INTERRUPTED CIRCUIT
Country: US United States of America
Inventor: Filippi, Ernest A.; Newhall, CA
Watson, Jack B.; Newhall, CA
Hughes, Larry E.; Newhall, CA
High
Resolution
Low
Resolution
8 pages
Assignee: The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of the Navy
other patents from UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, NAVY (597270) (approx. 13,239)
News, Profiles, Stocks and More about this company
Published / Filed: 1972-10-03 / 1971-06-10
Application Number: US1971000151681
IPC Code: F41F 1/02;
U.S. Class: Current: 124/072; 042/106; 124/032; 124/048; 124/051.1; 124/077; 124/082; 273/317; 434/019;
Original: 124/011; 124/032; 124/048; 124/051.R; 124/030.R; 035/025; 273/106.R;
Field of Search: 124/011,32,48,50,51 R,51 A 035/025 089/33 E
Priority Number: 1971-06-10 US1971000151681
Abstract: A pellet firing pneumatic machine gun wherein a toothed wheel carries pels from a hopper and conveyer assembly to a position adjacent one end of a barrel through which the pellets are propelled by an air blast from a solenoid valve, the periodic energization of which is effected by a photo-cell exposed to a light source, wherein the light source is placed on the opposite side of the periphery of the pellet delivering wheel from the photo-cell such that upon rotation of the wheel, the teeth thereof act to interrupt light from the light source falling on the photo-cell. In addition, a pellet slitting device mounted on the other end of the barrel, wherein the device includes adjustable blades which score the skin of dye containing pellets shot from a gun to render the pellets more frangible upon impact.
Attorney, Agent or Firm: Sciascia, Richard S. ; Pease, John W. ; David, Harvey A. ;
Primary / Assistant Examiners: Pinkham, Richard C.; Stouffer, R. T.
Family: None
First Claim: Show all 4 claims
What is claimed is: 1. In a pellet propeller operable from a source of A.C. electrical power and a source of compressed air and including a motor, a toothed wheel adapted to be driven in rotation by said motor for conveying pellets from storage means to a firing position adjacent a barrel, and firing solenoid valve means for releasing a blast of compressed air to fire each pellet, the improvement comprising:
a light source disposed on one side of the periphery of said wheel;
photo-cell means mounted on the opposite side of the periphery of said wheel such that light from said source falling on said photo-cell means is periodically interrupted by teeth of said wheel and said photo-cell provides an electrical output which fluctuates at the frequency of the passing of said teeth; and
circuit means responsive to said fluctuations to effect energization of said solenoid valve means in timed relation to rotation of said wheel.
It says everything in this to disapprove SP
smart parts has an agreement with dye (for the matrix) and i think also with national (for the intimidator). thats the extent of my knowledge on the issue.
if smart parts has been given the right and the patent to go and take control of the market, then more power to them. i dont think theres anything anybody can do about it.
i myself will continue to shoot and LOVE my sp products. i have owned a small bushell of SP markers and to be honest i love them.
i will always shoot my shockers (or my imp, or soon the nerve)
i will always wear my burn (or fighter) gear
i will always shoot my freaks or my AA's
i will always display proudly my dynasty, philly AA's, freak, and crosshair shirts, hats, and posters for all the world to see.
and theres not a damn thing that will change about it.
want to bash Smart Parts and their following, go right ahead. just know that there will always be support for them from me and thousands of others.
i would rather have respect for a company that makes smart moves in business and makes the best gear ive owned (and ive had LOTS of gear) than join a silly little cult of people who turn SP crosshairs into shwastikas and try to drag SP down using complaints and slander.
LONG LIVE SMART PARTS!!!!!!!!!!!!
Chris Bowen
Proud Smart Parts supporter
if smart parts has been given the right and the patent to go and take control of the market, then more power to them. i dont think theres anything anybody can do about it.
i myself will continue to shoot and LOVE my sp products. i have owned a small bushell of SP markers and to be honest i love them.
i will always shoot my shockers (or my imp, or soon the nerve)
i will always wear my burn (or fighter) gear
i will always shoot my freaks or my AA's
i will always display proudly my dynasty, philly AA's, freak, and crosshair shirts, hats, and posters for all the world to see.
and theres not a damn thing that will change about it.
want to bash Smart Parts and their following, go right ahead. just know that there will always be support for them from me and thousands of others.
i would rather have respect for a company that makes smart moves in business and makes the best gear ive owned (and ive had LOTS of gear) than join a silly little cult of people who turn SP crosshairs into shwastikas and try to drag SP down using complaints and slander.
LONG LIVE SMART PARTS!!!!!!!!!!!!
Chris Bowen
Proud Smart Parts supporter
I am glad you are satisfied with Smart Parts. If the rest of us were, there would be no problem.
I don't take a lot of interest in bashing Smart Parts, though I don't admire the equipment they produce the way you do. I am more concerned because they are removing products from the market that don't actually result from SP's "innovations."
When I say "innovations," of course, I mean new developements they have bought from inventors or duplicated because of lax protection by other inventors. The Impullse, after all, is basically the same operating style as an Angel, which predates the Impulse by a few years.
I don't take a lot of interest in bashing Smart Parts, though I don't admire the equipment they produce the way you do. I am more concerned because they are removing products from the market that don't actually result from SP's "innovations."
When I say "innovations," of course, I mean new developements they have bought from inventors or duplicated because of lax protection by other inventors. The Impullse, after all, is basically the same operating style as an Angel, which predates the Impulse by a few years.
All it takes to stop the madness is a company with extremely deep pockets and a desire to do the right thing.
Paul
Paul
well they also need to be fairly sure of winning, as risking many peoples livelyhoods is a pritty serious charge. (And how many patent lawers have contributed to this thread?) I know that in my mind the patent is whack... but we all shoulde know for sure that what is right and what is the law aren't always the same thing.
Laws are written by humans and humans make mistakes. Patents are given by humans and humans make mistakes.
Its like when people go over the problems with GM foods. YES there are serious problems possible with genetic modification but NO most people do not have the detailed know how to understand what the actual problems are...
Patents granted, like people have said are generally done by someone uniformed in the subject matter in which the patent covers. Why? because there aren't enough hours in the day for patent judges to brush up on everything and anything just incase someone comes to them with a bunk patent.
Ah well, like said don't shoot smart parts markers, don't use max flo's or freaks or do. I'm sorry AKA went, and it would be nice if WDP or someone bought the rights to make Vikings off AKA. That way we'd still have the full choice of markers avalible to us.
Keith
Laws are written by humans and humans make mistakes. Patents are given by humans and humans make mistakes.
Its like when people go over the problems with GM foods. YES there are serious problems possible with genetic modification but NO most people do not have the detailed know how to understand what the actual problems are...
Patents granted, like people have said are generally done by someone uniformed in the subject matter in which the patent covers. Why? because there aren't enough hours in the day for patent judges to brush up on everything and anything just incase someone comes to them with a bunk patent.
Ah well, like said don't shoot smart parts markers, don't use max flo's or freaks or do. I'm sorry AKA went, and it would be nice if WDP or someone bought the rights to make Vikings off AKA. That way we'd still have the full choice of markers avalible to us.
Keith
you think them putting others out of the running , out of business and out of work is A GOOD THING? despite your own admission of not knowing what's going on i think that is a naieve view to say the least
if a compeny can make decent products and win market supremicy by god or fantastic products that dont need constant upgrading from the box from day one great i would us said product o yes i do but to cripple the oppersition in court to point were the opersition has to shut down prodution or even close down is wrong. in my opinion all that will happenn is that the people who play the sport will have one of two choices.
1 either use a product they dont like which will leed to the players playing less because they no longer enjoy it.
2 people will no longer play full stop.
both will leed to the death of paintball.
if this happend with with cars then it wouldbe stopped dead in its tracks by the courts and goverments.
1 either use a product they dont like which will leed to the players playing less because they no longer enjoy it.
2 people will no longer play full stop.
both will leed to the death of paintball.
if this happend with with cars then it wouldbe stopped dead in its tracks by the courts and goverments.
Yes i agree part of it does sound like its for a hopper but the main bit is the part shown above where it says a source of A.C electrical power and also the part aswell about a firing solenoid valve !!!
Isnt that what S.P are claiming the patents that any marker using electricity to fire the marker and also the firirng mechanism usinga solenoid valve to fire it is in breech of their so called patents.
Also arent also all companies make that make hoppers sort of in the wrong aswell cos theres prior art to their designs aswell