Archery Talk Forum banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,862 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Had a guy tell me that for '07, there will be at least 10 manufactures come out with a Binary like cam system on their new bows.

Think there's any truth to this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,236 Posts
EricO said:
I think even the box boys at Darton are going to have Cadillac Escalades on 22" rims though.....
Pobably so , cant wait to see their new bow , hope they have the new cam on the mavrick platform with 7+ brace , 33 inch axil bow is too small for me
 

·
NC ASA Director
Joined
·
35,983 Posts
I see the discussions in the next couple months getting very interesting on the board with all the internet patent lawyers chiming in. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,484 Posts
I think Darton was the ones that said they would enforce the patent. Time will tell:)

All the speculation in the world means nothing;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
310 Posts
I have wondered what constitutes copying another cam, does it have to be identical to be considered copying a patented item, or is it the design or theory that is patented? Did that question come out right?

I guess what I mean is is it infringement if it works the same but looks somewhat different, as in the overall shape of the cams are different, but the theory, string and cable mounts are the same and such, then is it still infringement? if not then everyone could come out with a Binary copy with a different shaped and sized cam and be in the clear, kind of like all the single cam copies out there, similair in theory but different, sometimes just barely, in design.
 

·
300 or bust
Joined
·
13,140 Posts
bearclaw37 said:
I have wondered what constitutes copying another cam, does it have to be identical to be considered copying a patented item, or is it the design or theory that is patented? Did that question come out right?

I guess what I mean is is it infringement if it works the same but looks somewhat different, as in the overall shape of the cams are different, but the theory, string and cable mounts are the same and such, then is it still infringement? if not then everyone could come out with a Binary copy with a different shaped and sized cam and be in the clear, kind of like all the single cam copies out there, similair in theory but different, sometimes just barely, in design.
its how the cam system works. essentially they all do the same thing, deflect limbs and give some type of letoff. Its the differences in "how" the cams (or idlers) interact with each other and or the limbs.

its not the size shape or geometry unless said geometry is specific to how the system works together.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,204 Posts
I would have to look it up...

matforme said:
Are you sure that still holds true? Who knows.
but, I believe someone from Darton made a post on here about the reality that Bowtech was the only one who had rights to it...

I will search for it...
Tom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,134 Posts
Aww man, that's gotta SUCK for Bowtech if other people get to use their "exclusive" product. :cry:

Get ready to buy bows with lawyer's fees AND advertising built into the price. :cry:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,426 Posts
T-LaBee said:
but, I believe someone from Darton made a post on here about the reality that Bowtech was the only one who had rights to it...

I will search for it...
Tom
That was Archery history who posted that for Rex himself. If other companies are going to use it, than it won't be like Bowtechs but if Darton is going to license something to other companies than it will be the 2.5 system
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,204 Posts
You are right...

elkreaper said:
That was Archery history who posted that for Rex himself. If other companies are going to use it, than it won't be like Bowtechs but if Darton is going to license something to other companies than it will be the 2.5 system
Here it is...

QUOTE=archeryhistory]I have been asked by Rex Darlington, Darton Archery, to post current patent licensing information to minimize rumors and speculation.

Darton has a number of patents. Several companies are licensed under the CPS and other patents.
To clarify, Darton is licensing Bowtech to produce the current design marketed as the “Binary Cam” Bowtech will be licensed for the current design under patent #6990970-B1.
No other company is now licensed or will be licensed to produce the current “Binary Cam” design.

Darton will continue to produce their current line and will introduce a new 2 ½ cam for 2007.[/QUOTE]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,307 Posts
bearclaw37 said:
I have wondered what constitutes copying another cam, does it have to be identical to be considered copying a patented item, or is it the design or theory that is patented? Did that question come out right?

I guess what I mean is is it infringement if it works the same but looks somewhat different, as in the overall shape of the cams are different, but the theory, string and cable mounts are the same and such, then is it still infringement? if not then everyone could come out with a Binary copy with a different shaped and sized cam and be in the clear, kind of like all the single cam copies out there, similair in theory but different, sometimes just barely, in design.
There was a very old patent on a cam (actually wheel back then) system that was rigged and worked the exact same way. Any good patent laywer would be able to show prior art on a "binary" type cam.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top