Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Calendar
Go Back   NJFBOA - Home of New Jersey's Camaros and Firebirds > Community Forums > Lounge

Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-08-2007, 11:02 AM   #1
GP99GT
Mr Fantastic
 
GP99GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: West Milford NJ
Posts: 7,917
iTrader: (2)
STS claims any DIY remote mount turbo violates their patent

http://forums.nicoclub.com/zerothread/236967

First Patent
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...8&RS=6,745,568


Second Patent
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...2&RS=7,134,282

__________________
Matt

B18B1 FTW
GP99GT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2007, 11:05 AM   #2
foff667
Keyboard Tough Guy
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Trenton, NJ
Posts: 6,341
iTrader: (0)
Yeah someone posted that up on hpt's board a couple of weeks ago...it is a bit silly, but i guess they have to protect their future no matter how silly it sounds...kinda like me patenting WTF or something though lol
foff667 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2007, 11:19 AM   #3
BonzoHansen
Admin.
 
BonzoHansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamilton, NJ
Posts: 20,165
iTrader: (27)
If they have a patent, they should enforce it. That how a good business stays afloat.
__________________
Vent Windows Forever!

The looser the waistband, the deeper the quicksand. Or so I have read.

Feather-light suspension, Konis just couldn't hold. I'm so glad I took a look inside your showroom doors.

Hey everybody, it's good to have you on the Baba-too-da-ba-too-ba-ba-buh-doo-ga-ga-bop-a-dop
BonzoHansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2007, 11:46 AM   #4
Blacdout96
 
Blacdout96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Galloway, NJ
Posts: 3,964
iTrader: (2)
well its kinda stupid, i mean, how are thewy gonna know its remote mounted on your car ,what do they have people they just send out, drive around, and find cars that are turbo'ed and see if its in the rear?
Blacdout96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2007, 11:48 AM   #5
Jersey_TA
10 Second Club
 
Jersey_TA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Eastampton
Posts: 4,466
iTrader: (0)
I think that's pointed towards any business that makes money of a rear mount set-up. If the average Joe does up a custom set-up for his car they can't say anything.
__________________
1999 MBM T/A - the new ride
2004 CE Corvette - 1.410 - 10.246 @ 133.39
2003 Silverado - Lifted 6 on 35s
2000 T/A WS6 - 11.190 @ 119.79...SOLD

Last edited by Jersey_TA; 04-08-2007 at 12:46 PM.
Jersey_TA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2007, 11:48 AM   #6
BonzoHansen
Admin.
 
BonzoHansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamilton, NJ
Posts: 20,165
iTrader: (27)
You enforce a patent by suing the offending manufacturer, not a car owner. It is only a viloation if you sell it. If you replicate the part in your garage for your car, no violation. But if you start selling them, that is the violation.

Without patent proection, the economic incentive to spending on R&D goes out the window.
__________________
Vent Windows Forever!

The looser the waistband, the deeper the quicksand. Or so I have read.

Feather-light suspension, Konis just couldn't hold. I'm so glad I took a look inside your showroom doors.

Hey everybody, it's good to have you on the Baba-too-da-ba-too-ba-ba-buh-doo-ga-ga-bop-a-dop
BonzoHansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2007, 12:39 PM   #7
GP99GT
Mr Fantastic
 
GP99GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: West Milford NJ
Posts: 7,917
iTrader: (2)
yeah bonzo, but the guy was designing it for his own car, using his own design, nothing copied from STS besides the idea of having it remote mounted...they cant really do anything about it as far as i can tell
__________________
Matt

B18B1 FTW
GP99GT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2007, 12:57 PM   #8
V
Stalker
 
V's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 12,082
iTrader: (12)
STS contacted the guy, months after he was thinkign about the idea of doing a remote mount(he had decided not to anyway) they told him he'd need to basically BUY a license from them in order to do a remote mount on his OWN car. That, is complete BS.

we should get this up on as many boards as possible to make it know. i have no hate for STS but that action was not needed. LS1tech had a thread about it but it was quickly deleted since STS is a sponsor.
V is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2007, 01:05 PM   #9
maroman88
12 Second Club
 
maroman88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: West Milford
Posts: 8,373
iTrader: (11)
doesnt the new hennesey srt600 cherokee have a remote mount, not all the way out back but its tucked underneath somewhere
__________________
88 Camaro
95 Impala SS
97 Trans Am WS6
98 Blazer ZR2
00 Corvette
04 CTS-V
04 Grand Cherokee
06 GMC Sierra
07 Sublime Charger Daytona
12 Tahoe LT
17 Malibu LT
maroman88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2007, 03:58 PM   #10
BonzoHansen
Admin.
 
BonzoHansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamilton, NJ
Posts: 20,165
iTrader: (27)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokingSS View Post
STS contacted the guy, months after he was thinkign about the idea of doing a remote mount(he had decided not to anyway) they told him he'd need to basically BUY a license from them in order to do a remote mount on his OWN car. That, is complete BS.
If true, I agree. But we also do not know the whole story. I've seen more than a few threads about 'what I am doing' turn into 'buy my stuff'. Not saying that is what is happening here, I'm just talking in general.
__________________
Vent Windows Forever!

The looser the waistband, the deeper the quicksand. Or so I have read.

Feather-light suspension, Konis just couldn't hold. I'm so glad I took a look inside your showroom doors.

Hey everybody, it's good to have you on the Baba-too-da-ba-too-ba-ba-buh-doo-ga-ga-bop-a-dop
BonzoHansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2007, 06:48 PM   #11
NJSPEEDER
NJFBOA Co-Founder
 
NJSPEEDER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: All up in your kool aid!
Posts: 12,235
iTrader: (10)
the easy thing to do would be to dig up any evidence of a DIY remote mount that existed previous to STS selling or patenting such products. also, since patent information has to be very very specific i would guess that it you did a kit for yourself on a car of different engine displacement/intended air consumption with a different or not previously applied exhaust routing, their case would go flying out the window.
if they are serious about this i would call it a serious mistake of greed that will mess them all up. all it would take is STS trying to take one person to court for them to cost themselves 10 times as much money as they evr could have made selling that guy a kit or parts to help with the install.
then they coudl subtract the lost sales due to the black eye to the corporate image and it becomes very clear that they would be very foolish to persue any course of action against any private person attempting to make a system for their own personal use.
__________________
Tim - NJSPEEDER
Currently F-bodyless

New Jersey F-Body Owners Association
NJSPEEDER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2007, 09:58 AM   #12
98tadriver
10 Second Club; Has fan club
 
98tadriver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Delmont nj
Posts: 4,369
iTrader: (17)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacdout96 View Post
well its kinda stupid, i mean, how are thewy gonna know its remote mounted on your car ,what do they have people they just send out, drive around, and find cars that are turbo'ed and see if its in the rear?
they will use STS NAZIS and besides, i thought that violating a patent would take selling your DIY kit to someone, not building it for yourself. thats about as retarded as harley davidson patenting their sound
__________________
01' Z06 62k miles. Vararam, Longtubes, off road xpipe, tuned by me. Times TBA

2001 Corvette, Bolt ons , tuned 10.75@124.56 mph 1.38 60' Sold

1997 Saturn Sc1 5spd DOHC swapped
Bolt ons, decked head, stock intake cam on exhaust side, lotsa weight redux
13.22@102.32 mph 1.93 60'
12's on moda? One day

Last edited by 98tadriver; 04-12-2007 at 09:59 AM.
98tadriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2007, 02:07 PM   #13
NJSPEEDER
NJFBOA Co-Founder
 
NJSPEEDER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: All up in your kool aid!
Posts: 12,235
iTrader: (10)
patents refer to the actual act of producing something specific in a very specific manner, not the application or distribution of the idea. those are further counts of patent law, beyond what they are claiming.
basicaly they would have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was no way that anyone in the world coudl have remote mounted a turbo on any vehicle before it became common knowledge that they were doing so. they would also have to prove that the application in question is in direct violation of EVERY term of the patent in question and not just a partial or evolved concept, since extensive rvision = new idea in the eyes of the law.
STS is screwed if they try to go forward against anyone in something like this. remote mount turbo and rear mounted turbos instead of mufflers have been put on cars since the late 70's in racing applications and it is too broad a stretch to believe that no one ever thought of applying this concept to teh stret until they came along.
any lawyer good enough to pull it off for them woudl cost them 3 years profit in the process. i can't see them being that stupid.
__________________
Tim - NJSPEEDER
Currently F-bodyless

New Jersey F-Body Owners Association
NJSPEEDER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2007, 04:21 PM   #14
Blacdout96
 
Blacdout96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Galloway, NJ
Posts: 3,964
iTrader: (2)
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJSPEEDER View Post
patents refer to the actual act of producing something specific in a very specific manner, not the application or distribution of the idea. those are further counts of patent law, beyond what they are claiming.
basicaly they would have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was no way that anyone in the world coudl have remote mounted a turbo on any vehicle before it became common knowledge that they were doing so. they would also have to prove that the application in question is in direct violation of EVERY term of the patent in question and not just a partial or evolved concept, since extensive rvision = new idea in the eyes of the law.
STS is screwed if they try to go forward against anyone in something like this. remote mount turbo and rear mounted turbos instead of mufflers have been put on cars since the late 70's in racing applications and it is too broad a stretch to believe that no one ever thought of applying this concept to teh stret until they came along.
any lawyer good enough to pull it off for them woudl cost them 3 years profit in the process. i can't see them being that stupid.
If im gonna have to point my finger at rear mounted turbos on race cars, id say look at the porsche 935's

http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Downs/1403/bh812.jpg

and indy cars that used the offenhauser turbo'd enbgines, at one point and time they were able to produce almost 1100bhp out of a offy 4 cylinder, but if my memory seves me right, they never used it, only tested to see what it could hold. Ot me its rediculous to say they patended the idea. STS FTL
Blacdout96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  NJFBOA - Home of New Jersey's Camaros and Firebirds > Community Forums > Lounge


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Sponsor List














All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.