breach of copyright?

[TF_Fred Davis]

I see that Preston Innovations have won damages against ultimate for breach of copyright for copying an off box accessory according to their website compensation plus case costs, with a dwindling market things are hotting up 😮

[TF_baitchefParticipant]

Indeed they are, looking back over recent years and the boom in comercial carp fishing, when it comes to ideas/products being imitated, i don’t think there is an industry quite like it.

[TF_Fred Davis]

I quite agree baitchef there has been so many copies of an origenal product over the years designs with a very slight change by tackle companies that it’s laughable, just look at all the different method feeders and method moulds around, in fact the method mould must be the most copied and slightly altered bit of kit around.

[TF_AnthonywatersParticipant]

Simple really if its patented or patent pending leave it alone.

[TF_Cutnut]

In general infingements like this go unchallenged by a lot of companies because of the court costs and legal fees that can potentially ruin both parties.

Obviously PI must’ve reckoned they had a watertight case and enough collateral to do some legal damage. Fair Play…but how many one man shows would have the wherewithal to do the same.

Will we be seeing a flurry of cases now the dust has settled on this one? Doubt it, but. watch this space. There will be a few e-bay bargains going soon then from any retailers that have stocked UA parts…

[TF_AnthonywatersParticipant]

@chrismoorhead wrote:

im not a lover of this kind of action where do you actualy draw the line are we going to see tackle company after tackle company sueing each other over attachments ,poles ,rod ,reels
I mean lets look at this in more detail for instance who was the first to invent the pole are they going to sue every other company for copying there idea or infringed on there patent or copyright
we shall have to see what preston say to the angling press and then make a decision
on a personal note I cannot remember anybody going to court over such things not in the tackle industry anyway

Very good point, my understanding is I think we have to class certain products as being generic, rods, poles, floats things like that are generic its the finer details that differ they have been established so long no one could lay claim to inventing a pole float for instance but if you copied the reel seat from a Diawa rod to the exact detail then you are blatant copying. I dont see this one instance generating a case law where others follow suit with legal cases about copying products, manufacturers benchmark their products on other companies products thats fact, Ive worked in manufacturing somebody will launch something new and others will tweak it they take it to the company in China and they and come up with their own version quite often the manufacturer in China will make products for most tackle companies, I maybe be wrong but I would imagine ( and im not adding libs here !) Preston buy other manufacturers products and dismantle them and look how they can build their own version.

[TF_sillysod]

And Preston have never copied anyone else’s products…….lol

[TF_AnthonywatersParticipant]

@sillysod wrote:

And Preston have never copied anyone else’s products…….lol

I said it with a bit more tact 😉 😉

[TF_Fred Davis]

The silly thing about it all is we now have manufacturers who make poles drilling holes or slots or sometimes two holes or adding bits of carbon strengthening areas(so you can drill your own holes therefore not infringing copyright) on topkits just so that they can’t be sued for infinging the design on pulla kits on a pole, this sort of action will surely make things worse for the tackle industry

[TF_AnthonywatersParticipant]

Is the owner of Ultimate Roger Surgay or is it that chap who built Wold View ? I always mix up Badger,Ultimate,Panterra etc

[TF_mp.milo]

Pantera now your talking

[TF_badgerParticipant]

@Anthonywaters wrote:

Is the owner of Ultimate Roger Surgay or is it that chap who built Wold View ? I always mix up Badger,Ultimate,Panterra etc

Hey, leave me out of it !! 😮

[TF_sillysod]

Preston innovations new anthem

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=_Zym9N-I5F4&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D_Zym9N-I5F4&gl=GB

[TF_Gary]

The point of intellectual property and patent protection is to encourage innovation, which is surely in the interests of all anglers?

A person or company that makes an innovative breakthrough can secure patent protection so that they can commercially capitalise on their new product as a reward for their investment. This encourages investment in research and development of new products in the first instance. Without this protection, we would see far fewer innovative breakthroughs as companies may as well wait for somebody else to develop something and then become a ‘me too’ manufacturer. Net result – less new innovative products available for anglers.

In order to patent something it cannot be generic and the actual wording of patents is usually very precise and specific. As such, you can relax that somebody might now claim to have patented the pole and stop other people copying it…

[TF_Mark Wintle]

It is also important to know the difference between patents, registered design and copyright.

This argument is about patents, something quite different from copyright.

Copyright generally relates to work of an artistic nature like music, painting, photography or writing and currently applies for 70 years (different rules for those that died before 1946) from the death of the author/artist so a book that I had published in 2011 might still be under copyright in over 100 years time assuming I reach a grand old age. You can’t make a fishing reel and claim copyright on it. Copyright exists from the moment of it being done, no need to state it’s copyright or register the fact.

To get a patent then the item must be new; you can’t patent something already in existence or that is just a minor variation. If a patent is granted then generally it is only for 20 years (occasionally more for medicines due to the long development cycles) from the date it is granted. This is why Mitchell reels (and other brands like Allcocks) had half bale arms until about 1954 because Hardy’s had the patent for a full bale and wouldn’t allow anyone else to use it until the patent expired. So a patent protects rather allows others to benefit but it does help those that innovate to reap the benefits of their research. Many companies patent as many things as possible as it is a potential source of income.

Registered design is usually used to protect company specific branding and design that would not be patentable or subject to copyright such as the famous Ford blue oval badge.

A look through the appendix of the out of print book The Float will show just how many float innovations are patented by companies like Drennan.

[Author]

Posts