Frame patent?

[Jimass]

So, lately I've been designing lots of frames, trying to come up with something new.

Now, I came up with a frame design almost the exact same as the Transition DH bike, the differences being the tubing.

Now is this enough to clear me of patent laws? Or does mine have to be completely different from this bike?

Thanks for the help with this seemingly so obviously question.

EDIT: It also appear I planned on building a blind side frame as well, just with the main pivot around the BB.

 

[Bretty.]

What's the point of designing your own frame if it's going to be exactly the same as something already out there?

 

[dh1]

i thought about this question quite alot. I also design some of my own frames, trying to come up with something new. it can be hard because Im going to build the design eventually so it can't be anything to radically. Alot of my designs can end up looking similar to production frames but they still have their slight differences.
I don't think you can get in trouble for copying a shape of a frame, the only thing I wouldn't do would be copy the exact suspension system setup and frame shape otherwise there is no point in designing it.
anywayz post up your design to give us all a look.

 

[rayza]

copyright, actually.

 

[tu plang]

If you were just going to build a frame for yourself its fairly immaterial, no company would sue you for that. If you wanted to start producing and selling them then you'd need to consider this situation.

Depends on the patent to some extent. In most cases of DH bikes the patent would cover the suspension design. things like:

- number and position of linkages
- the directions they rotate during travel
- position of shock

etc.

The patent is unlikely to be too specific about the fabrication specification and hence simply using different tubing but emulating the suspension design would infringe on the patent.

 

[tu plang]

copyright, actually.

Well if we were going to be pedantic, it would be patents. Copyright is generally used with respect to media.

 

[Jimass]

What's the point of designing your own frame if it's going to be exactly the same as something already out there?

Well not exactly, there would be slight differences, as in half a millimetre is certain areas.

If you were just going to build a frame for yourself its fairly immaterial, no company would sue you for that. If you wanted to start producing and selling them then you'd need to consider this situation.

Depends on the patent to some extent. In most cases of DH bikes the patent would cover the suspension design. things like:

- number and position of linkages
- the directions they rotate during travel
- position of shock

etc.

The patent is unlikely to be too specific about the fabrication specification and hence simply using different tubing but emulating the suspension design would infringe on the patent.

Well, I considered that, and it wouldn't ever be put to production on my side at least.

I guess I shall keep trying, but say if I change the location of just one pivot does that clear me of the infringement?

 

[smeck]

I pretty sure copyright on applies to written work, ie. the right to use somebody else's copy. This would include articles, books, slogans, logo's etc. Your main issue is with Patent law, and you can't patent a concept, only a method or specific process. If you change the tube sizes or shape, or an angle or position then you have invented a new frame and are free from infringing on anybody else's patent. The process of copying somebody else's work to achieve the same result a different way is called "reverse engineering" and is common practice. Who thinks Compaq invented their own computer, as opposed to pulling IBM's apart and coming up with a way of doing the same thing. I would also bet that most frames are not Patented, just suspension linkage designs and a few specific advancements like Specialised Brain system. Patents are prohibitively expensive so are only used on design advancements that a company pins its financial future on. I doubt Santa Cruz are reliant on the bend in the top tube of the Blur for their survival.

 

[S.]

I pretty sure copyright on applies to written work, ie. the right to use somebody else's copy. This would include articles, books, slogans, logo's etc. Your main issue is with Patent law, and you can't patent a concept, only a method or specific process. If you change the tube sizes or shape, or an angle or position then you have invented a new frame and are free from infringing on anybody else's patent. The process of copying somebody else's work to achieve the same result a different way is called "reverse engineering" and is common practice. Who thinks Compaq invented their own computer, as opposed to pulling IBM's apart and coming up with a way of doing the same thing. I would also bet that most frames are not Patented, just suspension linkage designs and a few specific advancements like Specialised Brain system. Patents are prohibitively expensive so are only used on design advancements that a company pins its financial future on. I doubt Santa Cruz are reliant on the bend in the top tube of the Blur for their survival.

Copyright basically applies to any kind of communication/publication media, as Tu Plang said - written stuff, music, videos/movies, logos etc. Patents are the thing you need to look out for here.

That said, I'd bet you anything you like that that Transition TR450 doesn't have any patents on its general layout (unless it's something obscure like tube forming). The suspension design has been done before - check out the Ventana El Cuervo, and prior to that, the 2002 Turner DHR.

Besides all that, most patents are almost entirely frivolous - the devil is absolutely in the details. Most bike companies realise this, hence why most suspension designs aren't actually patented.

 

[Reubs]

As S. said, devil is in the details.
I had a conversation with Noel Buckley from Knolly bikes last year about different designs. I'd asked him about how his 4x4 link gets around the FSR patent, if it was purely by having a 2nd swingarm or what. He said that only minute differences in setup totally change the design, so even by having a few mm of difference you can get around most patents, depending on how they are worded.

The FSR patent is soon to be defunct for specialized meaning that any company can use it without paying rights. When Rocky Mountain released the Altitude, Specialized were looking at its design very closely with their lawyers. It still uses Rocky's ETSX patent which places the "horst link" above the centerline of the rear axle. FSR patent states that the Horst link (the pivot near the wheel) is below the centreline. Hence it is different...

 

[SouthYarraSage]

Basically no way of knowing if you are infringing someone else's patents without checking. When you patent something you have to describe exactly, and disclose, what the 'special' thing is that you are patenting, and why it's special.

If what you've got looks the same as something that exists but functions quite differently, it may not infringe the patent, but best to check. Some manufacturers (not sure if bike manufacturers do this) provide reference numbers for their patents on their websites - you can then look them up online.