Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 178

Thread: New AR stock that facilitates aimed bump-firing

  1. #101
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    24
    A picture is worth a thousand words, Mr. Akins.

    See below,




    Now please hit the "PrtSn" button. Your keyboard may have it listed as "Print Screen" or some derivative thereof.

    Open up a word processing or paint document of your choosing.

    Right Click on your mouse.

    Hit "Save As"

    Enter in "Medic_Krebs evidence".

    Save that into your butt-hurt file.

  2. #102
    Senior Member Kadmos's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    STL
    Posts
    7,682
    Personally I think it's perfectly reasonable to have a file of "evidence" of "basement-workshop" patent infringers.

    A patent is seriously time consuming and expensive to get, and even once you get it, you only hold it for a rather limited amount of time.

    Time that is usually desperately needed to market the product and make a name for yourself.

    Being able to post in a forum, or send a form letter, to the guy in the basement workshop who is in fact infringing on your patent is a cheap, sensible way to help protect the patent.

    If you can say "excuse me but I already hold a patent on that and want to make you aware that if you build or try to sell that item, then you risk a lawsuit"...that keeps the competition at bay while you use the limited time when the item is "yours and only yours" to make.

    Now after having probably said that politely 10,000 or so times, it probably gets rather old and a person lapses into "legal speak" rather than "polite speak"...not much consolation to the person who hears it rudely, but...it happens.

    Personally when I first saw Mr. Akins device I thought it didn't pass the sniff test of legality, and said so here. And of course was jumped upon for saying so. I've always sort of shaken my head at that product wondering why the ATF sent the initial letter approving it.

    But they did, which of course makes what they did later all that much worse.

    I'll admit I'm not 100% on the understanding of how the Akins device worked, never had the chance to examine one up close, does anyone happen to know if it was capable of being fired one handed? Or by bracing the fore-end hand under the pistol grip? Like shooting a pistol?

    It seemed to me that pulling the stock forward wasn't necessary on the Akins, where it would appear necessary on this new one.

  3. #103
    ADMIN | LOGIC POLICE RJ Shooter's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    SW Florida
    Posts
    12,079
    ...ONLY if they try to "SELL" the product! The "members" here making "bump stocks" are not infringing on any patent Mr Bill has or had - Plain & Simple!

    Just like if I shoot a home video, that contains a can of "Coca-Cola!" Unless I market or sell the video, I am not infringing on any Trademark or CopyWrite of that corporation...
    The Guns Network | Often Imitated - Never Duplicated!
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  4. #104
    Senior Member Kadmos's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    STL
    Posts
    7,682
    Quote Originally Posted by RJ Shooter View Post
    ...ONLY if they try to "SELL" the product! The "members" here making "bump stocks" are not infringing on any patent Mr Bill has or had - Plain & Simple!

    Just like if I shoot a home video, that contains a can of "Coca-Cola!" Unless I market or sell the video, I am not infringing on any Trademark or CopyWrite of that corporation...
    You aren't making coca cola, that would be a copy-write infringement, taking a picture of it, not a patent infringement.

    Just because you are making it for your own use does not mean you are not infringing on his patent.

    You are.

    35 U.S.C. 271 Infringement of patent.

    (a) Except as otherwise provided in this title, whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the United States, or imports into the United States any patented invention during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent.
    But the only one who can really stop you would be Mr. Akins, and to do that he would have to sue you...not worth it from his standpoint to take you to court. But very worth it to send you a letter or let you know on a forum before you decide to try to sell it.

    Making a copy, even for personal use only, is technically an infringment on his property.

    This is a lot like the story of Eli Whitney, who "invented" the cotton gin. The idea had been around for centuries, but his was different enough, and worked well enough (for lack of a better phrase) that he was granted a patent on it. The problem was, once the idea was out there, just about every farmer with semi-decent mechanical skills was able to make workable basic copies of it. And he spent quite a bit of the rest of his life trying to sue them to stop, which didn't work out all that great for him.

    Once his patent had expired, every time someone made an improvement to the device they were free to patent their improvements. Kinda insult to injury I would think.
    Last edited by Kadmos; 12-11-2010 at 07:09 PM.

  5. #105
    Administrator imanaknut's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Indiana, a state that is trying to remain free.
    Posts
    12,280
    Quote Originally Posted by 308 View Post
    If there was no BATFE, I'd imagine we'd all be friends here in this thread rather than shittin all over each other.

    Actually if there was no ATF then Mr. Atkins would not have had to think about what he eventually patented. We would not have to worry about bump firing. All we would have to do is flip a lever on our firearms from single shot to multiple. Fully auto, and burst fire would and should be available on any firearm, but ATF said no. Without ATF there would also be a lot less people in prison for exercising their constitutional rights.

    Sorry to ATF agents reading this, I don't want you to lose your jobs, jut the "F" from your company name.

  6. #106
    ADMIN | LOGIC POLICE RJ Shooter's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    SW Florida
    Posts
    12,079
    Quote Originally Posted by Kadmos View Post
    Making a copy, even for personal use only, is technically an infringement on his property.
    But the point is, nobody here made a copy of anything Mr Bill patented!!! If the product made, differs even slightly to the patent in question, it is not a violation. Glock tried to sue all the companies that made the initial copies of their trigger (ie S&W Sigma, etc.) and lost. They weren't 1 to 1 copies, and differed enough for it not to be a violation!

    Even the striker mechanisms of most modern striker fired (safe action) semi autos, are a pretty close copy of Glock line of pistols (XD, XDm, M&P, etc.).
    The Guns Network | Often Imitated - Never Duplicated!
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  7. #107
    Senior Member Kadmos's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    STL
    Posts
    7,682
    Quote Originally Posted by RJ Shooter View Post
    But the point is, nobody here made a copy of anything Mr Bill patented!!! If the product made, differs even slightly to the patent in question, it is not a violation. Glock tried to sue all the companies that made the initial copies of their trigger (ie S&W Sigma, etc.) and lost. They weren't 1 to 1 copies, and differed enough for it not to be a violation!

    Even the striker mechanisms of most modern striker fired (safe action) semi autos, are a pretty close copy of Glock line of pistols (XD, XDm, M&P, etc.).
    Every case will have differences due to the specifics, but the law is still the same. You cannot (generally speaking) make a copy of of a patented item without risking lawsuit.

    If Mr. Akins believes that the devices made here are/were substantially similar enough to proceed with a lawsuit, then he has every right to do so.

    If the court finds they are similar enough, or not, that's up to them, a question of facts, not law.

    In the meantime Mr. Akins still holds the patent to the device, and technically speaking if you were trying to make a copy, or a substantially similar device, then you either need to get a license from him, or risk lawsuit.

  8. #108
    Surly
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by 1 Patriot-of-many View Post
    Shouldn't have to, but that's another story. How's it going over there, you getting the same blizzard I presume?
    Unfortunately it went over north of me. It did follow me back from MT yesterday though. It was nice enough for me to go out and shoot this afternoon though...with my Carhart, knit cap and gloves. It's still shooting though.

  9. #109
    Senior Member Uncle Scary's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    242
    Ammo is money. Who's bump firing in this economy?

  10. #110
    Moderator & Team Gunsnet Platinum 07/2011 O.S.O.K.'s Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Deep In The Heart of Texas
    Posts
    9,363
    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Scary View Post
    Ammo is money. Who's bump firing in this economy?
    Ain't that the truth.

    And Kadmos =
    ~Nemo me impune lacessit~




  11. #111
    Senior Member Kadmos's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    STL
    Posts
    7,682
    Quote Originally Posted by O.S.O.K. View Post
    And Kadmos =
    Gee..sorry for putting, what, 3 posts in a six page thread?

  12. #112
    Administrator imanaknut's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Indiana, a state that is trying to remain free.
    Posts
    12,280
    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Scary View Post
    Ammo is money. Who's bump firing in this economy?
    Boy is this the truth!!! I'm down to one clinton mag per firearm per range trip, and instead of every week hitting the range, I am down to once a month! Does seem like ammo is slowly coming down, but...

    As to bump firing devices, going to go the way of the shoe string?

  13. #113
    Guns Network Lifetime Member #2

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    8,845
    Quote Originally Posted by Kadmos View Post
    Personally I think it's perfectly reasonable to have a file of "evidence" of "basement-workshop" patent infringers.

    A patent is seriously time consuming and expensive to get, and even once you get it, you only hold it for a rather limited amount of time.

    Time that is usually desperately needed to market the product and make a name for yourself.

    Being able to post in a forum, or send a form letter, to the guy in the basement workshop who is in fact infringing on your patent is a cheap, sensible way to help protect the patent.

    If you can say "excuse me but I already hold a patent on that and want to make you aware that if you build or try to sell that item, then you risk a lawsuit"...that keeps the competition at bay while you use the limited time when the item is "yours and only yours" to make.

    Now after having probably said that politely 10,000 or so times, it probably gets rather old and a person lapses into "legal speak" rather than "polite speak"...not much consolation to the person who hears it rudely, but...it happens.

    Personally when I first saw Mr. Akins device I thought it didn't pass the sniff test of legality, and said so here. And of course was jumped upon for saying so. I've always sort of shaken my head at that product wondering why the ATF sent the initial letter approving it.

    But they did, which of course makes what they did later all that much worse.

    I'll admit I'm not 100% on the understanding of how the Akins device worked, never had the chance to examine one up close, does anyone happen to know if it was capable of being fired one handed? Or by bracing the fore-end hand under the pistol grip? Like shooting a pistol?

    It seemed to me that pulling the stock forward wasn't necessary on the Akins, where it would appear necessary on this new one.
    Why wouldn't it pass the smell test? The definition of MG is clear. I don't care what whether you use a illegal shoestring or spring, one shot per trigger pull is still a semiauto firearm.

  14. #114
    Senior Member matshock's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,406
    Quote Originally Posted by 1 Patriot-of-many View Post
    Why wouldn't it pass the smell test? The definition of MG is clear. I don't care what whether you use a illegal shoestring or spring, one shot per trigger pull is still a semiauto firearm.
    Yep, if only more people cared enough about the 2nd to hold the BATFE and their handlers to the rule of law- well then there wouldn't even been a distinction between MGs and flint locks.

  15. #115
    Conributor 09/13 slamfire51's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    The South
    Posts
    8,200
    Damn, I swear I have not seen so much typing by one member since I've been here.
    Could it be copied and pasted from other boards he has also threatened?

    After reading this whole thread, it sounds like Mr. Akins is trying to make a living by going after and suing ghost patent infringements. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a patent of an item NOT approved by the BATFE useless anyway?

    This thread HAS to be the craziest I've read to date.
    There's no problem an AK can't solve...........


    GUNSNET Member Since 2003
    CCW Permit
    03 FFL

  16. #116
    Senior Member sniper_n_training's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    284
    Please, for the love of God, no-one start making jokes involving plane tickets and GunsNet members. That would most likely push this thread to 30+ pages within a couple days.

    I wonder if this post will land in his 3-mile long line of people to piss on. If so, have at it Bill!

  17. #117
    Conributor 09/13 slamfire51's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    The South
    Posts
    8,200
    Quote Originally Posted by sniper_n_training View Post
    Please, for the love of God, no-one start making jokes involving plane tickets and GunsNet members. That would most likely push this thread to 30+ pages within a couple days.
    How about this?

    There's no problem an AK can't solve...........


    GUNSNET Member Since 2003
    CCW Permit
    03 FFL

  18. #118
    Senior Member Kadmos's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    STL
    Posts
    7,682
    Quote Originally Posted by 1 Patriot-of-many View Post
    Why wouldn't it pass the smell test? The definition of MG is clear. I don't care what whether you use a illegal shoestring or spring, one shot per trigger pull is still a semiauto firearm.
    It seems to me, and this is without having looked at the item up close, that a single trigger pull sets in motion the series of events which causes the gun to fire essentially full auto. If I have clear how it works, one pull causes it. And releasing the trigger (or running out of ammo) stops it. For all intents and purposes it's a conversion that makes the gun full auto.

    My understanding of the Akins device is that one could mount the stock in a vise, and with one pull of the trigger all the way back, and holding the trigger back, the gun will fire full auto.

    I get that some would rather call this "bumpfiring" due to legal issues with full autos, but frankly I'm not sure it qualifies.

    From what this other new product looks like, you must physically pull the stock forward in order to get the "full auto" effect. An action that seems much closer to actual "bumpfiring". It *seems* as though if that one were locked in a vise and given one squeezed trigger pull it would simply fire one time.

    While some of us may want these to be legal, it's obviously questionable, which is why both Akins and this other one both wrote to the BATF to get their opinion. Reason itself that the sniff test finds them questionable.

    If something is clearly legal, there is no reason to ask the ATF their opinion and to send a sample for them to examine. You wouldn't do that if you were making just any other stock.

    Granted it's good that they asked (well the first time at least), otherwise Mr. Akins could be typing this from prison.

    These guys are playing right up to the edge of the line, and I think they know that, it gets to where the question of legality becomes the opinion of one person, a risky proposition.

  19. #119
    Senior Member Solidus-snake's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    1,837
    So according to this logic, one cannot make ANYTHING in their own home pretty much. I cant carve out a bowl, spoon, cup, or fork out of wood because THAT would be making a device similiar to someone elses?

    EDIT: While were talking about the ATF..... KISS MY ASS YOU ATF TURDS.

    That is all..

  20. #120
    Senior Member Kadmos's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    STL
    Posts
    7,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Solidus-snake View Post
    So according to this logic, one cannot make ANYTHING in their own home pretty much. I cant carve out a bowl, spoon, cup, or fork out of wood because THAT would be making a device similiar to someone elses?
    Yes, that's it exactly, you aren't allowed to make anything.

    You can't even legally take a crap, because someone did it before.

    Seriously?!

    NO!

    Some things (many) are public domain. The fork was invented centuries ago. Even if it had a patent, it has long since expired. IIRC patents are now good for 20 years, after that time anyone can make one.

    However, if the National Fork company designs a special decoration (pattern) for a fork and calls it the "flaming willow", and then patents it, you could not make an exact replica until the patent expires (actually it would probably a copy write issue, but hopefully you get the point)....lets say they make a fork with a second handle, a vertical foregrip for maximum control and are granted a patent, then you would not be allowed to make the same style without risking being sued.

    The patent office decides what is "patentable" using the laws as a guide, and it requires a ton of research to make sure it wasn't already patented by someone else or is in the public domain. It's a very cumbersome and expensive process.

    You can't just draw a circle on a piece of paper and say "you know, for cars" and try to patent "the wheel".

    It has to be something new, or a substantial "improvement" to something old.

    But if the patent office does approve it and grant a patent, then for that 20 years, it's yours...no one else can make one, either for personal use or to sell without getting your permission first. Because it is your property, yes it's intellectual property, rather than physical property, but its still yours...for a limited time

    This is as much of a fundamental property right as owning land, if someone wants to use your device they either need to
    1. buy the product from you
    2. get permission from you to make one for themselves
    3 wait for your patent to expire.

    This gives the inventor a chance to market their own design, hold off competition, and even gives him time to make improvements (which may also be patentable) to establish himself in the marketplace.

    It was due to his skull sweat, and quickness to patent, that the idea is out there, so it makes sense to give him a bit of time to make the most of it.

    Without this, there would be much less incentive to make something new, or to make improvements on existing products.

Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •