Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 178

Thread: New AR stock that facilitates aimed bump-firing

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by O.S.O.K. View Post
    Yeah, I remember that - it was mriddick for sure. I made one up too (using his example) - not hard to do but it keeps the stock from being closed all of the way. Just an AR spring with a cross-pin in the back to hold it in- and a hole through the catch latch with a pin to keep it open and the stock springy. Works. You can't hold the pistol grip but you can have it up on your shoulder. This was with the tapco carbine stock for AK's.
    In addition to my saved screenshots of this thread, this is to preserve the record of infringement of my patent and will be bookmarked.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by mriddick View Post
    I will agree my stock cost maybe $50 total in parts and 15 minutes work, hard to see where the $319 comes from.
    In addition to my saved screenshots of this thread, this is to preserve the record of infringement of my patent and will be bookmarked.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by skorpion View Post
    Thanks for the clear-up and the information, Mr. Akins! It's a shame how all of your work was basically thrown out the window because of the BATF flip-flopping on their decisions.
    Thanks for your sentiments skorpion. I appreciate it. It was a major setback to be sure. But now in addition to the Slide Fire Solutions ATF approval letter, I also am in possession of two other letters of approval requested by friends of mine wherein the ATF approves springless human isometric tension to translate the action back forwardly again after recoil. I intend to retrofit my 10/22 accelerator stock inventory to use an add on fore end pistol grip which will include what looks like another trigger but is actually an isometric tension lever that translates the action back forewardly after recoil without using a spring. As is covered in my patent. So all is not lost and all my work has not been thrown out the window. It will just be changed to opting to use human isometric tension instead of utilizing a spring. Will take a little time to add to my large existing inventory, but will be done.

  4. #24
    **Team GunsNet SILVER 12/2014** skorpion's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Oh-Hi-A
    Posts
    3,344
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Akins View Post
    While I opted to use a spring in the Akins Accelerators that we produced instead of using human isometric tension, specifically claim #1 (of 19 claims) of my patent (U.S. patent #6101918) does not limit my patent to only using a spring, but to any method of translating the action back forwardly again. Thus the claims of my patent covers not only using a spring, but also human isometric tension against the fore end of the stock, or any other method of translating the action or at least the trigger assembly back forwardly again after recoil. Consequently, Slide Fire Solutions and I are proceeding with patent licensing agreement negotiations.
    http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...&RS=PN/6101918

    Quote Originally Posted by US Patent Office
    I claim:

    1. An accelerating mechanism by which to increase the cyclic rate at which the trigger of a semi-automatic firearm can be actuated to discharge the firearm, the firearm having a supporting device, a receiver and a barrel supported from the supporting device, a trigger mechanism secured to the receiver and presenting a trigger, said accelerating mechanism comprising:

    means to permit the receiver, barrel and trigger mechanism to translate rearwardly a finite distance with respect to the supporting device in response to the recoil imparted to at least the trigger mechanism by the discharge of the semi-automatic firearm;

    means continuously biasing at least the trigger mechanism to translate forwardly with respect to the supporting device substantially said same predetermined distance;

    a locating stop means mounted on the supporting device;

    said locating stop means disposed to be engaged by the shooter's finger after the trigger has been actuated to fire the semi-automatic firearm, said engagement of the shooter's trigger finger with said locating stop effectively immobilizing the shooter's trigger finger with respect to said supporting device until the shooter releases his trigger finger from said locating stop means.

    2. The accelerating mechanism, as set forth in claim 1, further comprising:

    bumper means interposed between the receiver and said supporting device to dissipate shock loading.

    3. The accelerating mechanism, as set forth in claim 1, wherein said means longitudinally biasing at least the trigger mechanism comprises:

    a coil spring operatively interposed between said supporting device and at least the trigger mechanism.

    4. The accelerating mechanism, as set forth in claim 1, further comprising:

    a return bumper to absorb any shock imposed by said means continuously biasing at least the trigger mechanism.

    5. The accelerating mechanism, as set forth in claim 3, further comprising:

    bearing means interposed between at least selected of those components which translate with respect to each other.

    6. The accelerating mechanism, as set forth in claim 3, wherein:

    a shaft is secured to extend forwardly from said supporting device;

    a coil spring circumscribes said supporting device;

    a ferrule is secured to the barrel;

    said coil spring being interposed between said supporting device and said ferrule.

    7. An accelerating mechanism by which to increase the cyclic firing rate of a firearm in combination with a semi-automatic firearm, said combination comprising:

    a receiver and barrel assembly;

    a trigger assembly including a trigger and fire control mechanism supported from said receiver and barrel assembly;

    said trigger having a ready-to-fire position, a fire position and a reset position located between said ready-to-fire position and said fire position;

    a supporting device;

    said fire control mechanism requires that said trigger move rearwardly a finite distance with respect to said receiver and barrel assembly from said ready-to-fire position to said fire position in order to discharge the firearm as well as to require that said trigger move forwardly a finite distance with respect to said receiver and barrel assembly to said reset position after said firearm has been discharged in order to recycle said firing mechanism to permit a successive discharge of said firearm as the trigger is moved from said reset position to said fire position;

    a stop means presented from said supporting device to control the rearward movement of a shooter's trigger finger relative to said supporting device;

    said accelerating mechanism permitting said receiver and barrel assembly, together with said trigger and fire control mechanism, to move rearwardly with respect to said supporting device at least that finite distance required to move said trigger from said fire position to said reset position in order to cycle the fire control mechanism and then be biased forwardly with respect to said supporting device at least the distance required to move the trigger from said reset position to said fire position by engagement of said trigger against the shooter's trigger finger.

    8. The combination, as set forth in claim 7, wherein:

    the forward biasing of the receiver and barrel assembly, together with said trigger and fire control mechanism, is accomplished by a compression spring disposed between said supporting device and said receiver and barrel assembly.

    9. The combination, as set forth in claim 7, further comprising:

    return bumper means to cushion the movement of said receiver and barrel assembly as well as said trigger and fire control mechanism to their forwardmost position with respect to said supporting device.

    10. The combination, as set forth in claim 8, further comprising:

    a connecting ferrule supported from the barrel;

    a fore-end integral with said supporting device;

    said compression spring being disposed between said fore-end and said connecting ferrule.

    11. The combination, as set forth in claim 8, further comprising:

    bearing means disposed at selected locations between said supporting device and said receiver and barrel assembly.

    12. The combination, as set forth in claim 11, wherein said bearing means comprises:

    relatively low friction material interposed at selected locations between said receiver and barrel assembly and said supporting device.

    13. The combination, as set forth in claim 8, wherein said supporting device comprises:

    a butt portion; and,

    said compression spring is disposed between said butt portion of said supporting device and said receiver and barrel assembly.

    14. The combination, as set forth in claim 13, further comprising:

    a first stop flange presented from a mounting plate secured to said butt portion;

    a second stop flange presented from a slide plate secured to said receiver and barrel assembly;

    a return bumper interposed between said first and second stop flanges to absorb any shock imposed by said compression spring between said butt portion and said receiver and barrel assembly.

    15. The combination, as set forth in claim 13, further comprising:

    an anchor plate secured to said butt portion;

    rail means presented from said anchor plate;

    a slide plate mounted between said rail means for longitudinal reciprocation;

    means connecting said receiver and barrel assembly to said slide plate.

    16. The combination, as set forth in claim 15, further comprising:

    a forestock separate from said butt portion;

    said forestock supported from said receiver and barrel assembly for limited reciprocation.

    17. The combination, asset forth in claim 16, further comprising:

    spring means to define an at-rest position of said forestock with respect to said receiver and barrel assembly.

    18. The combination, as set forth in claim 17, further comprising:

    a guide means supported between said receiver housing and a ferrule mounted on said barrel;

    said forestock mounted on said guide means for longitudinal reciprocation;

    said spring means circumscribing said guide means and extending between said forestock and said ferrule.

    19. A method of accelerating the firing cycle of a semi-automatic firearm comprising the steps of:

    depressing the trigger with a shooter's trigger finger to discharge the firearm;

    immobilizing the shooter's finger in the position it has assumed to discharge the firearm;

    translating the trigger away from the immobilized trigger finger to effect a total disengagement therebetween; and,

    sequentially biasing the trigger into engagement with the immobilized trigger finger to effect successive discharges of the firearm.

  5. #25
    **Team GunsNet SILVER 12/2014** skorpion's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Oh-Hi-A
    Posts
    3,344
    I bet the BATF doesn't like these things, either, although it's not illegal yet to my knowledge:

    http://www.cabelas.com/10-22-accesso...ivator-2.shtml


  6. #26
    Senior Member mriddick's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,804
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Akins View Post
    In addition to my saved screenshots of this thread, this is to preserve the record of infringement of my patent and will be bookmarked.
    If you do just make sure you note I posted the final design of my bump stock on the old site 4 months before you announced your first model. Also it might be worthy to note that I was only improving upon the same idea I had seen shooters doing since the mid 80's. Seeing such things for 20 years (25 now) I never saw the idea of spring loaded bump stocks as all that revolutionary.

  7. #27
    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
    Bill - I don't think any of us was intending to market our toys? Just fyi - you are being a bit paranoid IMHO. And besides, mriddicks "design" was nothing like your's - from what I remember. Your's operates off of just the trigger being depressed. These other designs are such that you have to hold your finger against the trigger but not hold on to the grip - just a bump firing assist.

    And, I also recall miriddick's post preceeding anything being known about your invention.

    And isn't the device in the OP an infringement on your patent too? After all, the stock moves just like your's...

    I wish you the best of luck if you are continuing to push for legality of your gizmo but please stop with the "threatening" BS OK?

    -----------------

    OK - I just read your previous reply - according to you (as it sounds) anybody bumpfiring their gun is infringing on your patent. Or if the stock has some spring to it (wich is all the aformentioned stocks were), then it's an infringement on your patent.

    Wow, there are a whole bunch of products now on the market that preceded your patent that have springy butstocks and pads that could actually facilitate bump firing. ( How about a Romanian PSL? It has a spring-loaded recoil plate - and I think that was designed in the 70's? ).

    I don't mean to poke fun at you Bill - I am appauled at the treatement that you got from BATFE. Just that if we aren't your "friends", then nobody is and you're here attacking us...

    ----------------

    Yes - just went back and looked at that "slide fire" that's being sold. Bill, if that's not an infringement on your patent, I don't know what is... are you pursuing that?
    Last edited by O.S.O.K.; 12-10-2010 at 03:27 PM.
    ~Nemo me impune lacessit~




  8. #28
    Guns Network Lifetime Member #2

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    8,842
    I like it. Better grab one before the ATF flipflops as they like to do. They gotta manufacture law breakers cause they won't go after the violent criminals. They're good at taking down kittens and pregnant ladies I hear.

  9. #29
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    5
    Mr. Akins,
    I am a troll, and this is my first post on this forum. I only signed up here in order to say my piece about how you are treating people here. I expect to possibly be banned for this post, and as such i certainly would not get my feelings hurt.

    Bill, if I may. You are being a collossal asshole. It seems as though you're extremely hurt that the BATFE would reneg on their approval of your product. I can not blame you for being upset, and I side with you on this slap in the face by our government, as most here do I think. However, you're pissing on friends here. I don't know exactly how or what you have patented, and I don't care. No one does. If anyone should get mad, it's Slide Fire. Not you. If you had this super duper idea on paper, you should have made it a reality. You went a dfferent direction, and now Slide Fire has an item on the market that (while still overpriced) is roughly 30% the cost of what you had on the market.

    Please understand that I am in NO way affiliated with Slide Fire or the .gov. You're simply being a shit head, and when I see shit heads make butt hurt posts and wrongly insinuate legal action against someone, I call them out. I'd like to see you walk up and knock on the door of any of these people that you're making screen shots of and tell them that their use of springs, rubber bands, shoe strings, etc is in violaton of your patent, and to cease and desist. If you don't come away bleeding or with a black eye, I would be surprised. You gonna sue me for violating your obscure patent on belt loops and thumbs?

    I hope you lose every penny you have in frivolous suits. If your counsel was any good, he or she would tell you to quit while you're ahead. You say you've patented the design that Slide Fire now uses. You can't patent the human body and its function. A smart businessman like yourself would do well to possibly work with Slide Fire on future designs, as it's clear that you are of higher intelligence than the normal Joe (for example... me.)

    TL/DR: Mr. Akins holds a grudge and is crapping on some of his most ardent supporters.

    I may or may not be back. To the moderators and long standing members of this forum, please forgive my outburst and you may certainly do to this post or my account as you see fit.

  10. #30
    Senior Member mriddick's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,804
    This thread has gone from interesting to odd to down right weird all of only 2 pages. If we are ever to beat swampy's 52 page masterpiece we have got to slow down and bring up the weirdness level slowly. Here we are on page 2 and we are drawing lines like it's page 34...


    Quote Originally Posted by notsofunny View Post
    I may or may not be back. To the moderators and long standing members of this forum, please forgive my outburst and you may certainly do to this post or my account as you see fit.
    My guess is it's not really the big deal you think it is, stop the lurking and start some posting

  11. #31
    Contributor 02/2014 FunkyPertwee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    11,163
    Quote Originally Posted by notsofunny View Post
    Mr. Akins,
    I am a troll, and this is my first post on this forum. I only signed up here in order to say my piece about how you are treating people here. I expect to possibly be banned for this post, and as such i certainly would not get my feelings hurt.

    Bill, if I may. You are being a collossal asshole. It seems as though you're extremely hurt that the BATFE would reneg on their approval of your product. I can not blame you for being upset, and I side with you on this slap in the face by our government, as most here do I think. However, you're pissing on friends here. I don't know exactly how or what you have patented, and I don't care. No one does. If anyone should get mad, it's Slide Fire. Not you. If you had this super duper idea on paper, you should have made it a reality. You went a dfferent direction, and now Slide Fire has an item on the market that (while still overpriced) is roughly 30% the cost of what you had on the market.

    Please understand that I am in NO way affiliated with Slide Fire or the .gov. You're simply being a shit head, and when I see shit heads make butt hurt posts and wrongly insinuate legal action against someone, I call them out. I'd like to see you walk up and knock on the door of any of these people that you're making screen shots of and tell them that their use of springs, rubber bands, shoe strings, etc is in violaton of your patent, and to cease and desist. If you don't come away bleeding or with a black eye, I would be surprised. You gonna sue me for violating your obscure patent on belt loops and thumbs?

    I hope you lose every penny you have in frivolous suits. If your counsel was any good, he or she would tell you to quit while you're ahead. You say you've patented the design that Slide Fire now uses. You can't patent the human body and its function. A smart businessman like yourself would do well to possibly work with Slide Fire on future designs, as it's clear that you are of higher intelligence than the normal Joe (for example... me.)

    TL/DR: Mr. Akins holds a grudge and is crapping on some of his most ardent supporters.

    I may or may not be back. To the moderators and long standing members of this forum, please forgive my outburst and you may certainly do to this post or my account as you see fit.
    So far it sounds like your gonna fit in around here.

  12. #32
    Forum Administrator Schuetzenman's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    East of Atlanta GA
    Posts
    15,035

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Akins View Post
    In addition to my saved screenshots of this thread, this is to preserve the record of infringement of my patent and will be bookmarked.
    You know I just went from feeling sorry for what BATFE did to you to thinking you are a douce-bag and got what you deserved. Nice going!

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by mriddick View Post
    If you do just make sure you note I posted the final design of my bump stock on the old site 4 months before you announced your first model. Also it might be worthy to note that I was only improving upon the same idea I had seen shooters doing since the mid 80's. Seeing such things for 20 years (25 now) I never saw the idea of spring loaded bump stocks as all that revolutionary.
    I said I was not here to argue with people who do not understand the claims protected in my patent. But you force me to correct you MrRiddick.

    You do not seem to understand that it is irrelevant to the issue date of my patent of when I first announced or begin to sell my first model accelerator stocks. All that is relevant is when my patent was issued and in force from Aug 15, 2000.
    Understand that my patent #6101918 became valid on Aug 15, 2000.
    If you were unaware of my patent being legally in force since Aug 15, 2000, fully five years before you posted your infringing stock here, then your ignorance of the law is no excuse for infringement. Do you understand now?


    Your homemade converted Tapco stock infringement of my patented claims stock, that you posted at the old GunsNetwork site, you made five years after my patent was issued. Clearly an infringement of my patent claims and I will explain why a little further on. Here's two of your posts from the old GunsNet site that you made back in 2005 and 2006 when you posted about your infringing stock here. Five and six full years after my patent was issued and in force. We went through this discussion before five and six years ago at the old GunsNet site MrRiddick. You cannot rewrite history when I have your saved posts from 2005 and 2006 when you first posted here telling about your infringement upon my patent. Again, fully five and six years after my patent was issued and in force. Any ignorance of yours as to my patent issuance date, is no excuse. Again, you and I had this discussion five and six years ago at the old GunsNetwork site. Here's my proof.

    Note the date of your below post. It is 2005. Fully five years after my patent was issued.


    Note the date of your below post about making another infringement upon my patent AK stock in 2006. Fully six years after my patent was issued.


    You also stated that "you were only improving upon the same idea you had seen shooters doing since the mid 80's".

    There's just one problem with that MrRiddick. None of those shooters bothered to patent a rifles action reciprocating within at least a stationary buttstock whether the fore end moved or not. I DID, and I own that intellectual property that you infringed upon.

    MrRiddick, you also stated..."Seeing such things for 20 years (25 now) I never saw the idea of spring loaded bump stocks as all that revolutionary."

    Whether the idea was revolutionary or not MrRiddick, the fact is that I was the first person to be issued a patent for a spring loaded, or non spring loaded, firearm action that reciprocated back and forth a predetermined distance within a buttstock that was stationary whether the fore end moved or not. In fact two examples of Akins Acclerators are drawings in my patent of a one piece SKS stock where the entire stock stays stationary while the action reciprocates back and forth. And the other being the two piece AK stock wherein only the rear portion of the stock stayed stationary while the fore end moved back and forth with the shooters offhand. Both those stock examples in my patent drawings utilizing a spring, but again, that was my option to make them that way. My patent covers any means of continually biasing the action or at least the trigger assembly back forwardly after recoiling.

    Now that I've shown your infringement postings were five and six years after my patent was issued. I will now explain why your stock, and a few others who also made infringing copies of their own, are a violation of the claims in my patent.

    Here is my main claim #1 of 19 claims. There are FURTHER claims as stated at the beginning of my claim #2, but they are just that. FURTHER CLAIMS. They do not obviate the first previous claim, but simply ADD TO IT.

    "Claim #1. Quote Originally Posted by US Patent Office
    I claim:

    1. An accelerating mechanism by which to increase the cyclic rate at which the trigger of a semi-automatic firearm can be actuated to discharge the firearm, the firearm having a supporting device, a receiver and a barrel supported from the supporting device, a trigger mechanism secured to the receiver and presenting a trigger, said accelerating mechanism comprising:

    means to permit the receiver, barrel and trigger mechanism to translate rearwardly a finite distance with respect to the supporting device in response to the recoil imparted to at least the trigger mechanism by the discharge of the semi-automatic firearm;

    (MrRiddick, your infringing stock translated rearwardly a finite distance with respect to the supporting device (stock) in response to the recoil imparted to at least the trigger mechanism by the discharge of the semi_automatic firearm)

    means continuously biasing at least the trigger mechanism to translate forwardly with respect to the supporting device substantially said same predetermined distance;

    (MrRiddick, your infringing stock had a means continuously biasing (a spring) at least the trigger mechanism to translate forwardly with respect to the supporting device (stock) substantially said same predetermined distance)

    a locating stop means mounted on the supporting device;

    said locating stop means disposed to be engaged by the shooter's finger after the trigger has been actuated to fire the semi-automatic firearm, said engagement of the shooter's trigger finger with said locating stop effectively immobilizing the shooter's trigger finger with respect to said supporting device until the shooter releases his trigger finger from said locating stop means."

    Now do you understand that your several infringing stocks infringed upon two of the embodiments in claim #1 of my patent MrRiddick? Do you get it now?

    There were about 5 similar patent infringer like yourself. None them understood my patent and none of them cared. They tried to say they could make one if they weren't selling them. Look it up, patent law states that just the making (without selling or intending to sell) is still a patent infringement punishable by up to a $5000.00 fine for each separate infringement. You infringed at least two. That would be a $10,000 fine. Why did I not sue you and the other small timer garage infringers making one or two? It simply is not worth it to me unless one of you attempted to market it. But that is forebearance on my part. Realize, that I legally could if I chose to.

    We had this same conversation four and five years ago at the old GunsNetwork site MrRiddick.

    I hope this set the record straight, refreshed your memory and taught you some things you did not realize.

    .
    Last edited by Bill Akins; 12-10-2010 at 10:07 PM.

  14. #34
    Guns Network Lifetime Member #2

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    8,842
    Quote Originally Posted by notsofunny View Post
    Mr. Akins,
    I am a troll, and this is my first post on this forum. I only signed up here in order to say my piece about how you are treating people here. I expect to possibly be banned for this post, and as such i certainly would not get my feelings hurt.

    Bill, if I may. You are being a collossal asshole. It seems as though you're extremely hurt that the BATFE would reneg on their approval of your product. I can not blame you for being upset, and I side with you on this slap in the face by our government, as most here do I think. However, you're pissing on friends here. I don't know exactly how or what you have patented, and I don't care. No one does. If anyone should get mad, it's Slide Fire. Not you. If you had this super duper idea on paper, you should have made it a reality. You went a dfferent direction, and now Slide Fire has an item on the market that (while still overpriced) is roughly 30% the cost of what you had on the market.

    Please understand that I am in NO way affiliated with Slide Fire or the .gov. You're simply being a shit head, and when I see shit heads make butt hurt posts and wrongly insinuate legal action against someone, I call them out. I'd like to see you walk up and knock on the door of any of these people that you're making screen shots of and tell them that their use of springs, rubber bands, shoe strings, etc is in violaton of your patent, and to cease and desist. If you don't come away bleeding or with a black eye, I would be surprised. You gonna sue me for violating your obscure patent on belt loops and thumbs?

    I hope you lose every penny you have in frivolous suits. If your counsel was any good, he or she would tell you to quit while you're ahead. You say you've patented the design that Slide Fire now uses. You can't patent the human body and its function. A smart businessman like yourself would do well to possibly work with Slide Fire on future designs, as it's clear that you are of higher intelligence than the normal Joe (for example... me.)

    TL/DR: Mr. Akins holds a grudge and is crapping on some of his most ardent supporters.

    I may or may not be back. To the moderators and long standing members of this forum, please forgive my outburst and you may certainly do to this post or my account as you see fit.
    I would have to agree with that. Alienate your prospective customers and see what your patent gets you.

  15. #35
    Contributor 02/2014 FunkyPertwee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    11,163
    I would never buy a thing from this guy.

    Your my new Olympic arms.

  16. #36
    Senior Member mriddick's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,804
    Before you guys are too hard on Mr Akins you should read this: http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/dec...eads-him-ruin/
    I think he's mad at quite a few people, most notable the BATF and from the sound of the article has lost quite a bit personally in the deal. I bet from his point of view this whole mess is quite abit more stressing then anything most of us have ever experienced and I don't blame the guy for venting, maybe it's alittle over the top but still...
    Last edited by mriddick; 12-10-2010 at 11:03 PM.

  17. #37
    Administrator Krupski's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    ┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐
    Posts
    15,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Akins View Post
    In addition to my saved screenshots of this thread, this is to preserve the record of infringement of my patent and will be bookmarked.
    Excuse me? Are you on drugs?

    I put 1/2 of an AR-15 recoil spring between my buffer tube and rear of the Telestock long before I ever even heard of you or your spring loaded 10/22.

    You claim to patent springs and "isometric tension?

    I bump fire all the time. Sue me.
    Gentlemen may prefer Blondes, but Real Men prefer Redheads!

  18. #38
    Administrator Krupski's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    ┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐
    Posts
    15,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Akins View Post
    Thanks for your sentiments skorpion. I appreciate it. It was a major setback to be sure. But now in addition to the Slide Fire Solutions ATF approval letter, I also am in possession of two other letters of approval requested by friends of mine wherein the ATF approves springless human isometric tension to translate the action back forwardly again after recoil.
    I think it sucks what BATFE did to you, and I sincerely hope all turns out well for you and your company.

    But don't think you have any patent or claim on generic bump firing or springs.

    If Bubba Joe puts the rifle stock against his beer belly and uses a combination of "body fat spring" and "isometric tension" to bump fire, are you going to sue him for illegal infringement? Body fat as a spring?

    This is the funniest thread... ever.
    Gentlemen may prefer Blondes, but Real Men prefer Redheads!

  19. #39
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by mriddick View Post
    Before you guys are too hard on Mr Akins you should read this: http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/dec...eads-him-ruin/
    I think he's mad at quite a few people, most notable the BATF and from the sound of the article has lost quite a bit personally in the deal. I bet from his point of view this whole mess is quite abit more stressing then anything most of us have ever experienced and I don't blame the guy for venting.
    Stressing, yes. Like I said before, I feel for him on the BATFE flinging him the bird. I side with him on this issue without question. But he is taking his anger out on people who are doing him no harm.

    What if I wanted to heat up a piece of scrap steel and bang it into a certain shape... let's say an arrow or spade. And then I attached it to the end of a stick. I have effectively made a shovel. Who patented the shovel? Anybody know? DOES ANYBODY FUCKING CARE? Hey, if there's no patent, maybe I'll patent it and make BILLIONZ!!!!

    Look, Mr. Akins. I truly hate that you got renegged on. And I really believe that you have the intelligence and ability to bring something special to the table. But party crashing like you are is silly. The way you are acting here will not remain in this forum, and anything you may do in the future will be diminished by your hateful (and ultimately weightless) remarks on this forum. The bottom line is, you invested valuable time and money in a product, and you got screwed. Stop wasting your time hunting down petty patent "infringements" and devote it in your shop. Bring us something that would make a company like Slide Fire take notice. Build a better mouse trap. Chances are, Slide Fire never looked into your patents and at best it was unintentional. And if you can prove that you invented the belt loop/rubber band/shoe lace method, then I'll close my trap. and hating on Slide Fire's method is like saying I infringed on someone's directional butt wiping patent because it pleases me to wipe side to side as opposed to front to back.

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by O.S.O.K. View Post
    Bill - I don't think any of us was intending to market our toys? Just fyi - you are being a bit paranoid IMHO. And besides, mriddicks "design" was nothing like your's - from what I remember. Your's operates off of just the trigger being depressed. These other designs are such that you have to hold your finger against the trigger but not hold on to the grip - just a bump firing assist.

    You do not understand that under patent law, just the making, even with no intent to sell, is a patent infringement. If you had numerous patent infringers (at least four or five) that were true, small time, onezies and twozies infringing, but infringing nonetheless upon your intellectual property you paid $10,000 to patent, you would not be paranoid, but not happy about it either I don't believe. MrRiddick's stocks did infringe upon several of the embodiments of claim #1 of my patent. His barreled receiver and trigger group recoiled rearwardly inside an at least stationary rear portion buttstock. Exactly as in my patent claims. He also utilized a means to continually bias the barreled receiver or at least the trigger group back forwardly to bring the trigger back into battery with the shooters trigger finger. Exactly as in my patent. Read claim #1 of my patent. Quit making misstatement and assumptions and go read it.

    And, I also recall miriddick's post preceeding anything being known about your invention.

    I have disproven that by posting MrRiddicks posts from 2005 and 2006 that proves he made his infringing stocks fully five and six years after my patent issue date of Aug 15, 2000. So my invention/patent was known and issued and public record five and six years before MrRiddick's infringement stocks being unveiled at the old GunsNetwork site.

    And isn't the device in the OP an infringement on your patent too? After all, the stock moves just like your's...

    In my first post to this thread, I stated that Slide Fire Solutions and I are currently involved with the process of patent licensing negiotiations. If they license my patent, then they are not infringing. You must have missed reading that.

    I wish you the best of luck if you are continuing to push for legality of your gizmo but please stop with the "threatening" BS OK?

    I don't know where you get the idea I am "threatening" anyone. I am not and have not. I have simply proven that MrRiddick and around four others like him, small time garage onezie's and twozie's infringers who infringed upon my patent. I have also taken the time to explain how they did so. I have stated that I will vigerously defend my patent. That is not a threat to anyone. That is my legal right to protect my intellectual property and to inform anyone who infringes it, that they are doing so. Whether or not I decide it is worth it to initiate patent infringement litigation against small time garage infringers, is irrelevant to whether they are infringing or not. Who is the "threatened" one here? Myself who had at least four or five infringers upon my patent that I paid $10,000 to be issued, or the infringers who "threaten" my patented intellectual property? It is interesting that you do not see infringers as "threatening" to my intellectual property, but that you find my informing them of their infringement...somehow threatening.


    OK - I just read your previous reply - according to you (as it sounds) anybody bumpfiring their gun is infringing on your patent. Or if the stock has some spring to it (wich is all the aformentioned stocks were), then it's an infringement on your patent.

    You misunderstood. If you bothered to read my patent claims as posted by Skorpion, (thanks Skorpion), I do not claim that anybody bumpfiring their gun is infringing on my patent. That is a very incorrect assumption and statement on your part. Read claim #1 in my patent as posted by Skorpion. Then you will understand that I did not patent bumpfiring. I patented bumpfiring in at least a stationary rear buttstock whether the fore end was also stationary, or whether it moved, or not. Carefully read claim #1 and you will understand.

    Wow, there are a whole bunch of products now on the market that preceded your patent that have springy butstocks and pads that could actually facilitate bump firing. ( How about a Romanian PSL? It has a spring-loaded recoil plate - and I think that was designed in the 70's? ).


    If my intellectual property was not patentable as decided by a patent examiner, then I would never have been issued a patent on Aug 15, 2000. If prior art existed in the public domain that was identical to my claims, then my claims would never have been passed by the patent examiners nor my patent issued.
    But it was patentable because no one else had ever patented exactly what I claimed in my patent claims. You are entirely correct that there may have been springy butt pads that could facilitate bumpfiring. And they WOULD NOT infringe upon my patent claims (that you have not bothered to read or else you would not make these uninformed statements) and here is why they would not be infringements upon my patent. My claims were for at least the rear buttstock to be stationary while the barreled receiver and trigger group recoiled rearwardly within that stationary rear buttstock, and then had a means to continuously bias back forwardly again. So the springy butt plates you describe, that cause the ENTIRE stock and barreled action to move to bumpfire, is totally different from my patent claims that cover at least a stationary rear buttstock that the action moves back and forth within. Do you understand the difference? Springy buttplate entire stocks and barreled receivers and trigger groups moving to bumpfire, does not infringe my patent, because my patent is for at least the rear buttstock of the firearm to remain stationary while the barreled receiver moves back and forth within it. Two totally different animals. And such a springy buttplate bumpfire stock WOULD NOT infringe against my patent. I did not patent bumpfiring nor bumpfiring in all its possibilities. But I DID patent bumpfiring within at least the stationary rear buttstock portion of the firearm.

    I don't mean to poke fun at you Bill - I am appauled at the treatement that you got from BATFE. Just that if we aren't your "friends", then nobody is and you're here attacking us...

    I am not attacking anyone. I am pointing out what my patent claims are, and how they have been infringed. If anyone has been "attacked" it is I by the patent infringers. I have many friends who are informed and understand what my patent is, and what infringes upon it. It is public record. Skorpion posted my patent claims here in this thread. All you have to do is read it. Especially claims #1. Understand this, people who infringe upon my patent are not my friends. Would they be yours if they infringed upon your patent and then ignorant of your patent and patent law, they wanted to argue with you and deny what they did and try to rewrite and convice people they were not infringing when their posts prove they were?

    ----------------

    Yes - just went back and looked at that "slide fire" that's being sold. Bill, if that's not an infringement on your patent, I don't know what is... are you pursuing that?
    Slide Fire Solutions and I are currently involved with my patent license negiotiating. I stated that in my very first post. then I stated it again in a later post at this same thread. This is my third time re-stating that. A lot of the assumptions, misstatements and questions you have, I have already answered in my previous posts at this thread. If you would read them.

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... 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
  •