Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 178

Thread: New AR stock that facilitates aimed bump-firing

  1. #41
    Administrator Krupski's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    ┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐
    Posts
    15,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Akins View Post
    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.
    You or your lawyer must be smoking some good stuff. Sure you can patent your Ruger 10/22 modification, but you cannot patent a generic idea.

    If you think you own the rights to anyone who bumpfires or anyone who adds a spring to their rifle, then all I can do is slowly shake my head and try not to laugh.

    Actually, MANY years ago... MANY years ago... long before I ever even owned guns, I had the idea "hey I wonder if the rifle recoils backwards will it come back forward and fire itself again?"

    I thought of the basic concept of bump firing long before I owned guns, long before Gunsnet was on the web, long before there WAS a world wide web and certainly long before you patented (or thought) of anything.

    "Bump firing", I am quite sure, is a term that WE throw around here. I've never seen the term in a magazine or book. I've only read it here.

    In fact, the first time I heard the term, I though "oh yeah that's the thing I thought of years ago".

    Not the refined, machined parts that YOU made, but the generic idea of recoil operated rapid fire.

    Surely you know how an M2 and M1919 machine gun work? The action reciprocates with a "booster spring". You gonna sue John Browning too?

    I'll post a picture of my AR-15 spring stock. I'll send you a video of me using it. Hell I'll mail you one for your own. Come sue me.

    Good grief.
    Gentlemen may prefer Blondes, but Real Men prefer Redheads!

  2. #42
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Akins View Post
    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.


    Very well. I hope things work out well for both parties involved. If it's indeed your patent, then bring us one for $100 and I'll buy it. Just stop being an asshole.

  3. #43
    Administrator Krupski's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    ┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐
    Posts
    15,653
    Quote Originally Posted by notsofunny View Post
    Very well. I hope things work out well for both parties involved. If it's indeed your patent, then bring us one for $100 and I'll buy it. Just stop being an asshole.
    Really true.

    I do feel bad the screwing Mr. Akins got from the jack booted BATFE assholes, and I hope he wins whatever battles he has with them and their absurd "ruling for today" way of doing things.

    But, coming here and yelling at us for using springs is crazy.

    There are spring stocks available for shotguns to take out the painful recoil. One of these, combined with a semi auto shotgun, would probably bump fire. Is THAT a patent infringement? Please.

    What if I pull the trigger fast? Is that "isometric tension"? Am I going to be sued?

    If Mr. Akins has his panties in a bunch over bump firing, them I suggest he not visit YouTube... because there are thousands of videos of people bumpfiring. And 99% of them, no doubt, have never heard of an "Akins Accelerator".
    Gentlemen may prefer Blondes, but Real Men prefer Redheads!

  4. #44
    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.
    You lose your argument before you even begin when you resort to name calling ad-homimem attacks instead of sticking to the facts of claim #1 of my patent as was posted at this thread by Skorpion. Try reading it. Three people at this thread posted in this thread about their stocks they made that infringed upon my patent, BEFORE I ever made my first post to this thread. I do not consider those infringers "ardent supporters". They are patent infringers (knowingly or not, ignorance of the law is no excuse). I have stuck to the scientific and legal patent facts while yourself and others who do not care about the facts, resort to name calling ad-hominem attacks because you refuse to acknowledge the claims of my patent or to even bother reading them. Again, regarding Slide Fire Solutions, (for the fourth time in this thread alone), Slide Fire Solutions and I are currently involved with patent license negiotiating.

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by 1 Patriot-of-many View Post
    I would have to agree with that. Alienate your prospective customers and see what your patent gets you.
    Prospective customers are not infringers upon my patent. And patent infringers are not prospective customers. They alienated me when they posted about their infringement upon my patent. Only after three of them posted of their infringement of my patent in this thread, did I even post. Again, just read my patent claim #1 as posted at this thread by Skorpion. It is easy to do.

  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Krupski View Post
    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.
    You may have put a spring between your buffer tube and stock long before you ever heard of my patented stock. But did you patent that claim embodiment?

    I did.

    Read my patent claim #1 as posted by Skorpion. That claim and the following other 18 claims, explain what I patented. Don't assume, read what it says.

  7. #47
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Akins View Post
    You lose your argument before you even begin when you resort to name calling ad-homimem attacks instead of sticking to the facts of claim #1 of my patent as was posted at this thread by Skorpion. Try reading it. Three people at this thread posted in this thread about their stocks they made that infringed upon my patent, BEFORE I ever made my first post to this thread. I do not consider those infringers "ardent supporters". They are patent infringers (knowingly or not, ignorance of the law is no excuse). I have stuck to the scientific and legal patent facts while yourself and others who do not care about the facts, resort to name calling ad-hominem attacks because you refuse to acknowledge the claims of my patent or to even bother reading them. Again, regarding Slide Fire Solutions, (for the fourth time in this thread alone), Slide Fire Solutions and I are currently involved with patent license negiotiating.
    Boo hoo... with your words like "ad-hominem". Hominem... isn't that some kind of corn?

    You can infringe all up and down my cock for all I care.

    Like I said before, you bring us a better looking version of what Slide Fire is offering, with a reasonable price tag, and I guarantee that you will have my business.

  8. #48
    Contributor 02/2014 FunkyPertwee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    11,163
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Akins View Post
    You may have put a spring between your buffer tube and stock long before you ever heard of my patented stock. But did you patent that claim embodiment?

    I did.

    Read my patent claim #1 as posted by Skorpion. That claim and the following other 18 claims, explain what I patented. Don't assume, read what it says.
    So now you want it to be illegal for anyone to do that themselves at home?

    If so, I find that unreasonable regardless of patent laws.

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Krupski View Post
    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.
    You are entirely correct that what you describe does not infringe upon my patent. You are confusing regular all stock and metal action bumpfiring, with my patented bumpfiring method of the barreled receiver and trigger group reciprocating back and forth within a STATIONARY at least REAR BUTTSTOCK that does not move like "Bubba's" stock moves along with the metal action of his gun. You are misunderstanding and thinking I am saying I patented all forms of bumpfiring. I did not. In essence, I patented bumpfiring within a STATIONARY rear buttstock while the barreled receiver and trigger group reciprocates within that STATIONARY at least REAR BUTTSTOCK. Do you understand the difference? I have stated this over and over and still people misunderstand and think I am saying I patented bumpfiring in general. That is not the case. Again, for the upteenth time in this thread, simply read my claim #1 of my patent as posted by Skorpion at this thread. That and the other 18 claims are what I patented. No more, no less. Not all bumpfiring methods, but yes....bumpfiring a moving barreled receiver and trigger group that reciprocates back and forth within a STATIONARY REAR BUTTSTOCK.....I did patent that along with other embodiments contained in my 19 patent claims. Again, read them in Skorpion's post at this thread and then you will understand.
    Last edited by Bill Akins; 12-10-2010 at 11:47 PM.

  10. #50
    Administrator Krupski's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    ┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐
    Posts
    15,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Akins View Post
    Prospective customers are not infringers upon my patent. And patent infringers are not prospective customers. They alienated me when they posted about their infringement upon my patent. Only after three of them posted of their infringement of my patent in this thread, did I even post. Again, just read my patent claim #1 as posted at this thread by Skorpion. It is easy to do.
    Bill, THOUSANDS of people... maybe hundreds of thousands.... bump fire. They either use steel springs, or they use denim springs (thumb hooked in a belt loop) or even body fat (belly bumping).

    You are deluding yourself if you think anyone who uses recoil to re-fire their rifles is a "patent infringer".

    You also haven't answered my question. Browning machineguns use recoil spring technology. Do they also infringe?

    I know why you haven't answered me. You know why you haven't answered me. LOL at you!

    I'll be thinking of you tomorrow at the range when I bump fire a few mags out of my AR-15. I may even take a picture of it for ya!
    Gentlemen may prefer Blondes, but Real Men prefer Redheads!

  11. #51
    Administrator Krupski's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    ┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐
    Posts
    15,653
    Quote Originally Posted by FunkyPertwee View Post
    So now you want it to be illegal for anyone to do that themselves at home?

    If so, I find that unreasonable regardless of patent laws.
    I'm no lawyer, patent or otherwise, but I do not think a patent even covers a private person building a patented copy of any item for private use.

    I mean, if the Sham Wow dude sells chamois cloths and he's got the idea patented, do you mean I can't buy a piece of chamois and cut out a square of it and use it to clean stuff in my own home???

    Besides, patented or not, if the Akins Accelerator becomes a mainstream item, the Chinese will copy it and sell them at WalMart for $10.

    In the mean time, I'll put a bump spring into the stock of any damn rifle I please, and I'll post videos to prove it if anyone doubts it.
    Gentlemen may prefer Blondes, but Real Men prefer Redheads!

  12. #52
    Administrator Krupski's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    ┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐
    Posts
    15,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Akins View Post
    .......I patented bumpfiring within a STATIONARY rear buttstock while the barreled receiver and trigger group reciprocates within that STATIONARY at least REAR BUTTSTOCK. Do you understand the difference?....
    Yes indeed I do. And that's exactly how Browning Machineguns work. You do understand that?
    Gentlemen may prefer Blondes, but Real Men prefer Redheads!

  13. #53
    Contributor 02/2014 FunkyPertwee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    11,163
    Well now I'm wondering how to make the tapco knock off.

    Was it declared illegal?

  14. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by notsofunny View Post
    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.
    Again, if you just read my claim #1 and the other 18 claims of my patent that Skorpion posted, you would then understand. It appears few here have done that and instead resort to non scientific ad-hominem attacks instead of sticking to science and what is in my patent claims. You are making unfounded statement attributing me as "hating on Slide Fires method". Nothing could be further from the truth. For the FIFTH TIME in this thread...Slide Fire Solutions and I are currently involved with my patent licensing negiotiations. It is very frustrating when I stick to science and my patent claims and also state FIVE TIMES that Slide Fire Solutions and I are currently involved with patent licensing negiotiations, and people here make misstatements, unfounded statements, ad-hominem attacks and simply post ignorantly of subjects not germain to my patent, or think I am saying I patented all methods of bumpfiring, and assume without knowing what they are talking about, instead of reading what I have posted and reading my claims, particularly claim #1 of my patent as posted by Skorpion in this thread.

  15. #55
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,513
    If these guys were mass producing the stocks and selling them, I could understand your concerns. But to come off like you did to a few guys that were tinkering around in their garages is just plain idiotic.

    Have fun policing the web and saving screen shots Mr Akins. Perhaps if you threaten and harass enough gun owners you will improve your sales. Sarcasm intended.


  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Krupski View Post
    You or your lawyer must be smoking some good stuff. Sure you can patent your Ruger 10/22 modification, but you cannot patent a generic idea.

    If you think you own the rights to anyone who bumpfires or anyone who adds a spring to their rifle, then all I can do is slowly shake my head and try not to laugh.

    Actually, MANY years ago... MANY years ago... long before I ever even owned guns, I had the idea "hey I wonder if the rifle recoils backwards will it come back forward and fire itself again?"

    I thought of the basic concept of bump firing long before I owned guns, long before Gunsnet was on the web, long before there WAS a world wide web and certainly long before you patented (or thought) of anything.

    "Bump firing", I am quite sure, is a term that WE throw around here. I've never seen the term in a magazine or book. I've only read it here.

    In fact, the first time I heard the term, I though "oh yeah that's the thing I thought of years ago".

    Not the refined, machined parts that YOU made, but the generic idea of recoil operated rapid fire.

    Surely you know how an M2 and M1919 machine gun work? The action reciprocates with a "booster spring". You gonna sue John Browning too?

    I'll post a picture of my AR-15 spring stock. I'll send you a video of me using it. Hell I'll mail you one for your own. Come sue me.

    Good grief.
    Many people may have experimented with bumpfiring within a STATIONARY STOCK while the barreled receiver and trigger group moved back and forth. But they did not patent that bumpfiring while the rear buttstock remained stationary. I did. I did not patent all methods for bumpfiring. I have stated that repeatedly. You and some other posters here are not listening, you are just piling on and making misstatements and attacking without listening and reading what my patent claims are. Try reading them. They are posted at this thread by Skorpion.

  17. #57
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Akins View Post
    Many people may have experimented with bumpfiring within a STATIONARY STOCK while the barreled receiver and trigger group moved back and forth. But they did not patent that bumpfiring while the rear buttstock remained stationary. I did. I did not patent all methods for bumpfiring. I have stated that repeatedly. You and some other posters here are not listening, you are just piling on and making misstatements and attacking without listening and reading what my patent claims are. Try reading them. They are posted at this thread by Skorpion.
    Mr. Akins,
    We are coming at you like a pack of rabid dogs because of how you've been acting. Childish. If you were to catch me fabricating some spring device to help bump fire my AR, and tried to sue me, more power to ya.

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by notsofunny View Post
    Very well. I hope things work out well for both parties involved. If it's indeed your patent, then bring us one for $100 and I'll buy it. Just stop being an asshole.
    The assholes are the patent infringers, not me for pointing out what they do. I have proven by re-posting their posts from 2005 and 2006 that their infringing stocks were posted here five and six years AFTER my patent was issued. Three of them admitting to doing this BEFORE I ever posted in this thread to set the record straight. A record that some people seem incapable (or purposefully) of grasping or reading in my patent claims, and who instead resort to ignorant, inaccurate statements, ad-hominem attacks, and putting words into my mouth that I never said. Here is the bottom line. My patent is composed of its 19 claims. All you have to do is read them. I did not patent bumpfiring. I DID patent bumpfiring a barreled receiver and trigger group to reciprocate within a stationary rear buttstock, or even a full stationary stock that the action reciprocates back and forth within either using a spring or any other method of biasing the barreled receiver and trigger group back forwardly within a stationary stock that action reciprocates back and forth within. That I DID patent. I also patented the finger stops that hold the trigger finger in place so the trigger can be biased forwardly to re-engage said trigger finger. I patented that too. The problem here is that patent infringers do not want to admit they have infringed. So they divert, attack, put words into my mouth that I did not say, misstate what they THINK I patented or what I THINK I patented. I know what I patented. They obviously do not. The problem here is that three posters at this thread admitted infringing upon my patent, whether knowningly or not. They and their friends here simply do not want to admit the truth. So the ad-hominem attacks, diversions, misstatements and putting words into my mouth, are an attempt to minimize the facts that they are patent infringers. I have repeatedly stated to go read my patent claims in Skorpion's post. But instead of doing that and understanding the facts, they don't really care about the facts and instead just want to ignornatly pile on and support their buddies, or some misconstrued and misunderstood idea of what they THINK, my patent claims are, or what they THINK, I THINK, I patented. I have repeatedly stated that I did not patent all methods of bumpfiring. But I did patent bumpfiring with a reciprocating action moving back and forth within a stationary stock. Read claim #1 at Skorpions post and then stick to the scientific facts and not assumptions, ad-hominem attacks and misstatements.
    Some posters here have even accused me of directing "hate" towards Slide Fire Solutions. Again, they do not read. I have repeatedly stated (sixth time now) that Slide Fire Solutions and I are involved with patent licensing negiotiations. I don't direct "hate" towards Slide Fire Solutions, nothing could be further from the truth. I wish Slide Fire Solutions the very very best since a patent licensing agreement between us would tie us together financially. What an uninformed statement to say I am directing "hate" towards a company I would profit from the success of. Amazing. Lighten up guys, go read at least my first claim in my patent as posted by Skorpion. Then the admitted infringers and their buddies accept that they did infringe (knowingly or not) and then we can move on. But remember, I did not bring this up. Three people at this thread brought up their infringement of my patented stock BEFORE I ever posted in this thread. Try reading at least my first patent claim, and then maybe even the other 18. Then instead of misquoting me, making misstatements that you have no knowlege of, putting words into my mouth that I did not say, ignorantly accusing me of YOUR thinking that I myself think I have a patent on all methods of bumpfiring when I never claimed that, ad-hominem attacking me and diverting from the patent and scientific facts, admit the obvious infringement of those infringing stocks, and realize that I am just setting the record straight and have done so with a calm and cool manner while others have resorted to the lowest form of ad-hominem attacks
    and obviously simply do not care what my patent says, and simply want to argue and attempt to make me out to have claimed things I have not said nor claimed. It is so simple to read at least claim #1 of my patent and then the other following 18 claims (19 total). If some of the posters here would do that, and stop making uninformed statements, perhaps some people here might learn something. But this is not about the facts, this is about people being ignorant or purposefully denying the facts because they do not want to admit the that everything I have stated at this thread is the truth. It is so simple to simply read especially claim #1 of my patent and the other 18 claims and then if people pay careful attention to the engineering speak of the patent claims, then they might understand and be able to know what they are talking about. But for something so simply to do, so many here refuse to do that simple read. I have not attacked anyone. The infringers attacked my intellectual property. I have never claimed to have patented all methods of bumpfiring. But I did patent certain methods of bumpfiring and if you read Skorpion's post of my patent claims, you can find out just exactly WHAT I DID PATENT. There are those here who have said I cannot patent a generic idea. Well if it was a generic idea that I patented, then the patent examiners at the U.S. patent office would never have issued a patent on a "generic" idea that was so public domain, that it was unpatentable. Then I would not have received my patent. Since they did issue me my patent, those U.S. patent examiners disagree with the posters who think I can not patent what it is a fact I HAVE PATENTED. Amazing and ridiculous illogical thinking to state that I could not patent something that it is a fact that I DID patent. Lol. It if wasn't so uninformed and ignorant, it would almost be funny. I have not directed hatred towards Slide Fire Solutions, quite the opposite, I wish us a very profitable and long business relationship. If my pointing out what my patent entails and how infringers here infringed upon it offends the sensibilities of some people here, then walk a mile in my shoes. Go invent and then spend $10,000 on getting a patent. Then watch as many small time garage infringers blantantly infringe upon it and tell me how that makes you feel. Then watch as year after year they continue to mention their infringment that YOU paid to patent. Then watch as logic and reason and the simple act of reading your patent claims are all ignored by uninformed, ignorant people who simply deny and will not admit what is so easily there for them to read. Oh and while you're at it, spend a fortune on your invention and have the government approve it twice in writing only to recind it. Put my shoes on for awhile and then tell me how you feel about patent infringers whether they knowingly infringed or not. They sure as heck knew they were infringing when I informed them they were. They and their friends simply do not want to admit it. Walk that mile and tell me how that makes you feel. Understand? Now either read my claim #1 and even mercy me, perhaps the other 18 following claims too. Then you might be qualified to discuss this issue.

  19. #59
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,513
    “In addition to my saved screenshots of this thread, this is to preserve the record of infringement of my patent and will be bookmarked.”


    Why?
    Are you planning on suing them?

  20. #60
    [QUOTE=Krupski;73236]Really true.

    I do feel bad the screwing Mr. Akins got from the jack booted BATFE assholes, and I hope he wins whatever battles he has with them and their absurd "ruling for today" way of doing things.

    Thanks and accurate.

    But, coming here and yelling at us for using springs is crazy.

    Not accurate. another example of a misstatement. I am not coming here to "yell at people for using springs". That is ludicrous. Only after three people here at this thread posted that they made a stock that infringed upon the claims of my patent did I then post to set the record very straight. I have done that since the first infringers surfaced back in the early 2000's who saw my stock and made infringment copies of it. Not just the three here at this thread, but about five others at other sites doing the same infringment. All total about eight or so infringers blantantly posting how they built a stock that infringed upon my patent....and they knew it. Even though I patented it on Aug 15, 2000, most people only became aware of my patented stock around 2005 when our first beta models were being tested. The suddenly there was an awful lot a people claiming "parallel development" and that they didn't know anything about my patent or stock. Funny though that all these infringers surfaced only AFTER my patented stock became common knowledge in the firearms field and industry. Uh huh. Yeah, they didn't know about my stock and just coincidently came up with the same thing AFTER reading about, or seeing my stock on YouTube. It was all just inadvertant Bill. We were living in a cave and never saw your stock and just were working on ideas we had from the past. Uh huh. So I never came here to "yell" at anyone for using a spring. But after seeing three people proudly admitting they built stocks that infringed upon my patent, don't expect me to not re-inform them of their infringement and proving that infringement just as I did here at the former GunsNet site back in 2005 and 2006.

    There are spring stocks available for shotguns to take out the painful recoil. One of these, combined with a semi auto shotgun, would probably bump fire. Is THAT a patent infringement? Please.

    Yes it would be an infringement. If the shotgun's barreled receiver and trigger guard reciprocates back rearwardly within a stationary stock, and is then biased back forwardly to cause the trigger to re-egage the shooter's trigger finger to fire the firarm very rapidly (exactly as is described in claim #1 of my patent posted by Skorpion at this thread for all to read), then yes that would be an infringement of my patent. You derisively say "Please", but read claim #1 of my patent and then if that shotgun stock does exactly the same thing my patent claim describes (which from your description it would), then I could say "please" to your ignoring the obvious scientific fact that it would indeed be infringing.

    What if I pull the trigger fast? Is that "isometric tension"? Am I going to be sued?

    No and that is a ridiculous statement. Pulling the trigger normally is not a machine gun cyclic rate method of bumpfiring. But my claim #1 of my patent does not limit me to only use a spring to bias the barreled receiver and trigger group back forwardly. If you would carefully read claim #1, you would see and understand that the language used in my patent of "biasing" the barreled receiver or at least the trigger guard back forwardly, is not limited to just using a spring, but simply says a "means of biasing forwardly". That means any means of biasing back forwardly not necessarily just a spring can be used to "bias" the barreled receiver action back forwardly again in my patent claim #1. "Isometric human muscle tension" is one means of "biasing" the action back forwardly again. My patent attorney was the same patent attorney for Ohio Ordinance and he and I were very careful of the language used in my patent claims to be able to not be limited to just using springs. I could use rubber cords to "bias" the action back forwardly within the stock. I could use a superball to make the action "bias" and bounce back foreardly. Or yes I could use human isometric muscle tension to "bias" the action back forwardly within the stationary stock. Read claim #1 and you will see that what I patented was simply the method of keeping at least the rear buttstock STATIONARY while the barreled receiver and trigger group reciprocated back and forth within that stationary stock. I also patented the finger stops to keep the finger stationary across where the trigger would re-engage it upon "biasing" back forwardly. That is what I patented and what was passed and approved by the U.S. Patent office examiners.
    If someone does not like it that I patented that, that is their problem. The U.S. patent office would not have passed it if it was obvious and generic public domain general knowledge or unpatentable art.


    If Mr. Akins has his panties in a bunch over bump firing, them I suggest he not visit YouTube... because there are thousands of videos of people bumpfiring. And 99% of them, no doubt, have never heard of an "Akins Accelerator".

    Inaccurate. Pretty much everyone who stays current in the firearms field and community know about the "Akins Accelerator" and what the BATFE did. What poll do you base your "99%" figure upon? Again you miss the point, yes there are many people on YouTube and elsewhere who bumpfire without using the embodiments of my patent claims. You keep ignoring that I have repeatedly stated that I did not patent all methods of bumpfiring. But I did patent the methods of bumpfiring contained within the claims of my patent. Otherwise it would never have been passed by the patent examiners and U.S. patent office. Not just you, but others here seem to be incapble of recognizing the difference between regular, normal, many decades old technique of complete wood stock and barreled receiver and trigger group all moving bumpfiring, compared to my completely different method of bumpfiring by utilizing a reciprocating barrel receiver and trigger group reciprocating back and forth within a stationary buttstock. That is my patented method of bumpfiring. But it is only one method. But it is a good and accurate one and one that is not just limited to springs to "bias" the action back forwardly but can use other "biasing" methods. Again, it would really help you and others to read what my claim #1 states. Then you would understand the difference between normal bumpfiring of a factory stocked rifle, compared to my patented bumpfiring method of using a reciprocating barreled receiver that moves back and forth within a completely STATIONARY buttstock that does not move like a normally bumpfired firearm's stock would move.
    Last edited by Bill Akins; 12-11-2010 at 02:00 AM.

Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •