cdelicath Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 Anyone have any connections at any large media organizations? Imagine how quick things would play out if information got out to the mainstream media. People love David vs Goliath BS!! Link to comment
evilc66 Posted February 18, 2010 Author Share Posted February 18, 2010 evil, how will the hobby adjust itself if the patent holds? could you (meaning retailers and manufacturers) sell 'dimming devices' separately from the actual LED fixtures and avoid legal entanglement, or will the hobby just have to settle for single-intensity systems? There are ways and means that are being looked into on the DIY front, but if the new patent amendments go into place, all commercial fixtures are in trouble, regardless of dimming capability. If the new patent extension stands then any aquarium system using LEDs as a primary light source will have to pay a license fee to Orbitec. You may be able to get away with moonlights or actinic supplementation. True, but where's the fun in that Anyone have any connections at any large media organizations?Imagine how quick things would play out if information got out to the mainstream media. People love David vs Goliath BS!! That's a possibility, but I'm not sure how well a media blitz would work in such a small industry. All of the important players are already fully aware of what's going on, and what needs to be done, but it's finding the financial support to get things moving that's the hard part. There is something that can be done, but all the pieces need to fall into place. Best thing that we as hobbyists can do is find more supporting information that can be used as ammunition for those that are going to take this on directly. I know that the vast majority has been found already, but I'm sure there are a few key nuggets that are locked away somewhere in the vast spaces of the internet (planted tanks constitue marine life also, so keep that in mind). We are all going to suffer, as an industry and as a hobby, if things are allowed to continue. As it stands right now with the movements being made by local and nation governments all over the world, PCs, T5s, and MH will be outlawed in the near future because of the toxic chemicals and metals (mercury is one of the big ones, and is in all our lamps). LED will be the only real option unless something else comes along. If LED is the only choice, Orbitech has the monopoly, and the costs for even the most simple fixture will be higher than most will want to pay to enter this hobby. This will severely hurt the hobby long term to the point where the only ones that will be able to continue, are the ones with the deepest wallets. I know that sounds a little over dramatic, but think about it for a second. This is a realtively small industry as is. LED fixtures are expensive because volumes are low. If the cost to enter the hobby increases to the point where it limits who can enter, the market shrinks, and the costs increase again. It's almost smarter for Orbitech to drop the patent (or at least the license requirement), create a fixture of their own, and drive up competition that will make the cost of fixtures lower, and increase sales. They would make more money that way than collecting the license fee. Link to comment
nowlan Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 Youd think companies like Cree would take out patents. They'd be the first to see applications for their products. Otherwise its all pipe dream / science fiction. ps: its marbo. Link to comment
bxz Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 I think the US patent law should be revisited in the first place. I guess I can issue a patent using the exact description of LED light on a reptile tank, bird cage, your home, my home..... Link to comment
npain316 Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 So what's next... When and what is the next step in fighting aganist Orbitec and this patent? Link to comment
willp2 Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 This is DIY, but this shows a guy running LED's to grow corals back in 2000. The page itself was archived in 2003 but could have been around far longer. http://web.archive.org/web/20030714045004/...e.net/reef/led/ Before chucking too much money into LEDs, I decided to put together this test light assembly. It is made up of 32 white and 16 blue LEDs. As shown below, I'm running it on a small 3 gallon tank with a piece of live rock and a stony coral. This thing is bright! Looking At it directly will hurt your eyes! Believe it or not, it only draws 1/2 amp at 12VDC. It has been running for two weeks now (23JUN00) at 8 hours per day. The stony coral seems to love it. As you can see, the rock has some coralline algae on it so I will know the effect on it.. At night, I switch off the whites, leaving the blues on. Talk about a cool looking tank! I can see some corals flores under this light. The blue LEDs peak around 470nm. I'd prefer 430 but can't find any. I found the link in this thread which is from early 2003 http://www.thereeftank.com/forums/f153/new...logy-14896.html Link to comment
evilc66 Posted February 22, 2010 Author Share Posted February 22, 2010 So what's next...When and what is the next step in fighting aganist Orbitec and this patent? Not really sure at this particular moment. I have to get in touch with a few people to see where things stand. Working for the industry has its advantages in this respect. You start to know all kinds of people This is DIY, but this shows a guy running LED's to grow corals back in 2000. The page itself was archived in 2003 but could have been around far longer. http://web.archive.org/web/20030714045004/...e.net/reef/led/ I found the link in this thread which is from early 2003 http://www.thereeftank.com/forums/f153/new...logy-14896.html Thanks for that willp2. Link to comment
npain316 Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 Not really sure at this particular moment. I have to get in touch with a few people to see where things stand. Working for the industry has its advantages in this respect. You start to know all kinds of people A few thoughts: I interpret law 37 CFR 1.99, that third party submissions can only happen befor the patent is issued. a) A submission by a member of the public of patents or publications relevant to a pending published application may be entered in the application file if the submission complies with the requirements of this section and the application is still pending when the submission and application file are brought before the examiner. Unless you've already had legal council that has said this is the best route, I'm afraid we've missed the boat for a third party submission. My quick inquiry of doing this has found that it can cost upwards of 15K (with lawyer fees and such) to have a Ex Parte Reexamination of an issued patent. Has anyone ( you, Jake Adams, PFO, nanotuners) contacted a lawyer for proper coucil? The other possibility is to proceed and act against Orbitec (like PFO) to force a litigation against us and hopefully do a better job than PFO. This is more $$$ thans Ex Parte Reexamination, but a sure way to get before a judge. I'm not trying to rain on this parade, because I believe Orbitec is wrong. I'm just being realistic about this. I think we've done a good job demonstrating it is prior art, I'm just curious who else in "the industry" your speaking of that is getting involved. Know this gives us ( the reefing community) a true assurace that this will all go away. Thanks for your work in this Clive. Link to comment
evilc66 Posted February 22, 2010 Author Share Posted February 22, 2010 Yes, I have contacted a patent attourney about this in the recent past to see what is required to get this looked at, and the Ex-Parte Reexamination is really the only effective option. There is another option that costs less money, but it's pretty much a blind submission that you have no control over. The Ex-Parte Reexamination has the attourney follow the USPTO reexamination and can argue and contest certain points. I can't get into the details, but there is movement in this direction. The request for information has been prompted by this. It's early stages though. Link to comment
npain316 Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 Yes, I have contacted a patent attourney about this in the recent past to see what is required to get this looked at, and the Ex-Parte Reexamination is really the only effective option. There is another option that costs less money, but it's pretty much a blind submission that you have no control over. The Ex-Parte Reexamination has the attourney follow the USPTO reexamination and can argue and contest certain points. I can't get into the details, but there is movement in this direction. The request for information has been prompted by this. It's early stages though. I understand that you we don't want to tip your hand to potential "flies on the wall. Link to comment
willp2 Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Just wondering if the there is any new news or anything else we can do to keep this moving? Link to comment
evilc66 Posted March 10, 2010 Author Share Posted March 10, 2010 Haven't heard anything recently, but it is time to poke some people for updates. Link to comment
nibor Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Back from the dead. Post 61 and onwards. The rest of the thread is crap. http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthre...3364&page=3 Link to comment
Trick Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Are they saying the patents don't apply now? Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.