kuf

The OP reminds me of a kook that sits in their room all by themselves ranting on the internet about their pet peeve, and alienates their freinds and family and ends up leading a sad lonely existence. They are so blinded to reality by their emotions, they won't listen to other's arguments. They end up completely losing touch with reality and sending anonymous packages out...

DenisMenchov

Well that article certainly brought up a good way to get around the patent...buy the bike in Europe.

But still, specialized bought this patent. They weren't the cause for the innovation...and it wasn't their own design...and it wasn't something they engineered. They are just a big company with a lot of money that wanted to buy the patent, so as to create a road block for other manufacturers to use it. You don't think that's monopoly? That article is a perfect example of how monopoly works...look at what they did to Scott who tried to use the design and sell it in the U.S.

umd

I'm not going to continue to argue with you because I don't want to b confused for an idiot.

DenisMenchov

You are seriously comparing me to the Unabomber....that's insane Mam.

Google patent and monopoly...you will find plenty of examples of how patents create monopolies.

kuf

If the rant fits...

Seriously, get over it. You are ridiculously obsessed with patents and don't understand the reality of R&D.

DenisMenchov

So you are both a profiler and a expert on R&D as well apparently. If you don't believe patents create monopoly pricing, that's fine. To each their own. That's why we have Christians and Atheists...we can each have our own opinion and beliefs and not be unjustly slandered for it...

gnome

fify.

kuf

your idea that bike designs should be open source is absolutely ridiculous, totally ignoring the R&D that companies put in to make the design in the first place. This is not a matter of faith. If you remove incentive to innovate, you will stagnate.

DenisMenchov

Faith is what you believe. I believe bike designs shouldn't have patents. If you believe that to be ridiculous, you are entitled to your opinion. I appreciate your contribution to this thread. I am not the only person that does not like the idea of patents in general.

Skones MickLoud

Then don't buy a new bike. Patents expire. Buy it after it does.

kuf

Next time, take your faith to P&R.

rollin

Yes Specialized bought the patent. They must have paid the inventor of the idea.

Being paid is an incentive for other inventors to invent.

patentcad

Not for nothing but 'cycling intellectual property' does strike me as a profound oxymoron.

AEO

even open source software has donation links.

for your open source idea to work to its fullest potential, you have to get rid of money.

DenisMenchov

Probably not. I am passed being pssed and just starting to accept it for what it is. Doesn't mean I have to like it...but you are not going to like everything in life...kinda like having Bush as president...you just learn to live with it.

And I really do like this bike. I start to forget the whole patent debacle more and more after each ride. I'll probably try some fine grit sandpaper to at least remove the patent numbers on the frame.

urbanknight

China doesn't recognize patents or copyrights. Have you considered moving there?


So the designer got paid. If there were no copyright laws, Specialized (and every other company) would have just taken it and the little guy would still be SOL and crying about how big companies control everything.

SendMoreChris

Pure genius! I could apply that theory to pretty much ANYTHING I want to believe! I just googled "Ant Farm" and "Democracy" and found out things I'd never thought possible! Next I'll try "Space Travel" and "Hedgehogs" and see what I can learn from that.

I just combo-googled "President Bush" and "2009"... and who would have thought.. He's still president! I think you've just disproved the existence of objective right and wrong!

lambo_vt

I love it when people do this Google thing...

skiahh

Yeah? Patents are SUPPOSED to create a temporary monopoly to allow the inventor to profit from his/her labors. That could be from selling the design or being the only one to be able to sell the item so as to establish a market "beachhead". After 17 (or 20) years, the patent expires and others can jump in, but theoretically, by then the inventor has established himself and improved on his original invention.

If you're pissed about patents and won't use them or products protected by them, I recommend you sign off your computer (most of your hardware and software is covered by at least one patent), turn in your cell phone or PDA (also HW/SW patent protected) and move to a (self made) cabin in the woods, stop taking any medicines etc etc.

Take a look around you and look at how many things are covered by patents.

You could move to Cuba or China - two of the few communist countries remaining where the (theoretical) philosophy is everyone pitches in everything they own, people always do the right thing, and everyone shares in the fruits of everyone else's labor....

freddie

bunch of communism in this thread

TandemGeek

Yes, I forgot... we see what we want when it serves our needs but when it doesn't it's a photoshop job nowadays... and everything thing you read on the internet or hear on the news is true and based on facts...

1. It's not a photoshop job; why would I waste my time? You asked, I provided.
2. Look again... It's under the rear chainstay.
3. Because to enforce a patent in court (or a trademark, salesmark, copyright, etc..) you have to take measures that demonstrate due diligence was taken to protect your intellectual property rights.

As others have noted, intellectual property (IP) rights and the like are what drive investment in innovation and invention. You may not appreciate this at this particular time in your life, but that's the reason that those legal protections have been put in place. Your grasp of Open Source strategies is also lacking in that decisions to make software and the like "Open Source" is usually done for a business reason and represents a cost of doing business in one area to drive revenue generation, market penetration or some other type of promotion for a longer-term, greater benefit.

Intellectual curiosity is a good thing, but pursing it from an ill-founded set of premises with an argumentative tone and cynical attitude ain't gonna get you too far in your quest for facts that either prove or disprove something that you want to understand.

AtomicCactus

My garbage can has a patent number on it. Seriously.

dcbikeguy

Well, they do if they want to import the goods to the U.S. - that's what the 337 cases down at the ITC are all about - and they're pretty busy these days.

That would take him unbearably far from umd. Unacceptable.

donrhummy

The problem is not Specialized, it's the patent system. Don't blame Specialized as they're doing what the current marketplace calls for - they're just trying to do well as a business. If the patent system is properly fixed, none of this would occur and we'd have a lot more innovation.

iab

That is a design patent, essentially useless and far from a utility patent.