[Kevin]

Heh. I like how you changed the cbrider401's name to 'Bradflyn' when you quoted him.

Anyway, to answer your question, I find this discussion at least as interesting as some of the threads on here discussing whether the ideal number of shimz in a Boxxer WC high speed compression circuit is 5 or 6. *IF* (and it's a huge 'if') cbrider401's theory is correct, I think it means that any other bike mfr could use the basis of the ABP/Split Pivot technology and easily defend it against a patent challenge.

Again, I don't know whether cbrider401's theory is sound, but it's certainly interesting enough to discuss, no?

--JP
P.S. I own a Session 88 (which I love) and was in business with DW for years, so I don't have a dog in this fight.

I understand if from your background that this is interesting.
But I couldnt care less about who has patented the VPP on my v10.
All I read on the monkey these days are people slinging mud at other people fighting over a friggin patent.

Making multiple topics about "the REAL inventor of ABP/Split Pivot". Its the level Id expect on Pinkbike.

 

[Mr Ridiculous]

So, what I've gathered here is Socket = Bill Brasky?

Makes sense, because he once showed me a video of him making love to my wife, and it was the most beautiful thing I ever saw.

 

[no skid marks]

I understand if from your background that this is interesting.
But I couldnt care less about who has patented the VPP on my v10.
All I read on the monkey these days are people slinging mud at other people fighting over a friggin patent.

Making multiple topics about "the REAL inventor of ABP/Split Pivot". Its the level Id expect on Pinkbike.

Why are you in this thread clogging it with your opinion about having an opinion? It's about a patent that's not worthy. Go pay some huge fee for something you need not, and be done with it.
I'd like to see Socket reap some rewards from this, it's only fare. Others profiting from an idea that may have well come from that thread is not cool.

 

[Steve M]

I'd like to see Socket reap some rewards from this, it's only fare. Others profiting from an idea that may have well come from that thread is not cool.

The owner of a Session 88 bought me a beer once.

Seriously though - I haven't had a thing to do with the development of any split pivot/abp bikes, nor have I ever wanted to build one or in any way use that idea. To put it simply, I don't give a **** about it one way or the other, whether or not I actually thought of the idea before the patents were filed seems irrelevant as I have never had any intention of making use of it. Frankly I'm inclined to think both patents are somewhat frivolous simply because the idea of running an axle-centric pivot seems like a fairly obvious one to me, and I'd be very surprised if I was the first person to ever suggest the idea anyway. If DW and Trek want to patent it and fight it out in court, go nuts - it doesn't affect me at all. If someone else wants to challenge the patent based on what I've posted previously as constituting "prior art" then again, go nuts. I don't care what happens with it, if I was going to build a bike it wouldn't be using that kind of layout anyway. If someone else wants to make money out of something I mentioned in a passing comment five years ago, go for it, because I won't.

 

[Kevin]

Why are you in this thread clogging it with your opinion about having an opinion? It's about a patent that's not worthy. Go pay some huge fee for something you need not, and be done with it.
I'd like to see Socket reap some rewards from this, it's only fare. Others profiting from an idea that may have well come from that thread is not cool.

I guess Socket allready anwsered that one for me. ^^
I dont like the whole patent stuff anymore then you do. But its just the way the big bad money driven world works.

Deal with it.

 

[no skid marks]

I guess Socket allready anwsered that one for me. ^^
I dont like the whole patent stuff anymore then you do. But its just the way the big bad money driven world works.

Deal with it.

Freedom of speech about such things is one of the remaining powers we have, apart from not buying stuff.
I'm happy things get bought out in the open, so people can make informed choices. I thought that was what the main benefit of forums was.
You can swallow the sh!t if you like. Best wash it down
I don't think much split pivot stuff will come out now that it's a FREEfor all on the Horst link. Horst link allows a tincy wincy bit more axle path choice/ease for manufacturers anyway.

 

[cbrider401]

I understand if from your background that this is interesting.
But I couldnt care less about who has patented the VPP on my v10.
All I read on the monkey these days are people slinging mud at other people fighting over a friggin patent.

Making multiple topics about "the REAL inventor of ABP/Split Pivot". Its the level Id expect on Pinkbike.

I think we all get that you don't care, and that is just fine - it's your right. Why are you so adamant about letting us all know? As for slinging mud, what do you call what you have been posting???

 

[Kevin]

I think we all get that you don't care, and that is just fine - it's your right. Why are you so adamant about letting us all know? As for slinging mud, what do you call what you have been posting???

I just have a strong opinion on things and i have trouble keeping mouth shut about it.

But seeing the tags on these threads, im not the only one...

 

[Meat]

Here's where $hit gets really funny, a little known now non-exsistant company called Crestone Peaks had a Split Pivot in 1994... which is listed as prior art in the Trek patent, not sure about the DW.

http://mombat.org/94Crestone2.jpg
http://mombat.org/94CrestonePrice3.jpg
http://mombat.org/Crestone.htm

Granted the Crestone had a rubber band for a spring and a giant elastomer roller that contacted the seat tube to prevent a nasty bottom out, but interesting none the less and hey it was the 90's.

Sorry Socket, it appears some dude in Liberal Kansas was really entitled to that frosty beverage...

 

[Meat]

Oh and that was a full floating rubber band!

Crestone Peak - SAS Comp 202 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!@@AMEPARAM@@http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4022/5145029659_3023b94ebd_m.jpg@@AMEPARAM@@5145029659@@AMEPARAM@@3023b94ebd

Crestone Peak - SAS Comp 202 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!@@AMEPARAM@@http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4057/5145030319_c4888110f7_m.jpg@@AMEPARAM@@5145030319@@AMEPARAM@@c4888110f7

Crestone Peak - SAS Comp 202 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!@@AMEPARAM@@http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1367/5145029909_bd72817357_m.jpg@@AMEPARAM@@5145029909@@AMEPARAM@@bd72817357

 

[bradflyn]

Check this out -

Wow, interesting prior art type find. Dave filed August 25th 2006, and Trek filed April 2007 but proved they where prior to Dave when Trek started on it in July 2006 (FYI, Dates all taken from the publicly available patent file wrappers). However it seems in October 2005, S. seems to have inadvertantly disclosed the split pivot concept as an alternative to fsr or normal single pivots but impling that the linkage arrangements could be similar.

This will certainly stir the pot again...

 

[dropmachine]

No, it won't.

Go outside.

 

[cbrider401]

Wow, interesting prior art type find. Dave filed August 25th 2006, and Trek filed April 2007 but proved they where prior to Dave when Trek started on it in July 2006 (FYI, Dates all taken from the publicly available patent file wrappers). However it seems in October 2005, S. seems to have inadvertantly disclosed the split pivot concept as an alternative to fsr or normal single pivots but impling that the linkage arrangements could be similar.

This will certainly stir the pot again...

Hey, how do you access the publicly available file wrappers? Thanks-

 

[cbrider401]

Here's where $hit gets really funny, a little known now non-exsistant company called Crestone Peaks had a Split Pivot in 1994... which is listed as prior art in the Trek patent, not sure about the DW.

http://mombat.org/94Crestone2.jpg
http://mombat.org/94CrestonePrice3.jpg
http://mombat.org/Crestone.htm

Granted the Crestone had a rubber band for a spring and a giant elastomer roller that contacted the seat tube to prevent a nasty bottom out, but interesting none the less and hey it was the 90's.

Sorry Socket, it appears some dude in Liberal Kansas was really entitled to that frosty beverage...

Yeah, I rode a Crestone that a friend had. The rear QR basically held the concentric dropout pivots together....the bike was super innovative, but very poorly built and executed. Plus, the rubber band thing was just never gonna fly with anyone, so that alone doomed them.

Note that DW's patent claims only refer to compressing the shock / compression shocks. I bet the USPTO limited the patent because the prior art (Crestone Peaks, Becker) both pulled a spring. I imagine Cannondale or Scott could convert to a concentric dropout pivot with their pull shock designs without worrying about DW's patent....

I have also heard that there was a "Split Pivot / ABP" bike with a rocker that drove the shock in the Taiwanese Pavillion at Interbike in the early or mid nineties. At that time, those Asian companies were throwing together ALL KINDS of suspension bikes with all sorts of configurations. If this is true, then that bike will probably surface, too. Socket mentioned it earlier - it can certainly be argued that the whole design is really pretty obvious.

 

[bradflyn]

Hey, how do you access the publicly available file wrappers? Thanks-

All communication between the patent examiner and the inventor is electronically recorded. You can look it all up in the US patent office Public PAIR system.

http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/status/index.jsp

Then search the patent application number you want to read about. usually can find application number when searching either pending applications or granted patents in the header info.

split pivot stuff is 11510522 and 11735816

fun stuff ...

 

[cbrider401]

all communication between the patent examiner and the inventor is electronically recorded. You can look it all up in the us patent office public pair system.

http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/status/index.jsp

then search the patent application number you want to read about. Usually can find application number when searching either pending applications or granted patents in the header info.

Split pivot stuff is 11510522 and 11735816

fun stuff ...

thanks a ton!