Best buys Bow Patent...what does it mean for small brands?

[plummet]

Well I home the Legaignoux boys got a good deal for selling the patent. They deserve some $$$....

To brands not paying. Shame on you. The only reason you exist is because these bros made the breakthrough.

Are you suggesting that companies that does not break the patent should pay just to be nice?

I'm no patent lawyer. So I can't suggest what is and what is not patent worthy.

All im says is if your using the design. Pay the money. Don't be a dick and try and weasel out of it.

[SimonP]

The Legaignoux brothers considered the concave trailing edge to be very important. The original bow kites were very flat, and maybe the concave TE was important for efficiency reasons.

Most kites today are really a hybrid between a bow and a bridled C kite, of which there are examples of prior art. It would be a difficult patent to defend.

[Faxie]

It's not that bridles were such a new thing with kites. Sooner or later someone would come up with the idea on an inflatable.

[Bletti]

It's not that bridles were such a new thing with kites. Sooner or later someone would come up with the idea on an inflatable.

I agree

[marlboroughman]

What is the patent exactly about?
Any kite flattened by/with bridles located/attached on/along the leading
edge and showing a concave trailing edge “during flight, when viewed
from above” is covered as described in the hereunder
issued patents.

Or clean the market by denying cooperation?
E.g. Switch?

Most kites today are really a hybrid between a bow and a bridled C kite, of which there are examples of prior art. It would be a difficult patent to defend.

Switch line up is entirely C based design with bridle, but it too can be removed and they fly on five lines perfectly.
I think Best and North are doing it to settle the ongoing legal cases. It has no bearing on companies like Switch who never used the bow design in the past. Will other companies who used Bow design in the past but were not part of the lawsuits, be forced or voluntarily pay now, that's my question.

[tautologies]

I'm no patent lawyer. So I can't suggest what is and what is not patent worthy.

All im says is if your using the design. Pay the money. Don't be a dick and try and weasel out of it.

OK then I agree. There are examples of companies giving monies to people who came up with something they made money off. A Japanese company gave the scientist that came up with the algorithm / procedure for storing on harddrives a few million dollars. But the scale difference between that and the kite industry is uhh big.

[tomatkins]

It's not that bridles were such a new thing with kites. Sooner or later someone would come up with the idea on an inflatable.

Here is a trip down "memory lane”... The “2 line" kite I learned on was a 2000 or 2001 model Fuel, and it had a bridle, complete with 2 pullys... Back then, we took off the bridles and rolled up the wingtips and put 4 lines on the kite. The “depowerability” was fantastic... all 3 inches of it... ha, ha ...

I wonder if there was a patent on that bridle?