What constitues an original idea?

[earthworm77]

With all of this talk about guys stealing other guys baits and ideas, I thought it would be interesting discussion to try to come to some type of consensus about what constitutes copying and what is original.

Last night there was a post by Mattman regarding stealing baits. In it he made a reference to another T/U member saying he wanted to find a mold and learn how to paint like that and make those types of baits. Looking back on my home website, that statement may have been made by me. As I was paying homage to the intricate detail and great looks of those baits I stated that I'd love to find a mold and be able to paint like that, but surely it wasn't a serious querry to steal top secret information. The post has been followed with a disclaimer stating that there is no intention to do so.

I recommend in the future if somebody has a problem with something that is said online, contact that individual and work it out privately. Spouting off online without speaking to the party you have an issue with is wrong because you do not know what their statement really meant. If Matt asked me, I would have told him I couldn't make a bait like that if I wanted to. It would have been a dead issue. Instead he posted here and rallied the witch hunters which is just nonsense. That said, let's move on.

Now, I make tubes and hand pours, I make jigs, hairjigs and I spray crank baits. I believe much of what I do it unique although not original. A lot of my work consists of improvements I've made to existing baits to make them more fishable to me. Adding scent/salt/glitter is kind of customizing them in a way. I've always believed that I could be successful if I did something different than the other guy and I built up a tackle company using this philosophy.

But what is different? Everyone is making this Beaver bait. It is a flat out copy just like the 15 bags of stickbaits I got in the last T/U swap. The bottom line is that if something works, someone will try to duplicate it and sell it cheaper. It sucks but it is also flattery in its simplest form.

Is adding salt or scent enough to make a bait different? Do you really make a bait that nobody else has or was a true idea of your own? I'm interested because the more I think about this, just about everything we do in this business is based on prior success with similar baits, we just tweak them to try and make them better.

[GB GONE]

AMEN Brother!!!!!

Jim

[rockhopper]

With all of this talk about guys stealing other guys baits and ideas' date=' I thought it would be interesting discussion to try to come to some type of consensus about what constitutes copying and what is original.

Now are you talking about a concensus of this group, or are you talking about law ?

The law has it spelled out, so reguardless what the groups's concensus is, it will not change.

If your talking about lures that will never be patented, or the clock has run out on them being patented, then your group concensus has merit within the group to say what is eithical or moral to the group

for an invention, in this case a lure, the lure, or improvement of a lure must be new, non obvious, and usefull, if the lure is not patentable, it is not original "enough" to be protected, so by the terms of the law it can be copied, if copying the orignal lure is alowed ,by it not being under an active patent.

It is possible for you to get an improvemnt to a lure patented, but if it is still that lure that is patented, your patent does not give you the right to manufacture you invention based on it. your patent just keeps the original patent holder or anyone else from manufacturing, selling or using your improvement.

This is why patent searches are so important even if you never plan on filing one yourself, you need to know if you can make your own improved version of a lure.

Now, I make tubes and hand pours, I make jigs, hairjigs and I spray crank baits. I believe much of what I do it unique although not original. A lot of my work consists of improvements I've made to existing baits to make them more fishable to me. Adding scent/salt/glitter is kind of customizing them in a way. I've always believed that I could be successful if I did something different than the other guy and I built up a tackle company using this philosophy.

Very true, but how long before you get knocked off, when people see your company thriving on your new designs ?

Unless you protect them your just out of luck

But what is different? Everyone is making this Beaver bait. It is a flat out copy just like the 15 bags of stickbaits I got in the last T/U swap. The bottom line is that if something works, someone will try to duplicate it and sell it cheaper. It sucks but it is also flattery in its simplest form.

That's why we have patent laws, people should be rewarded for their original inventions, and that should be protected.

Is adding salt or scent enough to make a bait different?

That made a patentable difference in the making of lures

Do you really make a bait that nobody else has or was a true idea of your own? I'm interested because the more I think about this, just about everything we do in this business is based on prior success with similar baits, we just tweak them to try and make them better.

Let's see if we can't get all these great creative minds working on "new, non obvious, and usefull lure designs, don't leave this to the very small handfull of people who do this for a living, surely this group could indeed come up with some "original" lures

[redg8r]

Last night there was a post by Mattman regarding stealing baits. In it he made a reference to another T/U member saying he wanted to find a mold and learn how to paint like that and make those types of baits. Looking back on my home website' date=' that statement may have been made by me.[/quote']

I didnt see anyone here publicly calling you out.

Although A webpage can be a great tool of information, one loses the ability to emphasize the text they write. Ive many times tried to be funny or sarcastic in words & unless someone "hears" it being said, it can be taken out of context, That might very well be what happened. You cant blame a fella for that & you cant blame yourself for having a sense of humor, if that was youre way of "paying homage", but he never mentioned your name.

I agree, I see alot of crativity here, at the same time I see alot of replication. The art of making lures is tough, especially when guys start out, we want to craft something they have confidence in catching fish, which is usually a replica of an established bait.

Once you get confident in your abilities I recommend everyone to try & create something original. All my baits I make are original & you'll be surprised at the amount of skill you can get from trying to make something original.

For those of you looking to go into business with your baits, like rockhopper said, you should do some research first & if you feel ok with knocking off a bait, then be prepared to deal with the criticism. knockoff's in all industries are sometimes shunned, but sometimes improved.

The sole purpose of this site is to help everyone make the best baits they possibly can.

I dont often sell my baits, I dont often show my baits, Ive won multiple awards with my baits. I make my baits for 2 things, satisfaction & effectiveness on the water, so I cant really comment on ethics & morals among business, but I can comment on being creative.

[Handpoured916]

Earthworm I am w/ you on this a bait is copied it happens people will buy the best ones!

[BuMMeRBaits]

I have been reading through all of these patent/stealing messages. Man what fun. Well I was just wondering how much of a change has to be made to another bait to make it " ORIGINAL ". As most people are talking about the Sweet Beaver, I was looking through the BPS Cataloge I recevied last week, and saw the BPS XPS FLippin Craw. Well the body of this bait from what I can see is an exact copy of the Sweet Beaver Body (Angled Grooves, Grove down the middle of bait), they just changed the flaps to craws and the split tail to the craw head with anteens (sp).

And now that I have taken my Sweet Beaver bait and made several modifications to it, that I think will actually improve the bait, am I now a thief or someone who is trying to improve anothers idea???????

[rockhopper]

And now that I have taken my Sweet Beaver bait and made several modifications to it, that I think will actually improve the bait, am I now a thief or someone who is trying to improve anothers idea?

??????

There is no simple answer here

Acording to patent law, if one infringes on a single claim of a utility patent, he has infringed on the patent.

Now with patents, if you include the "new" part that the patent has protected, (like a new form of claws) and you have jsut added another part to the bait, (like a new tail), then you have infringed on that patent, now if you file for a patent and show the privous new claw, with you new tail, you could recive a patent, but you could not make, sell, import, or use the total lure you have shown in you patent, of course the guy who invented the new claw could not make , use, sell, or import, his lure with your new tail, not unless you gave, or sold him the rights to do so.

SO this is how improving something works, if you improve something that is patented, yet you use the protected part of the original, you have infringed on his patent if you make, use,sell or import the new improved bait you have designed

Do you understand this now ?

Another example would be the swimming tail, if the first lure ever made with the swimming tail, had a claim A lure with at least one curved thin portion that when dragged through the water caused the portion to ripple, and they showed a worm with this tail,, you would infringe if you designed a lizard with the same tail, and legs made the same way, it might have been possible for you to get a patent on the lizard, if the main claim of the first patent was claiming it only on a worm, but you still could not make, use, import, or sell your lizard, without getting the rights to do so from the original inventors of that swim tail.

There are countless numbers of patents issed this way, where the patent holder has no rights to actually make his invention

[BuMMeRBaits]

Well I guess then with that said, BPS will be getting sued for patent infringment for almost every XPS Bait they sell as, most are exact copies of other baits.

BPS will probably even be selling an exact copy of the Sweet Beaver within the next 6 months to a year, but under a different name, I see it now the XPS Beaver.

[crittercraw]

I have read through most of what you guys have been discussing and agree with rockhopper. I think the point averyone has not talked about is the difference between a design patent and a utility patent. A design patent application is basically a drawing showing your design, no claims as to function etc.. I don't know of a utility patent that would cover the design (shape) of a soft plastic bait that is in effect now. Salt impregnating was a utility patent, just like the new super plastics, meaning it would cover any design of plastic baits. If Reaction Innovations has applied for a design patent on the sweet beaver, then you cannot make an exact copy of the bait, but you can change it only a little bit and sell it. If they have applied for a utility patent on the bait they must prove there claims as to its functionality. I don't think there is anything on that bait that would justify a utility patent. Also remember that a patent isn't forever and alot have expired, meaning anyone can copy them. If one of the mold makers was making a mold of a patented bait design, they would get a letter and stop making it. A patent is only valid if it is enforced. Don't let myths and heresay cloud your judgement as far as patents go. Keep an open mind and remember that if you think you know it all, you have reached the pennicle of your success in life.

[LaPala]

This difference btw design & utility patent clears some cloud over the patent/originnal-ideas/infringment issues. Thks crittercraw.

[rockhopper]

I have read through most of what you guys have been discussing and agree with rockhopper. I think the point averyone has not talked about is the difference between a design patent and a utility patent. A design patent application is basically a drawing showing your design, no claims as to function etc.. I don't know of a utility patent that would cover the design (shape) of a soft plastic bait that is in effect now.

Another one just issued this month, there are many utility patents still in effect on soft plastic lures

Salt impregnating was a utility patent, just like the new super plastics, meaning it would cover any design of plastic baits. If Reaction Innovations has applied for a design patent on the sweet beaver, then you cannot make an exact copy of the bait, but you can change it only a little bit and sell it.

That depends on what you think "a little bit is", it's actualy more than most people think.

If to an individual they both look almost the same, or you have to look close to tell if they are not the same, then you have infringed on the design patent, you can't jsut add a little or take away a little and get around a design patent. If someone sues you , then the judge is the one who makes that determination

If they have applied for a utility patent on the bait they must prove there claims as to its functionality. I don't think there is anything on that bait that would justify a utility patent.

I don't have a clue as I don't know the lure

Also remember that a patent isn't forever and alot have expired, meaning anyone can copy them. If one of the mold makers was making a mold of a patented bait design, they would get a letter and stop making it. A patent is only valid if it is enforced.

Agreed

Don't let myths and heresay cloud your judgement as far as patents go.

That's what I'm here for

Keep an open mind and remember that if you think you know it all, you have reached the pennicle of your success in life.

[TRIPLE C CUSTOM LURES]

What about the foam lures some of us make on here. Is that being illegal? And what do you do when a customer wants you to paint a copy of someone else's bait? I would like to post a pic of one that i did but i dont want anyone calling me out. Was going to get the rubber to make better molds out of but if it is illegal.... Many thanks to all that are on this site, you truly make this site great. THANK YOU

[rockhopper]

What about the foam lures some of us make on here. Is that being illegal? And what do you do when a customer wants you to paint a copy of someone else's bait?

I don't have a clue about specific lures you make, it would depend on a patent search

Was going to get the rubber to make better molds out of but if it is illegal.... Many thanks to all that are on this site, you truly make this site great.

[Joe]

What are the steps to be taken to begin a patent search? Is there one web site better than another? I have been looking for over a year to see if a certain lure has a patent with no luck. I'm not sure if there is no patent or maybe I'm not looking in the right place. Thanks, Joe

[rockhopper]

What are the steps to be taken to begin a patent search?

The first step is the hardest, that is waiting, it can and often does take 5 years from the time you see the lure on the market , before a patent issues, here are the reasons today for such a delay (in years past these could be submariened for up to 20 years)

1. You have 12 months from the first disclosure or offer for sale to file, now if this is a Provisonal patent aplication, then you have an addistonal 12 months before you file for the utility patent.

24 months before a real patent was filed

It now takes about 18 months before the examiners first look at the aplication,

so this is 3 1/2 years so far

You recive the first office action, you have three months to answer this action, then it takes the examiner from 3 to 6 months to either issue your patent or, send another office action, then you have another7 to 9 months of delay,, then maybe a thrid office action.

If the inventor does not want to file in other countries, then he request that his aplication not be published after 18 months of filing, this keeps everything secrete until a patent issues.

SO to be sure that no patent is going to issue on the lure you need to wait at least 5 years,, sure sometimes they get issued in 18 months to 24 months, but many can and do get drug out much longer.

Those people and companies that do not want to just sue infringers will put patent pending on their products from the start (it must actualy be patent pending for you to do this , or you set yourself up for a big fine) not saying that these guys won't sue, on the contrary, it's just they want to keep all the honist people that way, they are not into the "surprize, I'm going to nail your butt " group.

On the searches themselves, you will need to do more than a word search, you will need to do a "class" search, and there will nbe a number of classes that must be searched, this is where you read every patent in each class,, not that much fun and really time consuming.

Since you are looking for a specific lure,, that lure it's self may be under a patent "claim" that the drawing with that patent don't remotly represent that paticular lure (this is what seperates the amature searching the data base and a professional).

Again since your searching for a paticular lure,, this means your search is not for filling your own patent,, just seeing if you can copy a lure and not infringe, so the good news is you only have to go back 20 years, if you were looking to get your own patent then you would have to go back to 1790.

Is there one web site better than another?

The answer here is yes, the best sites cost you a monthly fee, to do a profesional style search in the USPO site would take many , many , many hours,, hundreds of hours

I have been looking for over a year to see if a certain lure has a patent with no luck. I'm not sure if there is no patent or maybe I'm not looking in the right place. Thanks, Joe

Maybe the right place,, just searching the wrong way

Another way to find out is jsut call the manufacturer and ask them if they filed for a patent on the lure, they may get mad, then again maybe not :-)

[Tally]

O.K., this thread has got me going. Let's talk about the guy who does this for a hobby and sells a few baits here and there. First, there is only a number of different ways that a crankbait can be carved to be effective, whether it be round or flat sided. Second, angle of the lip and wieghting and weight placement is something that everyone tries until they find the right placement to obtain what they are after. My question is (and let's keep this simple), No matter what type of bait you carve, it will resemble something that is already being produced. How or what do we have to do to keep ourselves from getting into trouble? Will the angle of the lip or weighting, (being different) be enough? Does coping mean exact?

thanks for your time.

Tally

[Mallard]

No matter what type of bait you carve, it will resemble something that is already being produced. How or what do we have to do to keep ourselves from getting into trouble?

It seems that anything that is created new has the potential of infringing on someone else's patented work. It also seems the only way to guarantee not to infringe on a patent is to make an exact copy of a lure that was patented, but the patent was allowed to laspe.

Copy somene else's work exactly = not stealing

Create new but not research properly = stealing

[rockhopper]

[q

uote="Mallard]

No matter what type of bait you carve, it will resemble something that is already being produced. How or what do we have to do to keep ourselves from getting into trouble?

It seems that anything that is created new has the potential of infringing on someone else's patented work. It also seems the only way to guarantee not to infringe on a patent is to make an exact copy of a lure that was patented, but the patent was allowed to laspe.

Copy somene else's work exactly = not stealing

This is correct for any expired patents, this is the whole reason for patents to be granted, to let the world know the technoligy, and share it , after the patent expires

Create new but not research properly = stealing

Possible, that is why a patent search is needed , to see if you have indeed created soemthing new, if it infringes, it's not new, at least part of it is not new

[sducoach]

If in fact the lure manufacturing industry was as concerned as some on this forum appear to be then I agree Bass Pro would spend a great deal of time in court.

Do most small inventors make small amounts off selling patent rights to larger manufacturers?

Rockhopper as the apparent owner of a few patents did you make your fortune or, enough to fund a few law suits protecting them?

Does anyone believe U.S. patents are enforcable overseas?

Big Fish / Little Fish........

[rockhopper]

If in fact the lure manufacturing industry was as concerned as some on this forum appear to be then I agree Bass Pro would spend a great deal of time in court.

They do

Do most small inventors make small amounts off selling patent rights to larger manufacturers?

It can be huge, I know of independant tackle inventors making huge sums,, there are not many of them, but a few

Rockhopper as the apparent owner of a few patents did you make your fortune or, enough to fund a few law suits protecting them?

Making my man, making, not "made" in the past tence, an inventor would be foolish to "sell" his rights,, although many do this, because they don't know how to play the game, I license, that means I get royalities every month fo the life of the patent, or beyound it's life one one of mine.

Yes, I have the funds to pursue infringers, and you can even buy insurence to do this, that is not that costly.

Does anyone believe U.S. patents are enforcable overseas?

Of course not, a US patent does not protect your IP overseas, but it protects the heck out of imports of those infringers into the US, you not only go after the importer, you go after the wholesaler, and the retailer, as all of these have broken the patent laws, and owe the inventor damages times three

Big Fish / Little Fish........

[Mojo]

Of course not, a US patent does not protect your IP overseas, but it protects the heck out of imports of those infringers into the US, you not only go after the importer, you go after the wholesaler, and the retailer, as all of these have broken the patent laws, and owe the inventor damages times three

How, exactly, are damages determined? Is it the revenue lost to the infringer by the patent holder? In other words, the patent infringer makes X amount of money, and when damages are determined it would be X times 3?

So it appears that punitive damages are included. Wow, automatic punitive damages.

[rockhopper]

Of course not' date=' a US patent does not protect your IP overseas, but it protects the heck out of imports of those infringers into the US, you not only go after the importer, you go after the wholesaler, and the retailer, as all of these have broken the patent laws, and owe the inventor damages times three[/quote']

How, exactly, are damages determined? Is it the revenue lost to the infringer by the patent holder? In other words, the patent infringer makes X amount of money, and when damages are determined it would be X times 3?

So it appears that punitive damages are included. Wow, automatic punitive damages.

You have another problem, it seams here, as you are infringing on Mojo's Trade Mark,, Trade Mark infringement is a real No-No, would you please "quickly" pick another name

Mojo Trade Mark Regestration number 76568285

can be seen here

http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=rscepl.5.51

You would really want to stop doing buisness under this name ASAP, as this trade mark covers fishing lures of all types

[ckarren]

I have a question, say I took a bluegill and made a mold from the actual fish. There is no why I can patent any part of this bait, ?right?. Unless I make a special tail, way to hook on the hooks or any alterations and that is what the patent protects.

Thanks

-Corey

[rockhopper]

I have a question' date=' say I took a bluegill and made a mold from the actual fish There is no why I can patent any part of this bait, ?right?. Unless I make a special tail, way to hook on the hooks or any alterations and that is what the patent protects.

Thanks

-Corey[/quote']

This is correct, unless you could have, or someone could have patented the process of making the mold, and that patent is stil in force.

The problem with exact copies of fish or anything that fish feed on, to be used as a lure, is the action of that lure in the water, copies that are exact have dificulties in generating a life like action,, now there is an exception to that,, might even be more than one, the rig that the lure is attached to generates the proper action, my "wiggle rig" will do this with any soft plastic lure even copies of fish,, I have an exact copy of a blue gill soft plastic, (made by Renosky Lure) even screen painted to look like one, that I can generate an action that no bass has resisted,, at least not in testing

So most of your patents deal with what is added to a lure that gives it it's action

[rockhopper]

You have another problem, it seams here, as you are infringing on Mojo's Trade Mark,, Trade Mark infringement is a real No-No, would you please "quickly" pick another name

Mojo Trade Mark Regestration number 76568285

can be seen here

http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=rscepl.5.51

Sorry that link won't work, you would have to search the number, so here is the Trade Mark

Word Mark MOJO

Goods and Services IC 028. US 022 023 038 050. G & S: sporting goods, namely fishing lures and sinkers. FIRST USE: 19830000. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19910000

Standard Characters Claimed

Mark Drawing Code (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK

Serial Number 76568285

Filing Date December 19, 2003

Current Filing Basis 1A

Original Filing Basis 1A

Owner (APPLICANT) Mojo Lure Co., Inc. CORPORATION CALIFORNIA 2985 West Lincoln Street, Suite 404 Banning CALIFORNIA 92220

Attorney of Record James E. Brunton

Type of Mark TRADEMARK

Register PRINCIPAL

Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

You would really want to stop doing buisness under this name ASAP, as this trade mark covers fishing lures of all types