View Single Post
  #56   Report Post  
Posted to rec.woodworking
krw[_6_] krw[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 898
Default Bosch Reaxx Table Saw

On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 20:03:25 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
m:

On 9/17/2015 11:08 AM, John McCoy wrote:


No, krw is right here. You can't sue for infringement of patent
until the infringing product is on the market. Now that Bosch's
saw is on the market, and SawStop has responded by filing suit,
the patent can be tested in court.


Understood. But has Sawstop Responded?


Thought they had...yeah, Google says they sued back in July.

That can take years to resolve.

If the court thinks SawStop is likely to prevail, they can issue
an injunction to prevent Bosch from selling their saw until the
suit is resolved. That does not often happen, the infringement
has to be pretty blatent for the court to take action before trial.


Understood. I think Bosch will be fine, surely their attorneys would
have researched before giving the go ahead. Either way the method of
causing the blade to drop appears to be totally different.


That's the hard part about patent cases - you might think it's
totally different, your lawyers (who aren't technical folk)
might think it's totally different, but will a judge & jury?
Patent cases are notoriously unpredictable.


Exactly right. I read the patents with a reasonably trained eye and
don't see how Bosch can win but I'd never bet on the outcome of any
civil case in the US courts.

And, of course, there's also the possibility that Bosch is
intentionally infringing, but expects SawStop to reach an
agreement rather than pay to pursue a suit. That happens all
the time in electronics - Apple (just as a for instance)(*)
copies someone else's tech, the other party sues, then they
agree that Apple can pay a chunk of money to license whatever
it is. Even tho the second company wouldn't have voluntarily
licensed Apple if they'd been asked, faced with a fait accompli
it's cheaper to take the money than to sue.

Excellent point. It's not only cheaper but it's a bird in the hand.
Given the court system, that means a lot.

(* actually, using Apple as the example because they do this
all the time.)