so, who's up for some cheap chinese rifle scopes? Arken anyone?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
New Leofoto Anvil Copy
- Thread starter AIKNOWU
- Start date
How about our corrupt, raping, stealing, scheming, looting, wasteful, nasty, self absorbed, contemptuous, imperious, criminal Federal Government actually enforced international business and trade laws instead of enriching themselves off of our people? How about that?
Shit in one hand, wish in the other. See which fills up first. Territory is only territory if you are willing and able to actively and continuously defend it. That implies that you have the wherewithal to do so. Wishy thinky is not a productive use of one's time nor a viable philosophical base from which to make any of life's little choices.
To think that an idea can belong to a person is both just plain silly and greedy in the extreme. The practice of pretending that an idea can belong to a person and is transferrable or licensable (as through the patent system) has had primarily negative effects on humanity as a whole largely because it's a system based on the principle of wishy thinky.
That whole line of thinking is retarded, and doesn’t reward the creative talent that develops an idea, but simply the biggest criminal who can steal the most. There is no perfect answer, but making the originator of the idea, technology, process, or unique product the beneficiary is what actually drives innovation. The purist libertarian society is no more real and no more functional than the pure communist one.
Patents are necessary, but they need to work, they need to be fair, and they need reasonable expirations depending on what they are.
There isn’t a better system, but it requires a competent government that doesn’t benefit by robbing and raping their own people. Qui bona?
Last edited:
If you think that's bad just think that Since the 1980 case of Diamond v. Chakrabarty, in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a living microorganism is patentable, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has determined that plants and nonhuman animals can be patented.
Lol@patents stifling innovation.
If anything, I’d say not being able to directly copy your competition forces innovation.
If anything, I’d say not being able to directly copy your competition forces innovation.
The issue you bring up is absolutely infuriating, but it isn’t a problem with the patent system per se. Rather it’s an issue as to how the patent system is being abused.
If we didn’t have patents, no one would make anything cool except for themselves. Just think it through; pretend you’re an inventor.
Ok. Please, if you would, explain how you would set up your “no-patent” system.
Belive it or not Ive actually had ideas for things that I never did anything with that eventually made it to market. Nothing ingenious just convenient or clever. The way I see it is you have a few years to build a brand and exclusively sell a product. After that get out of the way. I have ideas for products now that probably will never come to fruition. Such is my life story. Coulda, shoulda. Woulda...
I just have a problem with a system owning and controlling ideas. It's like discovering the cure for cancer. Only making limited amounts and selling it for $1,000,000,000 a dose because it's your product and you have every right to.
I get it. But hear me out.
We all like the second amendment, right? We like that second amendment to be protected. After all, it’s in the Constitution of the United States.
The idea for patents is also embedded into our wonderful Constitution. It’s not in the Bill of Rights, but there it is. The framers thought it was quite important.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 8, of the United States Constitution grants Congress the enumerated power "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries."
I am far from a patent lawyer, but utility patents only last 20 yrs, and design patents 14-15 yrs in the USA. This allows someone with brains to profit and then the system should release the idea into the wild.
I would have a problem if an idea gets locked away forever. I think (but do not know) certain patents somehow get extended and extended (see Monsanto). And copyright law, distinct from patents, seems currently skewed in favor of corporations (longer protections for corp vs people).
But the problem, as I see it, isn’t the idea of a temporary protection of ideas. Rather, the execution of the protection can be the fly in the ointment.
Hmmmm, this gets me thinking. I’m going to patent a patent-making idea…for making patentable machines that generate patentable algorithms for patentable profit taking in patentable stock markets trading crypto-wallets containing NFTs created with my patented LOL-blockchain.
Don’t sell yourself short. This guy from MN, Mike Schwiess, was making something called the “Schwiess Chicken Plucker” when someone gave him an offhand idea for folding garage doors. Now he’s a rich man. https://www.bifold.com/history.php
But don’t make the same mistake of the inventor of the intermittent windshield wiper.
It existed for thousands of years before the patent system was created. Never seemed to be too big of a problem.
You argue that I'm wrong by puerile insult and simple unsupported assertion but make no actual argument as to why. You follow it up by making factually incorrect assertions twice. Methinks thou doth protest too much and back up your bullshit too little. Innovation is not merely in thinking up a widget. Real innovation comes from figuring out how to produce a widget in such a manner as to make the venture profitable. An idiot can design a thing that might be commercially successful. It takes real genius to figure out how to develop systems, processes, and facilities to manufacture, market and distribute it with and be able to recoup your investment in the product's marketable lifetime.
But without protection from, for example a patent, the marketable lifetime could be about 15 minutes if someone can come along and build the exact same thing without the expense of R&D and pay their workers 10% less.
I’m gonna start doing training. I’ll use your spreadsheets with no credit or royalties given. Appreciate the hard work you did.
You know what else existed for 1000s of year before civilized society? Survival of the fittest. “Copy my shit and die!”
Knock yourself out. The spreadsheet is past its marketable lifetime, is a derivative product based on prior art that others here did and which they put into the public domain, and it's not patented because you can't patent mathematical formulae. I just fixed the bugs in the original work (credit to Russ & co for the base material) to make it something that's actually useful, shined it up and added a few features. You might learn to read though as copyright is not the same as a patent. You're free to make your own front end using the existing back end. The back end is in the public domain. The front end is copyrighted. You might also note that I never sold the spreadsheet. I sold support for a couple years and that worked well enough but then I just got over the whole damned thing and stopped charging for support.
In any event, my spreadsheet is free to use for non-commercial purposes and if you want to use it for commercial purposes you just have to ask. I'll take your statement as a request for authorization rather than you admitting to a plan to commit copyright violations and approve your request here in writing. Enjoy. You may use the front end and the back end as they sit for your training courses and you may modify them as you see fit.
To my point, you clearly didn't read what I wrote well enough to understand it all so I recommend you repeat the reading part and come back for the talking part with at least some sort of valid argument.
I understand copyright vs patent. I was illustrating your work for my profit.
What I will agree on with all this patent talk is that ideas that are so simple that a caveman can invent probably shouldn’t be protected but ideas that are truly unique should. Now determine what is and what isn’t is the hard part. If Pfizer actually found the cure to prostate cancer, should they not be allowed to patent that formula and recoup the imaginary 3 trillion dollars they invested in the R&D or does the greater good for humanity demand that it be made available for all free of charge?
The inevitable flaw in all this is that humans are in charge and greed always wins.
No. The chemical itself is not something that should be patentable though it currently is. While the process itself to create the chemical could be protected via simple trade secrets precautions of limiting access to the important details. There's no need of a patent for anything Pfizer creates because they can control access to the process details making the R&D barrier still very high to any copycats. If someone else wants to make the same chemical they should need to develop the process to create it and if the two processes are identical, then it's something that was not worthy of a patent in the first place and if it's not identical then the most efficient process will make its developer the richest. Telling people that they have exclusive rights to make a thing stifles innovation because most innovation comes from slightly modifying some other already existing thing. As soon as you make a thing that's sufficiently close to a patented thing you're toying with being sued for patent infringement so you have a huge slow burning fuse that you have to wait out before you can turn your intellect to improving someone else's product directly or by improving the methods of manufacture and the organization of the business itself.
Given your summation, might it not have been more logical to cause people to learn to deal with the fact that the ability to be better at making a thing efficiently is the secret to wealth and not the widget itself. You might notice that in my first post on the matter I stated that once the patent system was put in place that we got locked into it and it can't be torn down anymore because the shape of the universe is different because it was put in place and that change is not reversible. To say that the patent system was a stupid and counterproductive idea in the first place is an entirely separate matter from advocating its repeal.
You probably don't understand the difference. I'll wait while you grab a dictionary.
As a matter of pharma, I find the idea of patents very difficult. It’s a double edged sword. But if GSK can come along and modify Pfizer’s pill by just adding a slight tweak to the compound and market it for 80% less because they have absolutely zero invested in the R&D that doesn’t sit well with me. But I also don’t think that’s what the founders had in mind either. I have no doubt that Ben Franklin was responsible for that. I don’t think it needs to repealed. I think, just like many things, we improperly applying the procedure. Like much of the constitution it’s been bastardized
is Field Optics Research, the one who was mentioned earlier in litigation by RRS for patent infringements, a parent company? Is Leofoto under Field Optics Research? As far as I can tell, no. Curious if anyone else can answer that.
I recently had a chance to try out Leofoto’s inverted tripod and it had me wondering if RRS is allowing them to manufacture their designs under some sort of agreement. That tripod was actually pretty good.
I recently had a chance to try out Leofoto’s inverted tripod and it had me wondering if RRS is allowing them to manufacture their designs under some sort of agreement. That tripod was actually pretty good.
Cease and desist order from RRS maybe? If you continue to sell the item and lose in court, you're responsible for $$$ from all the sales after the cease and desist order as well as any punitive damages the court awards. And in my opinion, RRS would win that case based on what I saw from Leofoto. And it appears LF lawyers agree.
Did the Pre-Ban model triple in price?
In reality what probably happens now is, instead of them coming from Leofoto and Sunwayfoto for half price with at least decent quality, soon you'll be able to buy them from fifty different no brand sellers on Ebay, shipped direct from China for 1/4 the price or less (with no quality). Leofoto and Sunway may stop selling them, but whomever's making them isn't going to stop making them.
Last edited:
ah i didnt check there. just google and vendors i knew to have it in the last weeks
If a company is infringing on legitimate IP they are responsible for damages back to day one. What you're talking about is if IP is granted after a pending patent application.
I was under the impression that prior sales to the cease and desist were not "finable" unless you can prove the seller knowingly and willingly sold a "copy". But I'm just spitballing from what little I've learned and my knowledge on the subject is limited. Thanks for the clarification.
What's the next best tripod head since I can't find an Anvil 30 in stock and the Leofoto is gone apparently? Now in the market for a tripod head after trying some out at a local PRS match.
I tried a bowl head and something similar to the Anvil but the locking lever was at the top if I recall correctly. Don't recall the brand of that one.
I tried a bowl head and something similar to the Anvil but the locking lever was at the top if I recall correctly. Don't recall the brand of that one.
Honestly no clue, seems they have the market and they also are unobtanium( for most who dont have time to stalk them down online)
Anvil-30 ARC Ballhead
Overview The R-LOCK feature in the clamp is a 5mm pin that mates with corresponding R-LOCK holes in the rail. The pin is spring-loaded to automatically engage the R-LOCK holes or be pushed down by non-R-LOCK rails, making it compatible with a wider range of “arca-type” rails. The user also has...
thermalopticsplus.com
Or look into this:
Precision Rifle Gear - Fix that BallHead, stumbled on a thought
So today we were talking, tripods, ball heads, Anvil 30 vs the others, and we were looking at the legacy ball heads We had a thought, so I tried it, and it works, Ignore the connector, I had to bridge two different size studs, and the stem on the RRS has a notch so it's not flat, but a...
www.snipershide.com
Most of results for a lot less of the cost.
Damn, that was quick . Had been checking for a few weeks now, no luck. Good stuffAnvil-30 ARC Ballhead
Overview The R-LOCK feature in the clamp is a 5mm pin that mates with corresponding R-LOCK holes in the rail. The pin is spring-loaded to automatically engage the R-LOCK holes or be pushed down by non-R-LOCK rails, making it compatible with a wider range of “arca-type” rails. The user also has...thermalopticsplus.com
Buy the RRS. When you're done with it or don't like it, you'll sell it for most of what you paid.
@efl15 All of the RRS distributors are receiving their final orders of the Gen1 and are also receiving some of the new Gen2 ARC versions. Reach out to one of them and see if you can get one ordered and you should have it within weeks. If you wait for RRS direct it will be a hot minute as RRS is focusing on fulfilling all current orders before opening up new ones.
Anyone that comes across a vendor or distributor selling the Gen1 Anvil, please PM me a link! Thank you!!!
Thanks for the info. I think I'll be patient and wait for an Anvil.
Is ARC the same thing as R-LOCK (Rapid-Lock)? Or is it short for ARCA?
https://soar.reallyrightstuff.com/Anvil-30-ARC
Similar threads
Precision Rifle Gear
Help with new hunting/shooting tripod
