Magpul sues 4 magazine manufacturers for patent infringement

[allingeneral]

It has been said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but Magpul Industries is not taking patent infringement lightly. The company recently announced that it has filed separate lawsuits against four other magazine manufactures that mirrored Magpul’s trademark designs too closely. According to guns.com, the companies named in the lawsuit are Promag, Plinker Tactical, Big Rock Sports/Swampfox and Cole Industries.



“These patents exemplify the industrial design-focused spirit at Magpul, which drives us to create novel solutions that enhance user experience with our products,” said Duane Liptak, Director of Product Management and Marketing for Magpul Industries. “People who use Magpul products have high expectations and a great deal of trust regarding the value, quality, and amount of thought put into every design we release. As such, we cannot allow others to misappropriate the patented technology that helps us generate that consumer confidence and trust.”

Read more: http://www.outdoorhub.com/news/magpul-b ... ringement/

[zykur]

This doesn't surprise me, some of the magazines look almost identical to their versions. From what I understand the US Military wanted to test Magpul magazines for our troops but Magpul would have to provide the technical data package IE patent to the government.

[Kreutz]

From what I understand the US Military wanted to test Magpul magazines for our troops but Magpul would have to provide the technical data package IE patent to the government.

Since patents are registered with the Patent Office wouldn't the government kind of already have them?

Not sure how you could patent a magazine anyway; its a box with a spring and a design thats been around for at least a century.

[gunderwood]

From what I understand the US Military wanted to test Magpul magazines for our troops but Magpul would have to provide the technical data package IE patent to the government.

Since patents are registered with the Patent Office wouldn't the government kind of already have them?

Not sure how you could patent a magazine anyway; its a box with a spring and a design thats been around for at least a century.

From the link, here is the main patent (emphasis mine):

The information available on Google’s database of patents provides the following abstract of Utility Pat. No. 8,069,601:

The present invention is an ammunition magazine, preferably made of a glass fiber reinforced polymer, utilizing a structurally enhancing ridge, angular guide rails and a follower made to interface with said guide rails to reduce wobble. The preferred embodiment also features a protective cover that distributes forces from the follower spring to more structurally sound areas of the magazine, thus reducing feed end splay, and an ammunition indication system comprised of at least one window and a noticeable marker on the follower spring . The follower and magazine casing are also designed to interface to prevent the follower from popping out of the feed end and the floor plate of the magazine utilizes a locking plate and sliding relationship between the floor plate, locking plate and magazine to secure the floor plate onto the magazine casing. The cover features built in tools for, among other things, unloading and disassembling the magazine.

You could argue a lot of points and the patent system needs a major overhaul, but the underlined are things I'd consider Magpul can easily claim as original. Yes, it still performs the basic function, but those are/were novel features.

[zykur]

What I meant was the government could take the design to several companies and have them produce them and bid on the contract to supply them just like the AR plarform.
At that point they lose the ability to sue companies for copying their design.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[allingeneral]

What I meant was the government could take the design to several companies and have them produce them and bid on the contract to supply them just like the AR plarform.
At that point they lose the ability to sue companies for copying their design.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Don't think the government can do that legally. Magpul's design is theirs. They own it. Unless the R&D was conducted specifically in response to a contract government request (i.e. paid for by the government), or if it were designed by the government and Magpul was just asked to manufacture them.

[GeneFrenkle]

If the contract allows it, the contractor can apply for (and be granted) patents. The issue is to what degree the gov't is effected and will generally be immune from action. Gov't also includes contractors, too, in the course of executing gov't contracts. If a contractor takes that information and tries to run with it in the private sector, they could be taken to court under patent protection by the patent holder.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[RoundHouse]

Magpul has gotta finance the move!

[GeneFrenkle]

I haven't read the suit in whole, but I suspect Magpul will not gt any money from this. I'm guessimg the suit is to demonstrate patent enfringement and willingness to enforce patents. If the courts agree, the infringers must stop, then civil action can be taken to get damages. So, if money is to be gained, I suspect it will not be from this and may be coming in a while. IANAL, though.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]