Good to see a total misunderstanding of what a patent is. Always a winner that one.

Thanks Biff for your posts, and it was good to speak to you on the phone. As we both know threads can carried away and true intention can get misinterpreted.

The Fu Manchu bar is a development sample we had at the bike show that we picked for the development table to go with our new bike bags, alloy frame and other new stuff.
It is one of several handlebar developments that are in our minds, down on paper and in sample production. Its nothing more than helping us look at ways to develop bars/bag systems.

If we have been advised right then the patent application was rejected? as it wasn’t unique or novel enough? But our intention is not to rip anyone off.These looped bar designs are over 15 years old now. In the last 15 years geometries, components and bags have developed so much since that we’re just looking at whether we can develop our own bar/bag system, and I don’t think this should mean that looped bar development should be off limits

However Biff you are right that this is less about patents and what we can get away with and more about doing the right thing, and as CTBM eloquently puts “not being d1ck”

So I guess it’s more of a statement of intent rather than an action. As we move into components we know we have an opportunity to integrate our luggage with our bikes in a more modular way, a greater synergy between our software and our hardware. The bars talked about on this thread are a first development step in this direction. They got a good deal of attention at the show and the reaction from people who saw them was that at last somebody was trying to make this style of bar accessible.

We have been making bike luggage since 2007 and have a sizeable, vibrant, motivated team in the factory who come from a varied range of backgrounds in terms of expertise and activities and they are constantly developing new product and tweaking the old, this happens on a daily basis. We have a pretty decent pool of design input so i’m sure there is some path forward for everyone.

I’m sure i’ll speak to Jeff this week and be able to reassure him of our future developments.

Cheers

Nick

Sounds ‘furry muff’ to me.

Good to see a total misunderstanding of what a patent is.
Always a winner that one.

It’s also great when people people smugly tell everyone how wrong they all are

but remain all mysterious and enigmatic as to why 🙄

Its taken you longer to reply than it would to Google it

You’ve got me hooked.

Do go on ……

a greater synergy between our software and our hardware

It was all going so well up until that point…. 😉

I have to say I struggle to see where the real problem is. If Jeff has got a patent then OK, not a great idea to copy, but I’m not convinced the idea of loop bars has sufficient IP to warrant a patent. I seem to remember seeing similar design bars on bikes for as long as I can remember. At most I would have thought that Jones optimised and popularised them for mountain biking.

Alpkit and Jones also inhabit different ends of the market. I doubt Alpkit sales will dent Jones’ but they may bring people around to that way of thinking so may help Jones either financially or exposure wise. Would it help if Alpkit acknowledged the Jones philosophy behind the loop bars?

Alpkit and Jones also inhabit different ends of the market. I doubt Alpkit sales will dent Jones’ but they may bring people around to that way of thinking so may help Jones either financially or exposure wise. Would it help if Alpkit acknowledged the Jones philosophy behind the loop bars?

It might do, or it might demonstrate that there is a market for them and that the patent isn’t valid/enforceable, bringing in other manufacturers and further diluting Jeff’s market share.

Well anyone buying loop bars that wants to can continue to support Jones, only now they will have a choice. And if there is no patent (whatever that ends up being) then there is no ethical problem I can see.

I just tried to find it out of curiosity (I used to work as a trainee patent attorney for a bit). The only patent I could find was this one..

http://www.google.com/patents/US20040244526

which was abandoned. If you put the application number into the US Patent Office site http://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair you can view the correspondence between the Patent Office and the Attorney (I can’t see at the moment).

The letter/number after the patent tells you if its been granted or not, A1, A2 etc.. are patent applications , and B1, B2 etc. have been granted.
Yes, they are only valid for the designated region. “European Patents” are converted into a number of local patents upon grant as there isn’t really such a thing as a European Patent yet.

If you’re reading a patent by the way, claim 1 defines the scope of protection, and it interpreted together with the description. Often the companies use similar description/pictures across several patents to save time and money.

To infringe you have to have ALL features of claim 1. So for instance if you constructed a Jones handlebar which was identical, except that the left tube was not adapted for mounting a brake lever on, you’d be fine.

Also, it can be perfectly acceptable to take known ideas from one area of technology and apply them another, like those thick/thin SRAM chainrings. The fact that no-one had thought to apply that idea to bicycle chainrings until recently could stand in their favour, because they could argue that it is not obvious otherwise it would have been done already given the advantages for DH racing and so on.
(As it turns out, they actually patented the details of the implementation rather than the general concept, because someone HAD already done it)

I suspect that he would not be offered a patent outside of the US anyway. Not suggesting that blatant copies are “good form” just that I find it difficult to assign any IP to two pieces of tube welded together.

As I understand it, in the US there is no prior art check – so you register a patent with whatever criteria you want to differentiate it from another patent and wait for someone to start action if you’ve infringed. In the UK they do a prior art check. So it’s easy to see how in the US they might say ‘ah but this is a 31.8mm bar and the controls go forward of the stem clamp so it’s different, whereas a UK patent clerk might go ‘it’s a loop bar, it’s as old as the hills, jog on’.

So in practical terms then, they are different products. In the same way that my Salsa is a different product to IanB’s Shand Bahookie, despite looking extremely similar. Or even more specifically, in the same way that a £70 Easton bar is different to a £10 On-One job.

how does one get the brakes to do this on a fumanchu bar ?

wherein the right front tube is adapted for mounting a first brake lever and the left front tube is adapted for mounting a second brake lever.

surely it can only fit on the rear…..

I get it on an H bar…

As it is such a ‘marmite’ product I’d not want to send £140 to try it, with there being a high chance of me not liking it, so I’ve not bought one.

For £35 I’d be tempted to give one a try. I’m sure lots of other people are in the same boat.

how does one get the brakes to do this on a fumanchu bar ?

Hope brakes with a two-piece clamp?

Only thing that would tempt me to a loop bar would be doing something like the Tour Divide and having some pads on the stem section to make it into a sort of aero bar. Lighter and less annoying than actual aero bars I suspect.

Various Shimano brake levers have split/hinged clamps too.

Whats the weight comparison on the bars and width ? purchased some Jones bars a couple of months ago and struggled to get my head around the price tag but I had tried a pair and they felt so right.
Rich

Will probably buy some Alpkit bars for my SS at that price?

Various Shimano brake levers have split/hinged clamps too

True, but they don’t seem to open wide enough to get them off the bar without removing the grips?

Or was I doing it wrong? Genuine question – it’s very possible that I didn’t try particularly hard, or I was taking the grips off anyway.

There’s a little hole where you need to insert a small awl (or similar) to allow them to open up fully. (RTFM, obviously 🙂 )

For £35 I’d be tempted to give one a try. I’m sure lots of other people are in the same boat.

yeah but then loads of people would have them and they wouldn’t be as good then.

100

Pounds or grammes?

kenyan shillings.

Charging £140 for something that costs £10 to make is askng for copies to be made.

£140? You’re not considering the added value of the Ti ones then?

http://www.charliethebikemonger.com/jeff-jones-titanium-h-bar-loop-handlebars-2417-p.asp

i find that a little harsh CTK.

unless someone corrects me , they started off being made by a man in a shed by hand in the us. – which is a costly process….

now they are shipped in from abroad where they are made en mass – which should be cheaper.

does the 140 reflect that part ? i cant remember ever seeing the alus for any price other than that.

I did nearly buy a set in bothy bikes in november but ive just stuck with my carnegies and a set of stubbies mounted inboard for the varied position , i still like my aeros for long rides.

Charging £140 for something that costs £10 to make is asking for copies to be made.

I understand where you’re coming from but i don’t think he IS taking a huge markup, not in his small volumes; and certainly NOT 140%. I also imagine he’s tied into some quite specific Jones tooling, having to have large batches of tubes drawn at a time.
It would certainly explain some of his design decisions. For example, when adding width to his Surly versions of the loop bar it was done by lengthening the grip rearward, when adding width by lengthening the central butted/tapered crossbar would be a better solution – doesn’t require a stem length change.

The cut loop or original H bar, represents better VFM since it’s made from 3 tubes 😉

Bought my Ti H bar back in 2007, second hand for £80, have not used another set set since.

I don’t see how patents stifle innovation. Merely copying isn’t innovation you know! 😉

I don’t see how patents stifle innovation. Merely copying isn’t innovation you know!

The stifling innovation point comes from the fact that Jones hasn’t developed a new bar in years the lazy bum, just sat back and collected the cheques living the life of riley, if everyone could copy his design he would be forced to come up with something newer and better.
😀

Ghetto loop bars with Marys and some old l-bend bar ends mounted inboard.

Don’t tell Jeff.

But will someone make some dirt drops, that fit normal mountain bike controls, for a decent price, and make them available in England?
I’d buy them

But will someone make some dirt drops, that fit normal mountain bike controls, for a decent price, and make them available in England?
I’d buy them

Like these?

Shand ONE flared drops

Jones bars might be fantastic but the price puts them out of the reach of most riders. Jeff has had years in which he could have produced a cheaper version for the mass market but he has chosen to keep it a niche product. The extra exposure his design gets from imitations being available at real-world prices can only be a benefit for him and the cycling community.

Jeff has had years in which he could have produced a cheaper version for the mass market but he has chosen to keep it a niche product

by say licensing his design to that ‘small enterprise’ Titec and their global distribution network. That really showed the market scope didn’t it.

Jeff has had years in which he could have produced a cheaper version for the mass market but he has chosen to keep it a niche product.

You’re unaware of the Jones Bend bar then? Cheaper and lighter!

those look familiar….

So those stand ones take MTB controls, not road?

So those stand ones take MTB controls, not road?

ah, my bad, didn’t read the part about MTB controls. Too busy trying to get the shameless olug in….

Are people doing that? MTB controls on drop bars? Shifters on the flats?

Jones Bend bars are still relatively expensive and lack the welded junction that make the H-bar/Loop distinctive.

I had forgotten about the licensed Titec version. Obviously that partnership didn’t work out.

As it is such a ‘marmite’ product I’d not want to send £140 to try it, with there being a high chance of me not liking it, so I’ve not bought one.

For £35 I’d be tempted to give one a try. I’m sure lots of other people are in the same boat.

This.. Very much this.

I tried Titec J bars, but they where far too narrow, so sold them after 1 ride.

Granted I could buy the Jones, and I’d probably get back a fair chunk of what I paid for them..

Its possible that Jones missed the Patent

97 Application

Jones application

2003 Jones application