Forum menu
SRAM have apparently contacted Dirt magazine about the Race Face Thick/Thin web article they published then pulled...except you can't delete anything from the internet:
The tweet:
Dirt Magazine ?@DirtMagazine 3h
@Workscomponents @amackinlay Just had a very interesting email from SRAM on this matter...
They're still featured on the Raceface and Silverfish websites. Dirt overreacting to threats? A patent existed for this from the 70's but now expired.
Hopefully just the spiderless side of things???
wolf components make them too, there was a good sized thread about them on hear a few weks back.
I suppose they used it for bikes first - bound to want to protect it a bit. I bet they dont care about RF, Works, Wolf etc but dont want to see that type of ring on mr Shimano's gear....
I already have one, will have to get another quickly if everyone is going to be told to stop making them, dont fancy a £80 ring!!
Anyone into patent stuff? - Can you patent something that is already released etc?
Works Components have updated their facebook feed suggesting that they have had a delay at the Anodisers. Apparently the Acid Chiller failed or something. Despite this, he states that people waiting on a chain ring should have it sent out this Wednesday/Thursday. However, I'm not sure what batch he is talking about and how far back your order needed to be to be in this batch.
It would be interesting to hear from Works with regard to these supposed patent talks from SRAM. From what I have read, the patent dates back to 1970s and is expired therefore all manufacturers of this technology are in the clear.
Anyone into patent stuff? - Can you patent something that is already released etc?
No, not once it's in the public domain.
No, not once it's in the public domain.
Thats what someone told me about some machine function they attempted to patent at work... I wonder what SRAM are upto then, i am sure we will find out - they got Dirt to remove that article for a reason.
chainrings are silly money
https://www.google.com/patents/EP2602176A1?cl=en&dq=sram+chainring&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RP3SUbWvOoSgtAbAoIDoAg&ved=0CDsQ6AEwAQ
had a quick look - patent wording makes no sense to me... i am sure it does to lawyers though 😉
Whilst we're on the subject of patents, this one is quite amusing...
"APPARATUS FOR FACILITATING THE BIRTH OF A CHILD BY CENTRIFUGAL FORCE"
https://www.google.com/patents/US3216423?printsec=drawing#v=onepage&q&f=false
haha, who would spend money persuing such a thing!!
The combover was succesfully patented in the US. Hope none of you baldies are in-fringing on it.
Well, I thought it was funny.
That article's classic Dirt though, it's not the first time they've ignored a Works Components product and pretended a late-arriving competitor is first to market. (they did the same with the standard-steerer Angleset, with a half-page puff-piece declaring it the saviour of old frames, when the Works one had been out for 6 months, and cost about half as much, while working better and being UK made)
Advertisers you say hmm?
PS, dear SRAM, instead of selling your product with a laughable markup and using your possibly dubious patent and larger legal team to beat down competition, why not make your chainring a sensible price? The market for Works, etc only exists because SRAM created it then declined to serve it.
Anyone into patent stuff? - Can you patent something that is already released etc?
No, not once it's in the public domain
That hasn't stopped Apple (but that's another off topic can of worms)! 😆
The US patent system is a joke. Bose have patended numerous things which had prior art existing decades before. Fortunately US patents do not apply in the UK!
Who are works?
Works Components- UK component company that make chainrings, angle-adjusting headsets etc
Works have posted it on their Facebook - they say it's unclear what it means for them, as their chainrings don't have a lot of the features the SRAM ones do.
Can you patent something that is already released etc?
Yes
enough legal engineering money and you can basically take any company/man in a shed that came up with the idea before you to the cleaners if you can get your legal bods to drag it out for years
also works well if your in the USA where patents are a bit shambolic
edit just read cheifgroove gurus post
The premise of specialized's suspension design has been around for centuries, but they somehow managed to patent it. They also seem to own the rights to the word "epic".
The American patent system allowed pharmaceutical companies to patent genes. You know; the ones we all carry and have since the human race began
Thankfully now overturned but it was one of the worst decisions of all time imo
Presume SRAM will want to hang onto the intellectual rights until they can launch and establish x7 and x9 with the trickle down tech
Doesn't Will I Am own the expression "I am"?
Though, this isn't just a US patent, or at least it's not just been filed in the US.
e weren't it Clive Sinclair that said he was better just screwing the money out of a product for a couple of years whilst developing something new to replace it ,rather than waste money on patents
they will patent pedalling round and round and round soon
Anyone into patent stuff? - Can you patent something that is already released etc?
No, not once it's in the public domain.
Ah, ha ha ha ha ha!. You don't work in software clearly 🙂
Patent's can get revoked if someone can demonstrate prior art or that something is insufficiently novel but that takes time and money and if BigCorp and their laywers are suing you it's often easier just to give in as fighting them will be expensive.
There is an entire industry in the States of companies who do nothing other than buy patents and extract license fees from companies 'infringing' their patents, which are often either stupidly broad or blindingly obvious. Google patent trolls for a wealth of depressing info.
So, compared to that thick/thin chain rings that you came up with and actually make seems like a reasonable thing to deploy the lawyers over :/
If you look on the back of the card that park tools come attached to when you buy them, you will see that the colour blue has been trademarked....
The only people who are going to win out of all this are lawyers it would seem 🙁
Sram did state they are looking for licensing partners....
[url= http://www.bike-eu.com/Home/General/2013/5/SRAMs-X-Sync-Technology-Set-to-Open-for-Licensing-1245909W/ ]Link here - Bike Europe[/url]
Why stop other people making them when you can get them to pay you while they help to take market share from shimano. The patent is to stop Shimano from tagging on, they must be losing top end marked share by the bucket load since XX1 has been around!
One thing that is strange, Raceface and E13 are both big players and wouldnt be dumb enough to take SRAM on in a legal sense, either they plan to license or the patent is fudge?
Either way, would Wolf Tooth and Works even attempt to fight it, they would roll over and stop selling i expect, david v goliath but here the small man wouldnt win!
mr_stru - MemberAnyone into patent stuff? - Can you patent something that is already released etc?
No, not once it's in the public domain.
Ah, ha ha ha ha ha!. You don't work in software clearly
No, I don't. But I do know the criteria for applying for patents. I make no comment on the reality of patent enforcement in different industries.
At the moment these are just filings, they are not actually granted. The report back from the patent office seems to say they don't feel there is a significant inventive step to warrant a patent, this doesn't mean it won't get granted but as it stands they won't accept it.
SRAM filed the original patent in dec 2011 before launch of XX1 in the states, this is still not granted, these more recent applications are to cover other countries, again are in process
I'm guessing this is patent from 1979 https://www.google.com/patents/US4174642
Doesn't really seem to be much of an inventive step other than putting it on a bicycle drive chain and offsetting the teeth slightly?
I'm quite tempted by one of the Works efforts while the going is good. Shame the colours aren't available yet.
Well if SRAM are successful in quashing these other guys, then they can just manufacture adapters to enable the SRAM chainrings to be fitted to ordinary cranks. The chainrings are still expensive as far as chainrings go, but still significatnly cheaper than converting to the complete XX1 setup.
SRAM's patent application is from December 2012
European patent too, so would shut Works down if they'r infringing it. Which I think they are, given the quote from their website:
[i]Works Components 104BCD Chainring, Alternating Thickness, Extended Tooth Design.
Inspiration taken from SRAM's own XX1 taller and alternating thickness tooth profile:[/i]
The patent is to stop Shimano from tagging on, they must be losing top end marked share by the bucket load since XX1 has been around!
Not really, 1x11 is a small niche.
From sense I can make of the patent, it only applies to [b]even[/b] numbered chainrings, so [b]odd[/b] numbers are fair game (rushes to compile odd numbered patent)
I also read once that prime number chainrings reduce wear in the drivetrain... seems SRAM hold the patent to an inferior product.
jivehoneyjive - Member
From sense I can make of the patent, it only applies to even numbered chainrings, so odd numbers are fair game (rushes to compile odd numbered patent)
The two in, two out alternating pattern isn't going to work with an odd number of teeth
But the teeth are designed to alternate between the narrow and wide gaps between the chain plates... you do the math!
jivehoneyjive - MemberFrom sense I can make of the patent, it only applies to even numbered chainrings, so odd numbers are fair game
Good luck making a chainring with an odd number of alternating thick/thin teeth 😉
😆
I'll get there yet 😆Good luck making a chainring with an odd number of alternating thick/thin teeth
It's one of those awkward situations though... SRAM genuinely have done something cool and useful here, it's the sort of thing you want to encourage and that's what patents are for. So it's hard to be against that.
But at the same time, they've patented their idea then restricted the product delivery to a pretty silly level. So it's not like these other produts are taking sales from SRAM, and by all accounts they haven't tried to licence it either. I'd have bought a SRAM 10 speed single ring, for 104BCD, ages ago if such a thing existed but instead I had to wait til Works made one. So I find it hard to feel bad about that "infringement" Patents are supposed to protect the rights of the inventor, not to enable them to suppress a product entirely.
Jivehoneyjive -I've just patented an odd chain, it should work well with your chain rings when you get them sorted 😉
Even getting hold of. 120bcd XO chainring was a bit of a hunt 2 months ago, there seems to be very little stock out there, and that's something like 4-5 years after it was released....
didn't sram patent the ratio 1:1.5? (so you can't make 24/36 chainsets) the mind really does boggle at what you can patent - genes being an even more silly/scary one.it only applies to even numbered chainrings,
Hardly fair to say they'r supressing a product. They brought out XX1, and will be bringing out X01 and lower also when ready - selling the rings on their own hurts sales of their groupsets, it's up to them to market their products and intellectual property as they see fit.
East for Works to jump in, they're a small company with a CNC setup who just have to "take inspiration" from an existinf product, versus a giant who have to develop, test and supply enough product for global sales and OEMs. Wanting SRAM to hurry up a bit is fair enough, but it's no justification for ripping their design off.
(No axe to grind with Works myself, BTW - but I don't think they can complain if SRAM stop them makign the rings)