In Reply to: With all due respect... posted by John Marks on January 1, 2024 at 12:18:46:
![]()
The above does not blow me away.
For the sake of argument, I suppose that nobody had yet used a balsa layer as the Pastrami in the Sandwich. (Let alone milling the surface of the second piece of bread!)
I'd say that any lawyer who filed an action to declare that patent invalid for lack of Non-Obviousness should not have any worries at all about being charged with filing a frivolous lawsuit. (I know I just committed a sort of Double Negative.)
In my 20 years as a trial lawyer, I was second chair on some patent-related civil cases (I never practiced as a patent lawyer).
The usual scenario is that two companies in the same industry sue and countersue alleging infringements of the patent each one holds, which is usually a "Kissing Cousin" to the other patent.
More than once the Federal judge told the parties that there was a serious risk that he would invalidate both patents on the grounds of lack of novelty, or obviousness, or both.
BTW that Vandersteen patent is the first time I have ever seen BOTH Stereophile and TAS cited as "Other Documents" in a Patent. Which honestly raises an eyebrow.
FWIW & YWWV.
My bottom line is that anyone with the bankroll can ask Composite Sound to make a TPCD diaphragm to their specifications, or they can ask SB Acoustics to design and build a complete TPCD custom driver for them. I heard from one source that a particular TPCD woofer has a cone thickness of .2 mm, which I find mind-boggling.
john
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- OK, I looked up US-8320604-B1 Composite loudspeaker cone Vandersteen; Richard et al. 2012-11-27 - John Marks 01/1/2414:04:27 01/1/24 (6)
- RE: OK, I looked up US-8320604-B1 Composite loudspeaker cone Vandersteen; Richard et al. 2012-11-27 - tomservo 14:27:39 01/1/24 (5)
- YEAH, I GOT THAT!!! - John Marks 16:07:57 01/1/24 (3)
- RE: YEAH, I GOT THAT!!! - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 18:28:49 01/1/24 (2)
- That seems to be what Jeff Rowland thought - John Marks 05:45:45 01/2/24 (1)
- RE: That seems to be what Jeff Rowland thought - hahax@verizon.net 19:02:32 01/3/24 (0)
- Thank you both for your thoughts on this matter. - Craiger56 14:50:05 01/1/24 (0)