Princeton wheels is being sued by SRAM (Zipp)
Moderator: robbosmans
But why after a few years, and imo Sram doesn't really seems to market this much anymore too...
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
-
- Posts: 1162
- Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 6:50 pm
- Location: Wilmington, DE
- Contact:
If Princeton was unsuccessful and pulled out of the market early on it wouldn’t be worth getting lawyers involved. They may have been watching all along and just finally decided they had lost enough money to make suing worthwhile. They are also obligated to defend their patent or otherwise risk losing it if they choose not to defend it.
Did Princeton get their wheels on some pro tour bikes recently? ...Googled and yes they did.
Did Princeton get their wheels on some pro tour bikes recently? ...Googled and yes they did.
The defending or you will loose it applies to trademarks not patents. You do not risk "loosing" patents if you don't defend them, in fact many do not "defend" patents through litigation but licence them, in quite a few field it's even that using them is specifically allowed (e.g. if the patent is part of a standard that requires this).joejack951 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 20, 2021 7:51 pmIf Princeton was unsuccessful and pulled out of the market early on it wouldn’t be worth getting lawyers involved. They may have been watching all along and just finally decided they had lost enough money to make suing worthwhile. They are also obligated to defend their patent or otherwise risk losing it if they choose not to defend it.
Did Princeton get their wheels on some pro tour bikes recently? ...Googled and yes they did.
-
- Posts: 1162
- Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 6:50 pm
- Location: Wilmington, DE
- Contact:
Perhaps ‘losing’ wasn’t the best word choice but not defending a patent for a number of years, and then trying to defend it later, can result in what I would consider ‘losing’ the rights to that patent (if you can’t sue someone for infringing, what’s the point of the patent?).Cycomanic wrote: ↑Sat Mar 20, 2021 8:14 pmThe defending or you will loose it applies to trademarks not patents. You do not risk "loosing" patents if you don't defend them, in fact many do not "defend" patents through litigation but licence them, in quite a few field it's even that using them is specifically allowed (e.g. if the patent is part of a standard that requires this).
https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2010/05/27/t ... /id=10777/
Licensing a patent is very different. It must be an agreement between both sides. Not all patents are open to licensing. SRAM can choose to not offer Princeton a license and continue to sue for damages. Had Princeton gone to SRAM from the beginning and asked to license their patent all of this could have been avoided (of course, SRAM could have said no and maybe even did).
Licencing patents doesn't mean you're not defending them. Hell, if you weren't defending your patents you wouldn't be able to licence them - because who would pay to use something they could just take for free?Cycomanic wrote: ↑Sat Mar 20, 2021 8:14 pmThe defending or you will loose it applies to trademarks not patents. You do not risk "loosing" patents if you don't defend them, in fact many do not "defend" patents through litigation but licence them, in quite a few field it's even that using them is specifically allowed (e.g. if the patent is part of a standard that requires this).joejack951 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 20, 2021 7:51 pmIf Princeton was unsuccessful and pulled out of the market early on it wouldn’t be worth getting lawyers involved. They may have been watching all along and just finally decided they had lost enough money to make suing worthwhile. They are also obligated to defend their patent or otherwise risk losing it if they choose not to defend it.
Did Princeton get their wheels on some pro tour bikes recently? ...Googled and yes they did.
I remember a velonews tech podcast episode where they interviewed Princeton founders and they said that they had the wheels in the work before Zipp brought NSW to the market but failed to launch before Zipp.
Basically they are saying they didn’t copy Zipp and that their wheels work very very differently than Zipp’s concept despite similarity. But now that the world’s most successful grand Tour and marginal gain-ish team is on Princeton, at least for the TT sram probably has to do something.
Basically they are saying they didn’t copy Zipp and that their wheels work very very differently than Zipp’s concept despite similarity. But now that the world’s most successful grand Tour and marginal gain-ish team is on Princeton, at least for the TT sram probably has to do something.
Zipp bought the Katsanis wavy wheel patent that was initialy applied for in 2011 - way before the launch of the 454.
-
- Posts: 540
- Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 4:39 pm
i thought this isnt the first time zipp/sram suing them but i couldnt find traces of the last law sue. i rememer it was about 6 months after princeton launch their first gen 6560. the winning argument at the time was that the shape unload the side wind quite differently to zipp 454.
Some say pour 10ml water out of your bottle to save that last bit of the weight. Sorry, i go one step further, i tend to the rider off my bikes.
n+1...14 last time i checked, but i lost count
n+1...14 last time i checked, but i lost count
Don't know about you, but I wouldn't be happy if someone faked products on my patents. If it was the other way around; Zipp building the wheel following Princeton wheels' design, the world would be furious.
Anyway, I don't know the details so can't argue here. They look very similar to me, but same can be said for nearly all 50mm carbon wheels .
Who cares if both design have zero aerodnyamic benefit?
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com