SawStop Sawsuit

[TGW]

All my table saws (I own 3) have solid overarm guards and low riving knives that don't need to be removed for trenching cuts. All my table saws have short fences.
In my oppinion those safety features are a lot more important that flesh sencing technology.

I think that saw stop technology has a place on the market but mr Gass attempt to enforce a total market takeover through taylor made legislation is outright ridiculous.

Both USA and Europe are rapidly heading down the slope of strict legislation to protect the business interrests of the rich against all forms of competition from home grown enterprises and initiatives. To protect them from demands for reasonable wages and demands for actual safety. To enforce their sales. All while the legislation that once protected ordinary people from being bullied by the rich and their lawyers is removed. The modern way of selling is to have your product made mandatory by law. The modern sort of safety is all about useless paperwork not about prewenting accidents from happening and helping those who are struck to recover. Pretty much like things were the Soviet Union.
We all need to change course!

[Tapper]

Richard D. said:

---

Have you traveled much outside of the U.S.? Ever been to Europe? I used to think similarly to you until I traveled abroad. We have a very short history of inventing stuff and very short memories.

---

I have indeed, traveled outside the U.S., primarily to Great Britain and the European continent. I'm sure not as extensively as some others here (Carolyn comes to mind), but enough to clearly see that this country easily was/is still my choice as a place to live.

When you factor in our form of government, as it was conceived and founded, the picture became even clearer - YMMV.

Doug

[EricU]

I think schools and other organizations where draconian safety enforcement and unskilled users are combined have strongly adopted sawstop. Either that or they don't have tablesaws. We finally got a contractor saw for our student shop. I was lobbying for it for a long time, but nobody listens to me. The economics for us requires zero thought. I imagine the lawsuit after an injury would take about an hour. Just skip to to part where they try to figure how much money to give to the injured student

My office is just a wall away from the shop, I dreaded the end of the semester because that stupid Hitachi was running all day and I figured someone would eventually cut off something important. I was always a little surprised that the university safety geeks let us have it.

I just used the sawstop for the first time. The dust collection leaves a bit to be desired, but it's a solid saw. I have a PM 66, which is nicer, but I could certainly live with the sawstop.

[JGrout]

ruffcutt said:

---

http://www.woodworkingnetwork.com/news/w...titrust-lawsuit

---

Gass still has to prove the cartridge is a knock off of his.

IMO watching it function it is not

then again the technology has been sitting on a shelf for some time

[Admiral]

JGrout said:

---

[blockquote]ruffcutt said:

---

http://www.woodworkingnetwork.com/news/w...titrust-lawsuit

---

Gass still has to prove the cartridge is a knock off of his.

IMO watching it function it is not

then again the technology has been sitting on a shelf for some time

---

[/blockquote]

Knockoff is not the standard, it's the patented processes, multiple patents, in fact. All you need is one. Not a trade dress case.

[JGrout]

how certain are you that Bosch does not already have a viable older patent?

speculation abounds which is why these threads are useless

[Admiral]

I'm not a patent lawyer, but I deal with infringement lawsuits on a weekly basis. You don't "trump" an infringement claim with your patent, either your device infringes or it doesn't. On the other hand, if Bosch has a patent that SS infringes, you crossclaim infringement. Bosch's defense remains twofold, either their device does not infringe, or they prove that SS's patent is invalid. That's it.

It is interesting that SS is not making claims for royalties based on the infringement, but rather, for an injunction to prevent the importation and US sale of the infringing product. Once they have established Bosch's infringement, which is not at all easy, then SS could use that determination in a subsequent lawsuit (presumably based on its foreign patents) to seek royalties on Bosch's sales outside the US, but even that offers a diminishing return, as the life of the SS patents is slowly expiring; I don't know but in one of the other threads someone looked up the patents and said that maybe they have another 4 years or so left.

What happened here is that the power tool industry made a collective decision to wait this out until patents expired, then develop their own versions of the SS technology. Surely part of their calculus was that defense costs and judgments against them in products liability lawsuits for not adopting the technology was cheaper than paying SS royalties on the technology. Sort of like the Pinto gas tank calculus used by Ford. Whether that is good or bad, not for me to say, but it is clearly what happened here.

Bottom line, is SS innovative? Yes. Does it prevent injury to untrained and sometimes stupid operators? Yes. Can it prevent injury to otherwise trained and smart fudge who slip up and put their fingers into harms way? Yes. Would I buy one? No. Everybody makes their choice, and each choice is equally valid.

Everything else involved in this endless debate is just a lot of self righteous reactionary noise about "nanny" this, perceived government over-regulation (query, has any government agency mandated this technology - oh, I didn't think so, quite to the contrary) and "unfair tactics" that. And for those folks, I just say get over it.

[®smpr_fi_mac®]

Admiral said:

---

I'm not a patent lawyer, but I deal with infringement lawsuits on a weekly basis. You don't "trump" an infringement claim with your patent, either your device infringes or it doesn't. On the other hand, if Bosch has a patent that SS infringes, you crossclaim infringement. Bosch's defense remains twofold, either their device does not infringe, or they prove that SS's patent is invalid. That's it.

It is interesting that SS is not making claims for royalties based on the infringement, but rather, for an injunction to prevent the importation and US sale of the infringing product. Once they have established Bosch's infringement, which is not at all easy, then SS could use that determination in a subsequent lawsuit (presumably based on its foreign patents) to seek royalties on Bosch's sales outside the US, but even that offers a diminishing return, as the life of the SS patents is slowly expiring; I don't know but in one of the other threads someone looked up the patents and said that maybe they have another 4 years or so left.

What happened here is that the power tool industry made a collective decision to wait this out until patents expired, then develop their own versions of the SS technology. Surely part of their calculus was that defense costs and judgments against them in products liability lawsuits for not adopting the technology was cheaper than paying SS royalties on the technology. Sort of like the Pinto gas tank calculus used by Ford. Whether that is good or bad, not for me to say, but it is clearly what happened here.

Bottom line, is SS innovative? Yes. Does it prevent injury to untrained and sometimes stupid operators? Yes. Can it prevent injury to otherwise trained and smart fudge who slip up and put their fingers into harms way? Yes. Would I buy one? No. Everybody makes their choice, and each choice is equally valid.

Everything else involved in this endless debate is just a lot of self righteous reactionary noise about "nanny" this, perceived government over-regulation (query, has any government agency mandated this technology - oh, I didn't think so, quite to the contrary) and "unfair tactics" that. And for those folks, I just say get over it.

---

[Bill Lyman]

Admiral: well said.

[Tapper]

Interesting analysis - well done. Just curious, are you saying that were you in the market for a new cabinet saw you would not consider a Sawstop? If not, why not?

Doug