Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 20
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    15,286
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Mossberg Suing Makers of Drop in Triggers

    From the Firearms Blog: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...drop-triggers/


    In another instance of the firearms industry feeding on it’s own, it appears that Mossberg is exercising it’s control on the original Chip McCormick patent (US 7,293,385 B2), that it acquired a while ago, and bringing lawsuits against a number of manufacturers of drop in triggers.


    Mossberg currently licenses the design to the new CMC company, who has apparently decided to get Mossberg to go after their competition, i.e. anyone making drop in triggers.

    A list of some of the companies that are currently named in the lawsuit(s) are:

    Black Rain (whose excellent lightweight 3-Gun rifle I just reviewed)
    DOA Arms
    Tactical Fire Control
    Battle Tested Equipment
    Patriot Ordnance Factory
    RISE Armaments (whose triggers I swear by)
    T Vehr Manufacturing
    Elftmann Gun Products
    RA APT - trigger 1-500x500

    While I do understand the need for protecting intellectual property in some cases, I personally have a problem with companies that buy up (or otherwise acquire patents for) items they did not innovate. IF you are the original innovator, then, okay, you should be able to reap some advantages for a period of time to capitalize on your product. However if you are using patents as an investment and/or speculative arrangement (or to otherwise stifle innovation), I strongly disagree (though the law clearly doesn’t support my opinion).

    One may also question the timing of the lawsuits just as the NRA show begins.

    I currently only own one Mossberg product (my 930 JM Pro I use for 3-Gun). I am not aware of having used any of CMC’s products.

    Trigger-Drop-in-01

    As this is a new (and breaking) story, when we get more details/clarifications/corrections we will update here. In general I think this is a bad thing for the industry. So, readers, let’s get a discussion going. Do you agree with the intent of the suit? Disagree? Could care less?

    Phil Note: From our sources it seems all companies making drop in triggers will be targeted with the companies listed being the first. Should Mossberg win this will kill some companies who only make drop in triggers. Considering the cost of a court defense that could also cause some to close their doors.TFB has verified the filing of these suits and have court documents in hand

    Update: A total of 12 companies have been sued since 5/18/2016. Link to original McCormick patent https://www.google.com/patents/US7293385

    Follow this story

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,825
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    ...no Geissele?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    160
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Geissele are not 'drop in'.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,825
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Aberration79 View Post
    Geissele are not 'drop in'.
    Guess that depends on your definition.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    15,286
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by voodoo_man View Post
    Guess that depends on your definition.
    Think CMC, trigger and hammer are all in a one piece housing.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The Unfree State (MD)
    Posts
    2,731
    Downloads
    3
    Uploads
    0
    How is Timney not mentioned? I honestly would have expected them to hold the patents on drop in's.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    DFW, Texas
    Posts
    461
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SINNER View Post
    How is Timney not mentioned? I honestly would have expected them to hold the patents on drop in's.

    I thought the same thing. I guess no one wants to go after the gold standard product.
    "I have never heard anyone say after a firefight that I wish that I had not taken so much ammo.", ME

    "Texas can make it without the United States, but the United States can't make it without Texas !", General Sam Houston

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The Unfree State (MD)
    Posts
    2,731
    Downloads
    3
    Uploads
    0
    Timney has some deep pockets. You know they would fight that suit. And I agree, they are a fantastic trigger.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    15,286
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I believe Timney and CMC pay royalties for their drop ins.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,825
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by UWone77 View Post
    Think CMC, trigger and hammer are all in a one piece housing.
    We both know its because they aren't targeting companies that can actually give them a fight.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    15,286
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by voodoo_man View Post
    We both know its because they aren't targeting companies that can actually give them a fight.
    I don't know personally, who has deep pockets, but there's a little more to this story.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    57
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    This has happened in the past and Timney has been sued in 2014. Looks to be Chip McCormick patented an idea that was already public domain.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    15,286
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    My understanding is Chip McCormick patented the drop in

    https://www.google.com/patents/US7293385

    According to this link, sometime in 2007. It was then sold to Mossberg, and CMC subsequently acquired a license.

    I see CMC's position. They are paying a licensing fee per trigger. Others are not. That would irritate me as well.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The Unfree State (MD)
    Posts
    2,731
    Downloads
    3
    Uploads
    0
    I think the date is back dated to the priority date of 2002. Timney was 2004-2005 when they started the drop in AR triggers according to their site.

    And damn right it would irritate me. No different than stealing a photo or computer code. Property is property.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    805
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SINNER View Post
    I think the date is back dated to the priority date of 2002. Timney was 2004-2005 when they started the drop in AR triggers according to their site.

    And damn right it would irritate me. No different than stealing a photo or computer code. Property is property.
    I don't know the deal with Timney, but they may have already settled or agreed upon licensing prior to this, which would more likely explain the absence in the suit. Timney does not have deeper pockets than Mossberg though. I agree with Sinner 100% in regards to stealing.

    I'm tired of people making excuses for others committing patent/trademark infringements, and wanting to use the excuse that it stifles innovation, or the whole Goliath mentality. Maybe people need to look up the word "innovation" because the last time I checked, producing the same thing as someone else but with an improvement, is not an innovation, it's an improvement. Innovation is creating something NEW. And I highly doubt if you worked hard to create something, paid an epic shit ton of money to patent it, then became successful, that you would look at it as picking on the little people. No, you'd look at it as people stealing from your company, your employees, and the work you put into making it, all so they could make an easy dollar. Companies have the legal right to protect their rights, whether they're big or small. Maybe people wouldn't have to face the so called Goliath if they weren't trying to take some of the bread off of anothers plate. The very idea is no different than any other entitlement complex. You want it, then fucking earn your own.

    Add: Please excuse the rant, but I reached a boiling point with some of the retarded comments I'm seeing habitually posted elsewhere whenever a company brings a patent suit. Not to mention all the people that continue to support knock-offs simply because it's cheaper, then they want to bitch about foreign outsourcing and the economic woes. The above is not directed at any singular individual here.
    Last edited by Ordnance; 21 May 2016 at 14:43. Reason: Add:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •