Results 1 to 15 of 56
-
26 February 2015, 10:09 #1
Magpul Obtains Judgment against Elite Tactical Systems in Patent Infringement Suit
Link
Magpul Obtains Judgment against Elite Tactical Systems in Patent Infringement Suit
February 25, 2015 — Magpul Industries Corp. announced today that it has concluded its patent infringement lawsuit against Elite Tactical Systems Group (E.T.S.), with the Court entering a judgment that E.T.S. infringed four Magpul patents—U.S. Patent Nos. 8,069,601, 8,635,796, 8,839,543, and 8,166,692. The Court ordered E.T.S. to immediately stop making, using, offering for sale, and selling its infringing magazines for AR-15/M16 rifles and carbines and its Rapid Recognition Follower. In addition, the Court ordered E.T.S. to destroy or permanently modify the molds used to manufacture the accused products. Lastly, the Court ordered E.T.S. to pay Magpul monetary damages.
This resolution of the E.T.S. suit was the lastest in a series of enforcement initiatives that Magpul started in 2013 against ProMag Industries, Cole Industries, Plinker Tactical, and Big Rock Sports (doing business as Swamp Fox) for offering for sale, selling, and distributing magazines for AR15/M16 compatible weapons that were alleged to be in violation of Magpul’s patents. ProMag, Cole Industries, and Big Rock Sports all settled their disputes with Magpul on confidential and mutually agreeable terms. The District Court entered a judgment against Plinker Tactical, finding that Plinker infringed Magpul’s patents and awarding damages.
Magpul notes that in every instance where it has taken legal action against another magazine manufacturer, the product in question is now either no longer in production or is no longer produced with the features that prompted Magpul’s lawsuit.
About Magpul
Founded in 1999, Magpul was launched with the intent of developing innovative devices to aid in the manipulation of rifle magazines while reloading under stress. The company’s name comes from this original product called the Magpul®. Over the last decade Magpul has continued to grow and develop using much the same mission and process with a focus on innovation, creativity, and efficiency.
www.magpul.com
Media Contact:
Duane Liptak, Jr.
Director of Product Management and Marketing
dliptak@magpul.com
303.828.3460 x170
-
26 February 2015, 10:13 #2
Well that's frustrating. I understand Magpul protecting their intellectual property, but now I wish I had purchased more ETS mags. They worked great and the material used appeared to be stronger than Magpul's.
-
26 February 2015, 10:21 #3
I was curious, so i wanted to look up the patents and see just how watertight this ducks ass is
http://www.patentbuddy.com/Patent/8069601
http://www.patentbuddy.com/Patent/86...t=true&sr=true
http://www.patentbuddy.com/Patent/88...t=true&sr=true
http://www.patentbuddy.com/Patent/81...t=true&sr=true
Sounds like polymer magazine manufacturers better be doing their research before going to market
-
26 February 2015, 10:36 #4
Ouch.....
-
26 February 2015, 10:55 #5
That sucks! Hopefully ETS comes out hard with their Glock mags.
NRA LIFE MEMBER
Veteran Combat Medic
Experience is what you get... When you don't get what you want.
-
26 February 2015, 11:32 #6
On arfcom, ETS stated they changed the design and settled with Magpul. They are continuing to make magazines. I'm wondering if Magpul is just doing this for PR to put the bug in the consumers ear.
-
26 February 2015, 11:42 #7
Yikes. I hope they do have their ducks in a row for the glock mags since both companies are now making them.
-
26 February 2015, 11:44 #8WEVO Spell Checker
- Join Date
- Sep 2014
- Location
- Florida
- Posts
- 3,198
- Downloads
- 1
- Uploads
- 0
best way to stay in the game is to
To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women.$300 and 10 Pastrami Sandwiches and a case of Diet Coke. ( UWone77)
-
26 February 2015, 11:54 #9
Where'd you copy and paste that from luis?
-
26 February 2015, 12:10 #10
-
26 February 2015, 12:11 #11
Money talks. Those patents are so loosely written anyone with enough money could tear them apart in court. But just like suing the Feds over taxes, you can not compete in court with entities that spend more on toner than your companies' entire net worth.
-
26 February 2015, 12:25 #12Contributing Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2012
- Location
- Front Range of CO
- Posts
- 343
- Downloads
- 1
- Uploads
- 0
Coming from a career in the pharmaceutical industry, I fully understand the motivation to apply for and protect patents. And I generally approve of the way Magpul handles itself as a company, especially with respect to the whole Colorado standard capacity magazine fiasco. Their tight-lipped approach to relocation timeframes was a bit of a PR mistake, but I'm sure they had their reasons.
All that said, I'm sad to see such a legal burden placed on a small company like ETS when they are producing a product with some really innovative features. Heck, I'm now even inclined to see just how good ETS' products are (oops, there's another Magpul PR backfire right there.....)
In the [otherforum] post that UW references, ETS said that simply removing the rear leg from the follower settles the suit without affecting follower stability. I hope their follower really is that rigid. But does that really address the full breadth of infringement across the 4 patents referenced in the suit? I'm rooting for ETS here (despite my appreciation of Magpul's products) - but I wonder if this is really the last we'll hear of this.
-
26 February 2015, 12:30 #13WEVO Spell Checker
- Join Date
- Sep 2014
- Location
- Florida
- Posts
- 3,198
- Downloads
- 1
- Uploads
- 0
-
26 February 2015, 14:12 #14
-
26 February 2015, 14:42 #15