While I feel for the guy going up again against something the size of Trek, part of me thinks this will just be a revolving door of bull crap.
Dave also appears to be a pretty smart dude, but this baffles me.... "Weagle visited Trek and shared photos of his then-patent-pending design."
Why the heck would he do that? Trying to sell it to Trek? If I had this awesome new design that was my own idea and it was not quite protected yet, theres no way I'd be showing it around.
It says right in the article that the "Split Pivot" or concentric pivot and axle can't be patented as the idea is quite old and the difference between the patents relates to how the shock is attached to the frame. If I'm correct, Weagles design has the lower shock mount attached to the main frame very near or perhaps concentric to the chainstay pivot. Whereas the Trek patent has it connected to an extension of the chainstay itself. While it sucks that Trek would riff off of the drawing that Weagle showed them, the patents are different and I don't see him winning.
While I feel for the guy going up again against something the size of Trek, part of me thinks this will just be a revolving door of bull crap.
Dave also appears to be a pretty smart dude, but this baffles me.... "Weagle visited Trek and shared photos of his then-patent-pending design."
Why the heck would he do that? Trying to sell it to Trek? If I had this awesome new design that was my own idea and it was not quite protected yet, theres no way I'd be showing it around.
Post a reply to: Weagle suing Trek over ABP/Split Pivot