Anchor DIY

[boatman61]

Anchors are like delivery skippers.. Great till they Fail.
Kudo's to Boneparte.. He's having a go..

[chemist]

Originally Posted by Iaangus

Wouldn’t the onus be on the patent holder to determine if there is a violation of the patent and then take legal action to recover financial damages?

Yes and No. No, because ultimately it is a judge that takes that decision. Yes, because a patent holder must look after his own interests, and take action if he considers that his rights are being violated. But, it is common practice in industry that before you disclose your invention, and to prevent costly litigation actions from taking place, to look at what patents there are available that may prevent you from freely operating/disclosing. Anyway the discussion on IP-rights started because somebody considered that he could not steel design features from other anchor developers. This is simply incorrect, because to determine the scope of protection sought by a patent one must take into account all features that are disclosed in the independent claims. Take for instance the Rex Francis patents. He discloses an anchor having holes and slots, but the main claim also states that the acnhor must be a convex/plow anchor.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Anchors are like delivery skippers.. Great till they Fail.
Kudo's to Boneparte.. He's having a go..

I've always wondered how well a delivery skipper would work as an anchor.

[transmitterdan]

Originally Posted by Iaangus

Wouldn’t the onus be on the patent holder to determine if there is a violation of the patent and then take legal action to recover financial damages?

Yes, this is correct. There is no automatic enforcement of patent rights because patent violations are a purely civil matter. The government will not go looking for violations of the law in such a case unless the government owns the patent.

[BigBeakie]

Originally Posted by chemist

Bonaparte, I have some time to spare so I thought I´d help you a little bit with a quick and dirty non-comprehensive freedom to operate search.


If you go to Espacenet "https://worldwide.espacenet.com/advancedSearch?locale=en_EP" and enter: in the field publication number= B or B1 or B2 or B3 or B9; in the field publication date=1997:2019; and in the field CPC= B63B21/32 and press search.
For a direct link to the search strategy: "https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODO C&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=B+or+B1+or+B2+or+B3+or+B9 &AP=&PR=&PD=1997%3A2019&PA=&IN=&CPC=b63b21%2F32&IC =&Submit=Search"


This search strategy will give you a list of 25 patents on rigid single fluke anchors (CPC=B63B21/32) that were granted (B-publications) between 1997 and 2019.
The results include some well known anchor designs such as: the bubble, the spade, the vulcan, the Bruce, the excel, the rocna with wing roll bar, etc. Of these 25 some are no longer valid (lapsed), some are only valid in the US or FR or NZ, some are only valid in GB. None appear to be valid in Slovenia.


Draw your own conclusions from this non-solicited help.

Hate to be pedantic, but Bonaparte would be better advised to search carefully under the PCT listing. There he will find WO 2008/116272 A1 which has Slovenia as a Designated State of coverage.

Bonaparte, have you consulted with a patent attorney on the implications of what you are doing? Are you intending to give these away for free, or what?
Because if you make any commercial gain from this little hodge podge Copycat design exercise you're going through, it may carry some risk.

Just sayin'.....

[transmitterdan]

Again someone misunderstands intellectual property law. Whether or not a patented design is sold for profit or given away free is unimportant. The acts of making, keeping or distributing a patented device without getting a license from the patent holder are alll prohibited. In fact, patent laws don't make much mention of financial gain by the infringer. The law is to protect the patent holder who can be damaged even by someone giving away patented goods.

I am not making any accusation that anchors shown in this thread violate any patents. Just trying to clear up some goofy misconceptions about intellectual property rights.

[Mr B]

I made my own Anchor, Cut the steel and Welded it up myself,
Why, Because I can,
Also because I am over dragging anchors, I wanted one that works,

My Danforth would not set on a changing tide, Got rocks caught in the clevis pin,
My Bruce, Hahahahaha, Some thing that slides along the bottom, Pure Lemon,

Had a couple of goes at it, Watched Panopes video's, Very informative,
He gave me the idea to cut the Hoop and widen it so it gave more weight onto the point,
Went and visited Rex at Rocna, He lives ten kays away from me,
Finally got the weight right for the tip, Its now over one third of the total weight, 75 LB,
Over kill, Who cares, It has to hold me in the roughest weather I will encounter,
It digs into compacted crushed rock being dragged behind my car, Stops the car,
Even my back hoe wont dig into that crap,

Will try it at the entrance to Western Port Bay over a few tide changes to prove it,
It resets every time, The chain cannot get tangled in it,
The slot on the top will pull it out backwards if it gets stuck in rocks,

Its made from Bissalloy, It wont bend either, It was a bit of steel I had left over from a Dozer Blade I welded in, The point is stainless steel, Hardened,
I had to make a new bow roller to take it, Thats all stainless steel,
150 feet of 5/16 th chain, I dont think this one will drag,

My welds hold the blocks that the cables sit in to hold up the Westgate Bridge, 1976, Its still there,

I like yours too Bonaparte, Well done,

[chemist]

Originally Posted by BigBeakie

Hate to be pedantic, but Bonaparte would be better advised to search carefully under the PCT listing. There he will find WO 2008/116272 A1 which has Slovenia as a Designated State of coverage.

Bigbeakie, Hate to be pedantic, but YOU would be better advised to search carefully for the fate of international PCT-application WO 2008/116272 A1, which indeed had Slovenia as a Designated State of coverage.
This PCT-application was converted into national applications in the US, AU, NZ and EP.
In the EP-phase this application was granted with a restricted scope in 2016 and published as EP 2129573 B1. This patent IS in the list of the 25 retrieved in post 100.
Of all the countries that were originally designated for the WO-application, the now patent holder decided to only validate the patent in: GB, IT and FR. The patent protection for SL and many other countries lapsed on the 07. Dec. 2016.
Sorry, couldn´t resist.
Let´s go back to anchors now.
I love the work of Mr. B and Bonaparte, and am looking forward to seeing some real live testing according to the methods of Panope.
All the best guys.

[BigBeakie]

Chemist,

I stand well corrected, thanks for that. 👍

I was beginning to follow the current status of it ,just out of curiosity, and then, well, the phone rang and I had to go out, and that was the end of that thought bubble.

I must say, as a PCT Patent holder myself having been through the rip off by a transgressor (knowingly and with commercial intentions), the cavalier disregard for IP rights is somewhat concerning. But hey, it's not unexpected. Who needs innovation anyway?


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[sanibel sailor]

What do I know, but...


Seems that a patent holder is quite unlikely to undertake legal action, maybe other than a nasty letter from the lawyer, unless the infringement is VERY clear cut and there is obvious threat to the viability of their business. Too much expense, too slow a process, too much uncertainty in outcome and little to be gained as few people will be building their own anchors and collecting on a significant judgment is unlikely, especially cross border.


From a practical standpoint, I would have to be convinced of the absolute superiority of this new design to go to the trouble of making one. This is great fun for those with fabrication shops readily at hand, but when I consider the expense and trouble of having an anchor made one off- getting the steel, having it cut, then bent, welded, then hauling it somewhere to get galvanized- at least here in USA where labor costs are high and I can easily order one and have it delivered in a few days, the cost savings quickly becomes insignificant.

[Bonaparte-eu]

I like your anchor mr.B.

[Bonaparte-eu]

One of my models was having the plate (where is cuted storm).
The size of the plate is very important. If is plate too big the anchor unset.

The plate was holding alll mud on the anchor that i decided to abandon the the model with the plate

[Bonaparte-eu]

[BigBeakie]

Originally Posted by Bonaparte-eu

I like your anchor mr.B.

You should like it, it's not a half bad knock off copy of a proven good anchor the SARCA from Anchor Right Pty Ltd. in Melbourne, Victoria.

Remarkably similar, don't you think? He even admits to going to the inventor to pick his brain for design details....my, my

[Uncle Bob]

Originally Posted by BigBeakie

You should like it, it's not a half bad knock off copy of a proven good anchor the SARCA from Anchor Right Pty Ltd. in Melbourne, Victoria.

Remarkably similar, don't you think? He even admits to going to the inventor to pick his brain for design details....my, my

Sarca Excell's!! (pun intended)