Cedar fair, Disney, Universal face patent lawsuit.

So, we got one company sueing an ENTIRE industry! This could get interesting. Does the lawsuit extend to all parks in the world or just the USA?

I dont think it should be the park that gets the blame. The company that makes them should get full blame.

^ Another coaster kid?

The question still remains though, is there really any "full blame" at this point anyway?

The two patents in question:

http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT5277125&id=QMUfAAAAEBAJ&dq=5277125
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT6659237&id=jtwMAAAAEBAJ&dq=6659237

Interestingly, it seems that Cedar Fair and Universal are the only ones in violation of the second patent. While all are named for the first.

Also, after reading the lawsuit there is NO request for the parks to stop operation of the rides while the suit is ongoing.

---

viper432@aol.com said:
The two patents in question:

http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT5277125&id=QMUfAAAAEBAJ&dq=5277125
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT6659237&id=jtwMAAAAEBAJ&dq=6659237

---

The first patent specifically states that it is for a material handling system, not an amusement ride, so there should be a strong case for having that claim thrown out.

The second patent, hmmmm... I'm NOT going to look up all the prior patents that it cites, but come on guys, how many unique ways can there possibly be to build an eddy-current brake? To me this looks like an example of the well-known phenomenon of modern U.S. patent examiners not being as critical as they used to be -- in fact, not as critical as they're SUPPOSED to be. A patent either utilizing widely-recognized physical phenomena or incorporating a previous patent is supposed to be granted only for NOVEL applications.

Dont the parks pay the design companies big bucks to make sure nothing like this happens.

Who patents rollercoaster brakes anyway.

Vapor Trail at Sesame Place has these brakes? I read in the article that Sesame was one of the parks mentioned...really? I didn't realize that...

(Ignore the idiot. Do not feed the troll...)(EDIT: Not you Big Jim)

This is interesting. Would I be able to be sued for riding the coasters that are in parks who have hired coaster designing companies who infringed on the patent?

What about my Mother for giving birth to a person who has rode the coasters that are in parks who have hired coaster designing companies who infringed on the patent?

What about the Kindergarten Teacher of my Mom who gave birth.....

It goes all the way to the President of the United States Of America. *** Edited 3/8/2007 4:58:43 AM UTC by dexter***

the whole patent issue in general is really interesting.
in some ways, everyone would like to protect their own 'intellectual property' so they can make money off of it, but on the other hand, should people die because a coaster couldn't use the best breaking system available to them or the rights to the medicine they would need to survive is unavailable because the idea is owned by someone?
there is the argument that patents protect little companies from big corporations, and then again, who but big corporations have the funds to file lots of patents at all?
(sorry, might be unrelated, but i'm thinking a lot about this - in most cases, i think patents are evil.)

---

BigJim4Life said:Vapor Trail at Sesame Place has these brakes? I read in the article that Sesame was one of the parks mentioned...really? I didn't realize that...

---

Haven't ridden VT, but I guess it wouldn't be too surprising. Busch seems to like mag brakes on the kiddie coasters...at least Shamu East has them. Kinda silly on one-train coasters, IMO.

A defense of patents:

Company A spends $$$ in research and development of a new technology. When company A sells components, they need to add $ to the price to recover the R&D investment. Without a patent, company B would be able to copy the component and sell it for less because they don't have to recover R&D costs. Patents provide incentive for innovation.

I don't think anybody is saying there should be no patents or royalties, just who is responsible in case there is a violation-- the manufacturer or purchaser of the product.

Or those who use the product?

Then again, I think the users (the riders), most of them are not aware of the techknowolgy in the part. They just know the ride worked and nobody (hopefully) was hurt.

The manufacturer is the only one with a "reason to know" that they're using technological innovations that are patented by another company. How could the BUYER be held accountable for the manufacturer's use, authorized or otherwise?

The ONLY ones that would seem to have *exposure* (at least in MY courtroom, LOL) are those that USED the patented technology without authorization in THEIR product line....to wit, the manufacturer(s). Any subsequent buyers of the product SHOULD be shielded from liability. Or at least that's my take on things...as if you cared. ;)

Actually Gator, you make a very valid point. Then again, should the buyers know what's going into their purchase, especally something as big as a coaster?

If one company does have the patent on magnetic brakes, I find it hard to believe the parks did not know about it. My guess would be that there were small changes made and the lawyers disagree on if there is a violation or not.

They should both be partially responsable for the mess up. The company that copied the design, and the company that bought the design. The company that made the product should know all patents before designing, and their for hold more responsablity then the consumer.

Okay, so let's say that the park (or group of parks) or company the bought the coaster is off the hook. So i guess until the coasters can continue operating without interuptions (exept of maybe the SF parks,but that's another thread :p)

---

Hopman said:
Okay, so let's say that the park (or group of parks) or company the bought the coaster is off the hook. So i guess until the coasters can continue operating without interuptions (exept of maybe the SF parks,but that's another thread :p)

---

Does anyone understand what this person is trying to communicate?