Minelab Files Suit Against XP Metal Detectors

[Ridge Runner]

I've always told my kids you can ask for something and the most I can say is NO.

I think most know that if you have been in the Military and can prove it Minelab would give a 15% discount on their detectors. Well I got a email on the new SDC 2300 and I like the looks of it. I email Minelab back and ask if they would give me 20 % discount I'd buy it.. In a weeks time a dealer we all know email me and said Minelab would do it.

Minelab didn't have to do that but at that time the powers that be their heart was in the right place. For this I thank Minelab and the next time I need a nugget detector I'll pay the price less my 15 %.

Chuck 

[Geotech]

The patent in question is US7310586, which covers wired and wireless data transfer (no, I'm not speculating, yes, I have the docket). It's the same patent they sued White's over when I was working there. I found prior art that would invalidate the patent but White's decided to settle instead.

 

[jasong]

Geez, that patent looks mostly like an attempt to restrict competition from companies without dedicated legal teams to me. Most modern devices stores and transmit data, how is that even patentable?

I guess they need to make sure they can keep releasing new $2k detectors for $11k when a sign of life emerges somewhere other than Australia in the industry. 

[Ridge Runner]

So if I'm not making a profit I just go around and sue every company that makes metal detectors.

Minelab I say the only one your're hurting in the long run is Minelab.

Who knows Garrett be the next in line.

Oh will I'll keep on buying from White's and when the new coils for the XP comes out I'll buy one them too.

Chuck. .

[SeabeeRon]

On 11/2/2016 at 6:42 PM, Geotech said:

The patent in question is US7310586, which covers wired and wireless data transfer (no, I'm not speculating, yes, I have the docket). It's the same patent they sued White's over when I was working there. I found prior art that would invalidate the patent but White's decided to settle instead.

 

Thanks!!

[Steve Herschbach]

On 11/2/2016 at 7:42 PM, Ridge Runner said:

Who knows Garrett be the next in line.

Well, I do recall that when the White's Vision Spectra came out, Garrett notified White's there was a trademark conflict regarding the name as regarded some old obscure Garrett feature. The Vision became the Spectra V3 and then later V3i.

Minelab may or may not play the game more than most but they are not the only ones playing the game.

[SeabeeRon]

Is it just me or are we hearing more of these detector company cross suits going on recently?

[jasong]

There is a difference between patent trolling and squabbling over a name though. Filing overreaching patents on extremely general or common ideas isn't just a problem with the detector industry but with patents in general and the companies/people which seek to take advantage of it. Kinda like paper stakers in the mining world. ML, please don 't turn yourself into a "Dept of Land Transfer" or "Gold Rush Expeditions", it just sullies your reputation. 

It's one of the major factors that kills innovation and makes it impossible for the "little guy" to make it to market with novel ideas, and it should be destroyed with fire IMO. I hate to see a company who's products I use do this. If I had the money to buy a Deus right now I'd do it just to show support. Until of course XP decides to do the same thing to some other little company and this discussion all repeats again 2 years later. 

[fredmason]

In the business world bullying and bluffing other companies is considered doing the right thing...all for profits nothing for principles...if Minelab can get them to fold then they win...

my disclaimer;

I do not endorse this behavior at any time or place

fred