PFO Done ? And All LED Aquarium Co.
- Thread starter Boomer
- Start date
For those of you that would like some additional background information on copyrights, patents, and trade secrets I highly recommend the following web sites...
Chilling Effects Clearinghouse
Electronic Frontier Foundation | Defending Freedom in the Digital World
Much of the information is related to the net, but is also applicable to products.
Happy reading.
Chilling Effects Clearinghouse
Electronic Frontier Foundation | Defending Freedom in the Digital World
Much of the information is related to the net, but is also applicable to products.
Happy reading.
BentMyWookie
Member
I found the actual patent
United States Patent: 7473008
I would have to say things dont look so good for PFO, I know that patent lawsuits can easily cost millions of dollars to fight and can take several years.
The last company I worked for was sued for patent infringement over one of their products, they were able to win the case but spent $90 million
in lawyer fees... then other company's would blatantly rip my old employers patents because they knew they no longer had the money to defend them.
United States Patent: 7473008
I would have to say things dont look so good for PFO, I know that patent lawsuits can easily cost millions of dollars to fight and can take several years.
The last company I worked for was sued for patent infringement over one of their products, they were able to win the case but spent $90 million
in lawyer fees... then other company's would blatantly rip my old employers patents because they knew they no longer had the money to defend them.
Boomer
Reef Sanctuary's Mr. Wizard
I have not talked to Pat for two months, as I have been visiting in Texas. This lawsuit has him all bent out of shape and seems to driving him and PFO broke. From one lawyer on another forum looking at things as he reads them.
PFO has two strong defenses. 1) that they created the product long before the patent was ever granted and those product lines are therefore exempt. 2) that you cannot patent to basic product formulation i.e. I cannot patent bike and all two wheeled non-motorized vehicles. And now that I look at it 3, they have decent argument that OTC stole the idea from PFO and then tried to patent it.
I for one am very upset about this issue I dont care if they are being sued or not they should provide the support for ther product no matrter what.
Well then Jak we will all have a good laugh if this happens to you then and your company is failing and you have no support. What Jak, you think Pat wants this to happen an does not care. You have no clue how they may be tied up lawyer wise and what they can and can not do.
PFO has two strong defenses. 1) that they created the product long before the patent was ever granted and those product lines are therefore exempt. 2) that you cannot patent to basic product formulation i.e. I cannot patent bike and all two wheeled non-motorized vehicles. And now that I look at it 3, they have decent argument that OTC stole the idea from PFO and then tried to patent it.
I for one am very upset about this issue I dont care if they are being sued or not they should provide the support for ther product no matrter what.
Well then Jak we will all have a good laugh if this happens to you then and your company is failing and you have no support. What Jak, you think Pat wants this to happen an does not care. You have no clue how they may be tied up lawyer wise and what they can and can not do.
Last edited:
That was my thinking also. I doubt they are avoiding customers willingly. It is most likly the lawyers that are making them pull the plugs for the time being. What would be good is if PFO could get their lawyers to write up something explaining something for their customers to read and feel less abandoned. Even a, "We cannot comment at this time but are trying to resolve the matter at hand" would be something.
reefdaddy1
New Member
Could not agree more boomer. The crappy attitude of some people tend to forget that PFO was a major contributor to this industry, Now in a time they need help we say well they should support thier product? Shoot they may not be with us anymore. Tell Pat for me, I emailed Orbit tech and gave them a good lashing for doing this, Also I am making it my mission to let everyone know that Sunbow or planet llc products should not be bought. Period. Iam all for PFO to win this. They need help not ridicule. And Iam a solaris owner.
reefdaddy1
New Member
Clank, Clank, Clank, Clank :whstlr:
:laughroll
I like hearing that they have a good defense, as long as they don't go broke in the process of defending themselves!
lcstorc
Well-Known Member
FWIW I sent an email to Orbitec.
Suprisingly I did get a response and it seemed to be written to specifically respond to my email not a form letter.
Thank you very much for your email. We unfortunately can't discuss the ongoing litigation, PFO’s quality issues or financial status, but understand that we took this course of action as a last resort, and information found online is not always accurate.
I encourage you to read the patent (US 7,220,018) and see that by no means have we cornered the market on LED lighting for marine applications. You will also find numerous other patents for LED moonlight products and other aspects of aquarium technologies. We have a particular system design patent that includes many, many features, and only in that combination are products infringing. We ourselves are a small business locally owned and operating in Wisconsin, and because of our limited resources we need to take our intellectual property seriously.
Our product line will be released later this year under a partnership with another aquarium lighting company, and they will be handling all of the marketing efforts for their product releases. I will save your email address and send you information on their products as they are released. Please let me know if you have any additional questions.
Suprisingly I did get a response and it seemed to be written to specifically respond to my email not a form letter.
Thank you very much for your email. We unfortunately can't discuss the ongoing litigation, PFO’s quality issues or financial status, but understand that we took this course of action as a last resort, and information found online is not always accurate.
I encourage you to read the patent (US 7,220,018) and see that by no means have we cornered the market on LED lighting for marine applications. You will also find numerous other patents for LED moonlight products and other aspects of aquarium technologies. We have a particular system design patent that includes many, many features, and only in that combination are products infringing. We ourselves are a small business locally owned and operating in Wisconsin, and because of our limited resources we need to take our intellectual property seriously.
Our product line will be released later this year under a partnership with another aquarium lighting company, and they will be handling all of the marketing efforts for their product releases. I will save your email address and send you information on their products as they are released. Please let me know if you have any additional questions.
rmlevasseur
Active Member
Law suit or no law suit, my beef is with the quality of the Solaris as it was released. It is absolutely inconceivable to me that so many of these were sold under such poor quality control. This is why I won't buy again. I didn't mind being the guinea pig for whether LED worked for corals or not, in fact I wanted to be. What I have a problem with is spending so much money for a product that arrived broken, and repeatedly kept breaking. I have never had a 100% working Solaris. It is true that Tom tried to fix my problems, but they just never could. This product was already unfit under the UCC. The fact that they might be going under for patent infringement is just icing on the cake.
Please, don't tell me my complaints or any other solaris-owners' complaints are not justified.
Please, don't tell me my complaints or any other solaris-owners' complaints are not justified.
Boomer
Reef Sanctuary's Mr. Wizard
Robert I understand your complaints which do have merit and are justified. One of the reason that Pat went with in-house making of the LED units was do to the complaints with the China versions, which where just killing him. He decided to bite the bullet and have them USA made and pay the extra. He know sooner started this and Wham-O the lawsuit. This lawsuit did not just start last week or or so, it stared back in July or August and may have been before that. Back in August or so I started doing searches on the use of LED's in this hobby and when they were first introduced. And it was back in the 90's and Orbitec had nothing do do with them back then. The PFO patent has been " Patent Pending", IIRC and some how Orbitec got a full patent, maybe do to their government contacts and then went after PFO.
lcstorc
Well-Known Member
I too have heard many complaints and other who have wonderful units. I have one of the first US produced units and so far it is wonderful. I do have to say that one of the reasons I was willing to spend so much was the PFO reputation for support this lawsuit does concern me from a long term support standpoint.
Boomer
Reef Sanctuary's Mr. Wizard
You will also find numerous other patents for LED moonlight products and other aspects of aquarium technologies.
Yah, we all know that but that is not how they started their lawsuit. The found that out after they were informed that others had them out
We have a particular system design patent that includes many, many features, and only in that combination are products infringing.
Yah, sure, after PFO came out with theirs. How convenient that was
We ourselves are a small business locally owned and operating in Wisconsin
Yah, sure, just look at the big government contracts they get.
Yah, we all know that but that is not how they started their lawsuit. The found that out after they were informed that others had them out
We have a particular system design patent that includes many, many features, and only in that combination are products infringing.
Yah, sure, after PFO came out with theirs. How convenient that was
We ourselves are a small business locally owned and operating in Wisconsin
Yah, sure, just look at the big government contracts they get.
guys patent law is complex and simple at the same time. Patents need to be novel and unobvious to someone skilled in the art. The use of an LED to light an aquarium maybe novel but it is also obvious so it probably isn't patentable by itself. The patent comes in the housing, arrangement control systems etc. And first to market has nothing to do with patent rights, In the US it is who can prove they they were the first to concieve the idea and I believe describe it .
A common preemptive move many companies use is to write about an idea in some public forum that makes it public domain and now no one can patent it.
This will take many lawyers many billable hours to figure out
A common preemptive move many companies use is to write about an idea in some public forum that makes it public domain and now no one can patent it.
This will take many lawyers many billable hours to figure out
rmlevasseur
Active Member
Correct. You can obtain a patent and still have a significant period of time to develop the prototype. A patent gives you an opportunity to develop a product correctly w/o getting "beat to the punch". Unfortunately it can also be used to keep needed products from coming to the market in a timely fashion.
reefdaddy1
New Member
Here is the one I got
Dear Bob,
Thank you very much for your email. We unfortunately can't discuss the ongoing litigation, but understand that you are seeing just a single very inaccurate opinion, and know that we took this course of action as a last resort after months of attempted discussions for partnership.
I encourage you to read the patent (US 7,220,018) and see that by no means have we cornered the market on LED lighting for marine applications. We have a particular system design patent that includes many, many features, and only in that combination are products infringing. There are many other LED Aquarium lighting patents pending and issued as well, so we do not see ourselves as stifling competition, rather we are a small U.S. company trying to compete and protecting our intellectual property.
Our product line will be released later this year under a partnership with another aquarium lighting company, and we look forward to continuing to integrate and work together in the industry. Please let me know if you have any other questions, and I will do my best to answer them.
Marty
Marty Anne Gustafson
Manager, Commercial Products
PLANET LLC / ORBITEC
1212 Fourier Drive
Madison, WI 53717