Renze
Super Member
To me, a granted patent is only a deterrence for those who are scared of lawyers or their fees. Only in court you find out what a patent is worth...
When interested, read this textbook example of patent justice:
Tractor backhoe - homemade
- Thread starter BFreaky
- Start date
- Views: 1161779
When interested, read this textbook example of patent justice:
rScotty
Super Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2001
- Messages
- 9,707
- Location
- Rural mountains - Colorado
- Tractor
- Kubota M59, JD530, JD310SG. Restoring Yanmar YM165D
I worked as an science-orinted engineer doing R&D & technical consulting.
Innovations as well as improving manufacturing methods for existing products were equally important parts of that job. Along the way I generally did some of the technical writing, testing, and prototyping - and then worked with patent attorneys and also with patent artists when specialized drawings were required. It was a lot of fun and exciting for a young guy - although I don't miss now as much as I though I would.
Today, the philosophical and educational implications of the patent process interest me more than the work I used to do. Or maybe I'm just getting old....
I saw some patents that became international in scope while others were more targeted. I believe - but do not know for sure - that patent law can vary from one country to another.
Last I checked, the USA patent office offered a one year "provisional patent" with reduced requrements and expenses. I've never filed one of those, but have been tempted. As I understand it, the goal of a provisional patent is intended to offer a year of protection without the formality and expense of a full patent. Sounds rather too good to be true.....but we can dream. You might want to check and see if something like that is also available in Europe.
Lucj
rScotty
Last edited:
Renze
Super Member
Yes, but i am wondering what the requirements are for those specialised drawings. Line weight, perhaps ? Patent drawings are always in bold, much bolder than production drawings.
I want to build a prototype soon, then test on stubble, next spring test on greencrop and when it works as intended, file my patent i write this winter. I assume the requirements for drawings and text makeup is pretty standardized worldwide...
LouNY
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2015
- Messages
- 14,357
- Location
- Greenwich, NY
- Tractor
- Branson 8050, IH 574, Oliver 1550 Diesel Utility (traded in on Branson) NH 8160. Kioti CK2620SECH
Except for china.
I'm not considering a patent for this. In my country there is no point because no one will protect it. Anyway, if someone can copy this by just watching these pictures and videos, just go ahead 
. I'm well aware of the complexity of this machine because I drew all parts in full detail and it takes a few months and a ton of thinking to do it
. I'm well aware of the complexity of this machine because I drew all parts in full detail and it takes a few months and a ton of thinking to do it
rScotty
Super Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2001
- Messages
- 9,707
- Location
- Rural mountains - Colorado
- Tractor
- Kubota M59, JD530, JD310SG. Restoring Yanmar YM165D
I'm not considering a patent for this. In my country there is no point because no one will protect it. Anyway, if someone can copy this by just watching these pictures and videos, just go ahead
I keep pointing this out, but haven't yet figured out how to explain it understandably.
For some reason, there is a common misunderstanding about the purpose of a patent.
Call me stubborn, but I'll give it one more try - here goes...
A patent rewards a person by gving that person recognition for being innovative.
The patent holder agrees to educate the world in exactly how to use an invention, and in exchange the world agrees to give him the option of exlusive use for a few (7) years.
After that, the patent is available for anyone to use.
The basic purpose of a patent is not the exclusive use.
The patent holder can decide if he wants exclusive use or not.
The basic purpose of a patent is to educate the world in how to do something better.
That is the reason why patents have to be completely described and illustrated.
Just because some have decided to concentrate on the self-serving option doesn't make that the only reason patents exist, or even the main reason.
Go for it,
rScotty
Renze
Super Member
I dont agree with that. The purpose of a patent is to create exclusive rights for the innovator to sell his invention. If a small innovative company spends its resources (time, money) into developing a product that can improve the world, a patent is there to give the innovator a chance to capitalize on his hard work. If a large and cumbersome organisation (which are generally speaking less innovative) can copy the work right off the bat and capitalize on someone elses creative work and beat them commercially by their larger resources, there is no incentive to develop anything new, by the smaller companies who are generally speaking the innovators.
Good example: Kemper patented the row independent corn head in 1983, the same year as i was born. I do not know of a contractor who didnt have a Kemper header in my youth, they were the dominant force.
John Deere bought them in 1997, and Claas and New Holland dealers were worried: If Deere would only sell them in green and yellow, and no longer make them available to competitors in orange and white, the dealers in my area knew that contractors would buy that Kemper header, no matter which chopper it was attached to. (Same like Cummins and Ram)
Without a patent, Kemper would probably have gone bankrupt if the chopper manufacturers stole their idea, sold it standard on every harvester they made, and thereby produced it cheaper by economy of scale, while Kemper never had the chance to sell enough units to earn back the R&D investment they put in.
Maschinenfabrik KEMPER | Head of Harvest since 1985 | Powerful harvesting technology
Welcome to KEMPER in Stadtlohn - market leader for row-independent maize headers and harvesting headers. Since 1985, the traditional German company has stood for high-performance harvesting technology - efficient, robust, innovative.
www.kemper-stadtlohn.de
No mention of JD on the Kemper website, yet on the European Deere site, they proudly mention that their corn header is made by Kemper
In 1990 there was no self respecting contractor who didnt use a Kemper header, on any brand of forager, so eagerly was the Kemper header adopted in the market. When the patent expired and the chopper manufacturers began building their own, the concept was introduced in North America, where it now also became the standard.
Since the Kemper patent expired, everyone began making them, and the row independent corn head has also become the standard in North America. The Deere takeover probably saved that company because they cancelled all other agricultural production in order to keep up with header demand... which means that they could have better did like Piet Zweegers did when he invented the drum mower in 1965: License it to the whole world, and make them put a sticker on each mower that says "system Zweegers"
Last edited:
rScotty
Super Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2001
- Messages
- 9,707
- Location
- Rural mountains - Colorado
- Tractor
- Kubota M59, JD530, JD310SG. Restoring Yanmar YM165D
How can you agree or disagree? Or is that just a figure of speech? After all, a patent is just a tool. The patent holder has the sole option to decide how they want to use that tool.
I know it has become popular to look at the world hrough a financial bias and sometimes wonder why. What part does pure "simplicity" play in that decision? Financially is certainly a handy and simple way to look at things, but that alone seems inadequate to have made the financial miindset so dominant.
There must be other simple & equally valid ways to see the world.
That is an interesting story you wrote about Kemper. Thanks for posting it. Patent wise, I like how it shows the use of a patent as a tool - of how a business chose to use a patent to accomplish their own motives.
Interestingly, some companies chose not to use patents at all because they do not want to teach others to make their product. They choose instead to keep their process as an unpublished "trade secret". That also works , and is a common manufacturing strategy.
rScotty
Renze
Super Member
People who pay a couple of grand for a patent with the intention to teach others, are insane. Business isnt an altruistic environment, businesses only do charity if they get recognition for it.
Now a poorly formulated patent can have that side effect: you teach them how to solve a problem, yet you didnt formulate your solution clearly enough so that they can use your solution without infringement of your patent by making a small change that isnt covered by how you formulate it.
I know a German manufacturer who bragged about his 93rd patent lately, and the product he patented is so specific that the cost of the patent application will never be payd by the profit on the number of units sold. For him, its about recognition. Like medals on the chest of a soldier, some wear it as much as they can, some keep them in a drawer.
I worked for a company that patented only their products that went out the door, and not their production methods. Their factory was enclosed, so the only way their tech could escape is through patents. And then there was no way to check whether their three or four competitors in Europe infringed those patents, because they didnt let anyone in either.
Last edited:
Everhard
Gold Member
I've been following this since day one. I'm almost afraid to ask if there's anything else you'll do or make for this tractor, or is this it?
Perhaps a grapple for the loader?
E.
Perhaps a grapple for the loader?
E.
Smokeydog
Elite Member
Had over dozen patent pendings thru work. Patent pendings are not supposed to be viewed by public without being released by owner. Think only one went thru the whole patent process so it could be transferred to a private company. Got my $1 and chicken dinner. The legality and benefits of the patent process in a global economy is questionable. The return profit on intellectual theft is often higher than cost of development. Get to the market first and the thief uses profits to fight and delay you in court. Few winners outside of lawyers.
M59
Platinum Member
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2014
- Messages
- 565
- Location
- Fairview NC
- Tractor
- Kubota M59 TLB/ Mahindra Max 24 TLB/ KX-080-5
Okay, I'll dive in. Patents are a two edged sword. A patent gives the user exclusive right to produce and sell the patented process, idea, product, etc. BUT in return the patent must be so descriptive as to allow a reasonably capable person to reproduce the patented article once the exclusive use period expires. This is the advancement benefit to the world's users. A patent must be registered in every country where one wants the exclusive rights. Different countries have different laws regarding time frame between idea and patent application/ issuance and this in itself creates loop holes for people/ companies to exploit the patented article without infringing. Now comes the fun part. A patent is ONLY as good as the money available to back up the enforcing of patent rights in each and every country where an infringing article is sold or produced. Think really big bucks ( hundreds of thousands to hundreds of millions ) and lots of time as in years.
I've had some experience in patent infringement wars. A competing company patented a chemical process and outcome that my company had been doing for decades before the patent was issued to the USA company. The patenting company sued my company for infringement and after 2 years of legal expenses at $400-500/ hour the patent was wholly and completely declared invalid due to my company having practiced the now patented process, for decades, before the patent was issued. The patent office and patent attorney for the competing company did not do their due diligence. Whoops!!!
I've developed a number of processes and specifically chosen to NOT patent them so as to avoid disclosing the process used to produce the final article.
Process patents and many product patents are notoriously hard to defend since by proper examination and substitution a process or product may be produced that can be claimed non infringing and then the patent holder must decide on how deep their pockets are.
Sorry to be a bummer but this is how life works and the Chinese are really good at knocking of stuff and holding them accountable is heading down the proverbial rabbit hole.
I've had some experience in patent infringement wars. A competing company patented a chemical process and outcome that my company had been doing for decades before the patent was issued to the USA company. The patenting company sued my company for infringement and after 2 years of legal expenses at $400-500/ hour the patent was wholly and completely declared invalid due to my company having practiced the now patented process, for decades, before the patent was issued. The patent office and patent attorney for the competing company did not do their due diligence. Whoops!!!
I've developed a number of processes and specifically chosen to NOT patent them so as to avoid disclosing the process used to produce the final article.
Process patents and many product patents are notoriously hard to defend since by proper examination and substitution a process or product may be produced that can be claimed non infringing and then the patent holder must decide on how deep their pockets are.
Sorry to be a bummer but this is how life works and the Chinese are really good at knocking of stuff and holding them accountable is heading down the proverbial rabbit hole.
Last edited:
rScotty
Super Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2001
- Messages
- 9,707
- Location
- Rural mountains - Colorado
- Tractor
- Kubota M59, JD530, JD310SG. Restoring Yanmar YM165D
That is a very good and accurate posting. I have a number of patents and have been involved in the patenting process. I'd say M59 has summarized it well. That is a good synopsis of the what to expect from a patent.
I only disagree that it is a bummer. It can be, but that's not the whole story.
As M59 says, a patent provides a format for educating the world, and the potential of financial reward for doing so.
But the rest of the story is that financial reward is only half the reason for a patent. The other reason a patent exists - and just as important - is to provide a way to educate people about a better/different way to do something.
Patents do that very well, and provide a way to publish an idea widely at low cost.
So half the reason for a patent is not a bummer at all. It's a service to everyone.
rScotty
Renze
Super Member
Both M59 and Rscotty are looking at this from a chemical engineering standpoint, patenting processes not products.
As long as you keep anyone out of your chemical plant, you can safeguard your secrets better than when you describe them in a patent. I worked for a company that made air suspension trailing arms. They had developed their own processes, hot pressing and molten salt hardening. They only patented products that went out the door, went on the road in plain sight. None of their processes were patented, they just kept their doors shut to unauthorized people.
So we have to see a clear distinction between process engineering, and mechanical engineering (the thing you deliberately ship out the door because thats what you sell)
When Piet Zweegers patented the forage mower in 1965 and revolutionized farming, he had to describe what made his mower a forage mower and not a mulcher like prior art.
Even though any competitor who would have one minute to look at it in action, would have an "Aha!" moment and be able to copy it.
He just mounted the blades on a saucer that kept the cut grass out of the path of the cutting blades, gently carrying it to the rear, like we all know today. He licensed the idea all over the world, for a price that was lower than any patent lawsuit would have cost his competitors.
His invention ended the days of cutting a long crop of hay twice: First drive left hand turns with the sickle bar, reverse every few meters to clear pluggage, once mown, hay it, and a week later, drive against the grain to cut the other half, also backing up every few meters to clear blockages, and taking the motorcycle to get more wooden pitman arms at the dealer because they broke so often.
My father found his first PZ CM165 mower an absolute blessing, it made mowing a hectare of hay an hour of work, instead of an entire day, and sometimes finishing the next day.
I dont know how long North America has been using the sickle bar, did you guys have diskbines before the patent expired in 1986 ? In Europe, sickle bar manufacturers quickly went out of business because of the PZ mower (off course our climate is humid, giving denser swards. The first American combine harvesters couldnt cope with tall European wheat either, after WW2)
So, thats what i am talking about: patenting an answer hidden in plain sight. When i have proven it effective, large manufacturers can copy it and steal my thunder. Not that my idea solves an international problem, it only solves a problem caused by national law, and as you know, my country is small. So a patent might just buy me some time to get into business and promote my brand, before established dogs take off with my bone.
To my knowledge, no one ever looked at a chemical product for just one minute, exclaimed "aha!" and went on to copy the production process right away.
Thats the difference between process engineering patents and product engineering patents. It gives a patent a different meaning in each branch, as one can easily copy whats sold into the field, but not what remains in the factory.
The whole mantra of "educating the world" only applies to process engineering patents. Once you sell a product and move it out the door, you are already educating the world, patent or not.
As long as you keep anyone out of your chemical plant, you can safeguard your secrets better than when you describe them in a patent. I worked for a company that made air suspension trailing arms. They had developed their own processes, hot pressing and molten salt hardening. They only patented products that went out the door, went on the road in plain sight. None of their processes were patented, they just kept their doors shut to unauthorized people.
So we have to see a clear distinction between process engineering, and mechanical engineering (the thing you deliberately ship out the door because thats what you sell)
When Piet Zweegers patented the forage mower in 1965 and revolutionized farming, he had to describe what made his mower a forage mower and not a mulcher like prior art.
Even though any competitor who would have one minute to look at it in action, would have an "Aha!" moment and be able to copy it.
He just mounted the blades on a saucer that kept the cut grass out of the path of the cutting blades, gently carrying it to the rear, like we all know today. He licensed the idea all over the world, for a price that was lower than any patent lawsuit would have cost his competitors.
His invention ended the days of cutting a long crop of hay twice: First drive left hand turns with the sickle bar, reverse every few meters to clear pluggage, once mown, hay it, and a week later, drive against the grain to cut the other half, also backing up every few meters to clear blockages, and taking the motorcycle to get more wooden pitman arms at the dealer because they broke so often.
My father found his first PZ CM165 mower an absolute blessing, it made mowing a hectare of hay an hour of work, instead of an entire day, and sometimes finishing the next day.
I dont know how long North America has been using the sickle bar, did you guys have diskbines before the patent expired in 1986 ? In Europe, sickle bar manufacturers quickly went out of business because of the PZ mower (off course our climate is humid, giving denser swards. The first American combine harvesters couldnt cope with tall European wheat either, after WW2)
So, thats what i am talking about: patenting an answer hidden in plain sight. When i have proven it effective, large manufacturers can copy it and steal my thunder. Not that my idea solves an international problem, it only solves a problem caused by national law, and as you know, my country is small. So a patent might just buy me some time to get into business and promote my brand, before established dogs take off with my bone.
To my knowledge, no one ever looked at a chemical product for just one minute, exclaimed "aha!" and went on to copy the production process right away.
Thats the difference between process engineering patents and product engineering patents. It gives a patent a different meaning in each branch, as one can easily copy whats sold into the field, but not what remains in the factory.
The whole mantra of "educating the world" only applies to process engineering patents. Once you sell a product and move it out the door, you are already educating the world, patent or not.
Last edited:
I make stuff every day, and since you asked I did make a grapple recently just not for use with Rk - 6000 but a different excavator and the purpose is to lift heavy concrete pipes for sewage installations.
Denis Aurélio
New member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2024
- Messages
- 2
- Tractor
- Não tem .
Bom dia! Não consigo abrir as os arquivos .jpgOlá. Aqui estou eu novamente com algumas inovações. Essa ideia estava me incomodando há algum tempo... então finalmente decidi fazê-la... Estou construindo meu próprio acessório de retroescavadeira para meu trator Belarus 820. Como sempre, tudo começou com alguns desenhos... Fiz aproximadamente 30 deles, mas aqui estão alguns finais...
Depois disso, fiz uma inspeção detalhada da parte traseira do meu trator para chegar à melhor solução de montagem. Minha decisão foi fazer um engate rápido tipo gancho com uma estrutura sob o trator que se conectará à estrutura do carregador frontal para evitar qualquer estresse ou dano à caixa de engrenagens ou ao motor.
Desenhando o modelo 3D...e o início do trabalho real..
A conexão com o chassi do carregador frontal...
A nova estrutura de montagem evita todas as partes do engate traseiro de 3 pontos, para que o trator possa ser usado normalmente para trabalhos agrícolas ou outros quando a retroescavadeira estiver desligada...
Montagem do subchassi acabado...
Comprei algumas outras peças... dentes de caçamba, joysticks, bombas de engrenagem tandem...
É isso até agora. No momento, estou no processo de desenvolvimento de outras peças para minha retroescavadeira...
Vou postar ao longo do caminho até terminar...
BF
ptsg
Super Member
Infelizmente, as fotografias mais antigas já não estão disponíveis.
Denis Aurélio
New member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2024
- Messages
- 2
- Tractor
- Não tem .
Obrigado pelo retorno!
dfkrug
Super Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2004
- Messages
- 7,695
- Location
- Santa Cruz Mtns, CA
- Tractor
- 05 Kioti CK30HST w/ Prairie Dog backhoe, XN08 mini-X
Nice looking grapple!
I have considered making something like that. Does it have passive rotation (no hyd motor)? And did you evaluate doing it with one cylinder plus linkage, instead of 2 cylinders? Something made you build your own instead of buying an existing product.
Keep up the good work.