"I would like to gently point out that Dampp-Chaser has a patent on the undercover and back side cover. We kindly ask technicians to honor this." Roger Wheelock And ... Dear List, Avery has asked that I post to the list regarding the Dampp-Chaser patent on the undercover and the backside cover. As a manufacturer, we maintain a strong business relationship with our local patent attorneys. When we come up with a new idea we get their law firm involved. They complete an initial evaluation of potential patentability. If they make a positive recommendation, we work with them to complete an application. They obviously use their "special" terminology and illustrations that deliver a document designed to meet a government patent inspector's expectations. Then we enter into a review and appeal process that after some (often seemingly endless) period of time can result in a patent being issued. Sometimes we are told that the idea is obvious and not patentable at the end of this journey. Costs are considerable as the attorneys charge by the minute at a rate equivalent to $250 per hour. Patents are often drafted to include "anything under the sun" type claims. Then some claims get rejected during the iterative review process. The patent as issued can then have some inconsistencies within the document based on these activities. With regard to the patent under discussion, I believe we had a long list of materials for use as an undercover or backside cover and tried to achieve maximum material design freedom in the final document subject to the judgments of the patent inspector. The Mylar was initially used on upright pianos, but was never tried on a grand. We feel that our current material falls within the scope of the patent as do most materials purchased at fabric stores, but others may disagree. We have heard the argument that the patent was issued for an obvious idea. Indeed this topic is in the news with a recent Supreme Court ruling saying that too many patents have been issued for obvious ideas. With these changes in the air, critics of our patent may have a means to "reverse" it in the future...if they have the time, energy and money to participate in the process. Kindly note we have not been pushy about the patent. In the numerous training programs we conduct I simply mention the patent, explain that we are not the patent police, and ask technicians to do what they feel is right. Our intention was and is to develop a climate control system that provides maximum benefit to the piano. I was skeptical of the undercover benefit at first, but over the years I have seen it improve system performance in many grand installations. In this regard, we are considering making it standard equipment in the grand systems sold in Europe. I do appreciate the kind comments about our product in this thread that has certainly morphed from a data logger discussion. I also thank you for your support of our organization over the years. Sincerely, Roger Wheelock, VP Dampp-Chaser Corporation I have no particular problem with any of that. I just think they are absurdly overpriced for what you get, the difficulty of installing it and servicing the piano afterwards. Etc. The solution: Come up with a set-up that is simpler, better-looking (a la Mark Cramer's effort), easier to install and get around for servicing; then, instead of selling it as a separate item, just include the dang thing with the grand systems (regular, large, or super-size your order). Alan Barnard Salem, MO Original message From: "paul bruesch" To: l-bartlett at sbcglobal.net, "Pianotech List" Received: 2/17/2008 7:00:08 PM Subject: Re: Au contraire, mon frere,perhaps (and a rant) was Re: Whole room humidity control better thanDampp Chaser. ( Right?) This came up a few months ago and Roger Wheelock did chime in on it with a very thoughtful and reasonable post.... check the archives. On Feb 17, 2008 6:25 PM, Leslie Bartlett <l-bartlett at sbcglobal.net> wrote: I don't think the DC engineers spent a lot of time designing and inventing this "product". [Leslie Bartlett] On what exactly do they have a patent? The "idea"? How can one limit others from putting a piece of cloth on their own furniture? The cloth? Is there some special blend they use which is patented? Sure would like DC to get in on this discussion. Maybe a call to them would be wise........ les b -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20080217/d4a0a1fc/attachment.html
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC