Capstans

[Farrell]

Thanks Richard! That was my only point: that action geometry, while integral
with Precision Touch Design or any other method of weighing off keys, is
simply not a specific part of David Stanwood's patents (or at least not
relocating a capstan).

Terry Farrell
Piano Tuning & Service
Tampa, Florida
mfarrel2@tampabay.rr.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Brekne" <Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: Capstans


>
>
> A440A@AOL.COM wrote:
>
> > Terry writes:
> >
> > << My point was that action geometry is not a
> >
> > component of Stanwood's patents (I believe that to be true).>>
> >
> > Greetings,
> >     Stanwood's methods consist of alterations to one or more of
geometry,
> > weights, and springs.  Action geometry is a MAJOR component of Precision
> > Touch Design.
>
> 'cuse me.... my understanding of the Stanwood method relating to patent
> rights is that the matter is quite precisely defined. Indeed it has to be
or
> patent laws would be like useless. Your "definition" (if it was meant as
> such) is waayyyy to broad to be of any use in this relation. Tho
addmittedly
> it does accuratly describe the domain he is in. However.. the statement
(the
> WHOLE statement) Terry writes above is most certainly true. Neither David
or
> anyone else can be issued a patent for "action geometry". Way too vague a
> term.
>
> I think most of this is pretty well covered in the information provided by
> the Stanwood Kit.
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ed Foote RPT
>
> --
> Richard Brekne
> RPT, N.P.T.F.
> Bergen, Norway
> mailto:Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no
>
>
>