Dampp-Chaser Patent #6,133,519

[Roger Wheelock]

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

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Avery 
  To: Pianotech List 
  Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 11:21 PM
  Subject: Re: Dampp-Chaser Patent #6,133,519


  John & others, 

  I just sent this to Roger Wheelock at Dampp-Chaser. Maybe he'll have something
  to say. 

  Avery 

  At 08:54 PM 4/30/2007, you wrote:

    Paul,

    I looked at this last night. (www.uspto.gov) It appears to be the only
    patent for a cover to be used in conjunction with a DC system. I
    didn't look everywhere, but this was one of the three patents I found
    for Dampp-Chaser Corp.

    Anyway, what this appears to be talking about is the older way of
    doing it with the mylar type plastic material. I think I installed
    only one of those, as it was right around the time that I started
    working full-time as a piano tech.

    The undercover in use now is speaker fabric.

    There is a possibility that there might be a patent pending. Maybe
    someone could contact Dampp-Chaser and find out. Or maybe someone from
    there will comment here on the list.

    There are a number of us who want to abide by the law, and it would be
    helpful to know exactly what that is.

    JF

    P.S. After reading the patent lingo, one thing I hope I never have to
    become is a patent lawyer. Ugh!  :-)  No offense to any of you who
    like that kind of thing.

    On 4/30/07, paul bruesch <tunergeek at gmail.com> wrote:

      I found the Dampp-Chaser's patent online:
      http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6133519.pdf
      (you might have to create an account to look at the pdf, for some darned
      reason)

      According to the abstract, the under/back cover patent is for a "...moisture
      impervious aperture free sheet...".  In the detail of the patent write-up,
      under "Background of the Invention" it specifies "MYLAR or felt" (caps
      theirs) "... having a plurality of apertures or holes..." (which, to my
      mind, contradicts the abstract portion... but then again I'm not a lawyer.)

      So, what sort of fabric/material is Dampp-Chaser's under/back cover made
      of?  I'm not a rocket scientist, nor even a acoustic engineer, heck, I'm not
      even an RPT, but the idea of Mylar back/under cover on a piano sounds to me
      like it would sound a bit bizarre. Wouldn't it?? And wouldn't felt mute and
      muffle the sound?  (see previous disclaimers regarding my qualifications)

      I wonder what a "plurality of apertures or holes" means... several holes
      and/or apertures in the cover, or is that phrase intended to include an open
      weave like speaker cloth, being what it sounds like many techs are using.
      An open weave certainly has a "plurality of holes," but it would make a lot
      more better sense to say "open weave fabric."

      Please understand that I'm not trying to get around anyone's patent, or
      infringe on same... when the time comes I'll order the DC cover simply for
      the convenience of it, if for no other reason. My curiosity is piqued about
      this patent for a new way to use a piece of cloth... and I'd just like to
      understand it better. Judging from the amount of traffic generated by this
      topic, I don't think I'm alone.

      Paul Bruesch
      Computer Geek and PTG Associate, who typically plays by the rules but wants
      to understand them. And I don't run with scissors.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20070501/746b4c31/attachment.html