Search results

Agreed. I played with a bunch in the gun shop where I worked many moons ago, and I found the same thing. There was almost zero consistency, same with the JP triggers in the DPMS.

I haven't shot it, but I'm honestly not impressed with the RRA NM2.

Yeah, you're right, don't think of the big picture, don't think to the future, just...... fuck our rights in the butt.

Unfortunately a lot of people feel the same way. They feel that it's simply their decision, and any indirect negative side effects like further erosion of gun rights just don't affect them....or that meh...whatever, it's just not a big deal. Many of us are known to our friends as "gun guys" and...

I've talked to quite a few friends with ideas and inventions that are looking for patent (protection) for their ideas. Here are a few things about the patenting system that you may not know that will illuminate this story a bit more. Usually, these details open some eyes on the process. 1...

Yes, exactly, except a patent will not provide protection, but a legal right to take action against infringers. On their own, they provide zero protection against infringement (as Mossberg discovered).

Yep, you have to infringe upon the entire patent and do so in the very specific way spelled out in the claim for it to be infringement. This is why I don't have much sympathy for the companies getting sued, they took the lazy way out, didn't create their own design, and stole an idea from...

Yeah, which happens to be mine too, and that's what pisses me off.

I simply like to ask myself, "are my actions beneficial or harmful to my Second Amendment rights?" I don't believe that being seen carrying is ever a benefit when in the public sphere, but I don't believe it is always a negative. That's why I don't OC unless I'm hunting, hiking, or back in bfe...

When it was one or two companies it may not have made sense for them to file a suit. They may have sent out notices to the companies asking for a license. As more and more companies jump into the trigger game, using their IP to make money, the stakes get higher. I kind of have a feeling this...

Possible because patents don't provide protection, but the ability to take legal action against infringers. It costs a lot of cash, and you have to weigh the cost vs. benefit before taking action. They may have already sent out letters saying, "hey, we noticed you've been using our IP, send us...

Look familiar?

Nope, they're suing based on Claim 1 and 10, and it pretty clearly spells out their drop in design, and it appears their ip was infringed upon.

Here's claim number 1, and it's a pretty well written claim( I read claims all day for work). They have every reason to sue, this is their ip that's been infringed upon (probably). 1. A trigger group module for a firearm, the firearm including a receiver that defines a trigger group receiving...

Meh, they'll probably end up giving them the opportunity to purchase a license to use their ip, pay back damages, OR face an infringement suit. It depends on the damage done, profit made with their ip, and the willingness of the various parties to hash out a deal. Regardless, this is why it's...

No. BUIS are for just that.

!

The rifle makes it's own music!

On some stuff, others they are pretty solid. You have to shop their sales, otherwise yeah...a bit high.

For a very small time KYGUNCO had the POF mp5 and mp5k's on sale for $1100ish. I had to sit on my hands.