My Caldera Clone

[Nicholas Martin]

I think the big gripe is that the word Caldera is being used.
As far as patents go, they do run out. I think it varies from product to product…
i think some mechanical ones last like 15 yrs or something like that…sooo maybe stop calling it a clone…just call it a MYOG stove which is what it is…
Is it stealing to make a cuben down quilt?
Or your own tarp or tent modeled almost exactly after a cottage manufacturer?
Some may say yes-100% theft. Others may say no.

Regardless if it works and Rand(who really is a super nice dude) doesnt give you any guff for it…keep doing what your doing…heck maybe he will buy the design from you!!!
Making it a true caldera clone!!!

[MFR]

So, I looked up Trail Design's patent (U.S. Patent #7,967,003–Google it if you want to read it yourself). It turns out that part of what I said was most definitely wrong. The patent basically covers the windscreen/pot support, i.e. the Caldera Cone, by itself without the accompanying 12-10 stove. It's a complicated read, but it's clear from a quick skimming that the patent is about the CC, not the whole system (which was what I said earlier was worthy of a patent).

I still think much of what I said still stands, but I wanted to correct this error. Trail Designs deserves it.

/*/Edited for clarity and grammer/*/

[Backpack Jack]

Matthew where did you find the Heinekin keg can at, I've been trying to find one now for a couple of monthes with no luck, if you have a source I'll buy the beer, just need the beer can. Thanks, Jack

[a b]

NM

[MFR]

I'm no attorney, but here it is:

35 U.S.C. 271 Infringement of patent.

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this title, whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the United States, or imports into the United States any patented invention during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent.

(b) Whoever actively induces infringement of a patent shall be liable as an infringer.

……….

(g)…A product which is made by a patented process will, for purposes of this title, not be considered to be so made after –

(1) it is materially changed by subsequent processes

Now, does Captain Paranoia's adaptation apply to the G1 provision of US patent law? I don't know. Maybe—-but then, maybe not.

Still, the cone is a basic shape long held within the public domain. Morally, regardless of legal wrangling, is it right to use Trail Design's idea of a cone with bottom and top vents as both a pot support and windscreen? Does the fact that a high school student could recreate a similar cone change the issue or not?

(All quotes taken from http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/appxl_35_U_S_C_271.htm)

/*/Edit – forgot to add link!/*/

[Bob Gross]

"Does the fact that a high school student could recreate a similar cone change the issue or not?"

US patent law does not allow for exceptions for high school students, or anybody else for that manner.

If Trail Designs were _applying_ for the patent, you could try to legally stop it if you had good grounds. Once the patent is granted, you cannot un-ring the bell.

–B.G.–

[David Thomas]

>"US patent law does not allow for exceptions for high school students, or anybody else for that manner."

Agreed, there is no mention of high-school student in US patent law. The relevant phrase is "non-obvious", which, if we graduate 5,000,000 high-school students each year, might be related, but one would have to make that argument in court.

In this particular case: Could I have done the calcs as a HS student? Sure. Did I (and produce a scaled drawing)? No. Could most HS students? No.

[a b]

Seems to me the infringement was when it went from this:
.

.
To This:
.

.
.
This is the Original Invention.
Oh yea.. the entire Trail Designs system; from the stove, pot, cup, cozy, lid, and storage bag weighs 5 ounces.

[Michael L]

Nicholas Martin,

The problem goes beyond the name. This is infringement of a design. Copying a quilt or tent exactly is ok legally IF it isn't under a paten or other protection.

Right wrong on copying unprotected item is completly different thing. What we have here is illegal, wrong, and literally encouraging others to steal from Someone.

It is discouraging to see so many ok with it.

[Arapiles .]

"I think the big gripe is that the word Caldera is being used."

Actually the issue is that they're copying something that isn't theirs to copy.

[al b]

If (as stated on other threads) Trail Designs don't mind people making their own homemade cones (frustums to be correct) for personal use (i.e non-commercial use) then what is the point of getting annoyed on their behalf? If they're happy then I don't think accusing MYOGers of stealing is either helpful or nice.

The general ethos of most cottage manufacturers has always seemed to be that when someone posted a "here is my MYOG version of said companies", eg a tent, for personal use, general congratulations are offered. Some companies even post make your own instructions.

About the name caldura clone Rand (Lindsly) said
" the community has adopted the adorable label "Caldera CLONE" to refer to these DIY activities. While still a violation of the trademark, it at least helps folks understand that they are not getting a real Caldera Cone but something else." Note the word adorable.

NB I did mention conic stove windshields existing before the caldera cone although they weren't ultra lightweight.

[Michael L]

So rand, what do you think of someone aiding and encouraging people to copy and steal your design?

Are you "happy" people are ripping off your patent?

Adam I read that adorable quote as much less than a ringing endorsent of said theft. As in well at least they are admitting they are ripping off our patent. Since we can't really stop it, well that is better than nothing..,

[Ken Thompson]

MYOG is MYOG not commercial

Hence the YO

[Nick Gatel]

"So rand, what do you think of someone aiding and encouraging people to copy and steal your design?

Are you "happy" people are ripping off your patent?"

---

This is kind of an unfair question. Of course he is probably not happy about it. But answering the question here may not be a "win-win" situation. Instead of putting the onus on Rand, it should be on those who steal, whether it be a legal, moral or ethical issue. For me it is so obvious that I can't believe it happens.

If Trail Designs wanted people to copy their design they would post instructions on their Website. I think that Gossamer Gear and Tarptent did this with a couple of obsolete products.

And if one is smart enough and willing to risk the time and capital, build a better system that does not infringe on the patent and go into business yourself.

If someone wants to rip-off another's design then keep it to yourself. I am shocked that some people see no problem in stealing Tyvek envelopes or condiments among other things from companies.

[Michael L]

I agree nick. I just find it odd that somebody would act like they are happy about it.

Probly lose lose alright….

[Cayenne Redmonk]

People are allowed to make anything they have the ability to make.

Patents don't come into play until you try to distribute what you make.

[Nick Gatel]

"People are allowed to make anything they have the ability to make.

Patents don't come into play until you try to distribute what you make."

---

I am not an attorney, but that does not jive with the quote posted earlier from the law.

However, I don't think anyone cares if a person builds a Caldera clone at home and keeps it to themselves.

I see a problem when the DIY project is posted, which encourages people to do the same.

Another question may be whether or not the BPL moderators have a responsibility to monitor these kinds of postings?

[Michael L]

Not really Cameron.

[James Marco]

Nick,
Privacy is privacy. What you do in your own home is beyond question without a court order. People are allowed to feel differently, indeed, activly encouraged to think for themselves. Morality? Ask Clinton. Ethics? Ask our lawers. 'Nuff said. This is way off topic.

[al b]

Again in most non-USA countries patents dont cover MYOG.

I wonder if the USA coverage was unintentional.

Posters are behaving as if a company has been set up to compete against Trail Designs, only MYOG has been discussed, in a MYOG forum:

You might as well object to all MYOG of commercially available items, as they may well be replacing a purchase.

Some homemade frustum windshield makers, like me, will already have bought a Trail Designs cone: howevwe, if somehow prevented from such MYOG, I suspect most would/could find a different solution: eg conic pot and cylinder windshield or cylinder windshield and trangia style overlapping lid.

A frustum (truncated cone) windshield is a simple idea: if the usual simple foil cylinder windshield based stove was patented would MYOG cylinder windscreens be frowned upon: I don't think so, that would see unreasonable.

Nevertheless, it seems a pity to get upset by MYOG on a MYOG forum.

[Michael L]

Alan how do know that patents in most non-US countries don't cover manufacturing? And does that matter to most posters on here who do happen to be in the US?

Nobody is acting like a rival company is setup

And for what seems like the billionth time, there are plenty of legal myog projects. This one started with linking to and praising a guy that is giving you a blue print to infringe an existing patent.

What is a shame is that you are ok with somebody getting ripped off.

[Tim Zen]

d

[Tim Zen]

<del></del>

[David Thomas]

I have, at various times, done each of the following:

Let someone else watch my Blockbuster DVD rental before returning it.

Brought a snack into a theater instead of buying their $8 popcorn.

Used a McDonald's or service station restroom without patronizing them that day.

Made my own gear without an extensive patent search for someone else's prior art.

Camped or backpacked contrary to some park regulation.

Bought something shipped directly from Hong Kong.

Patronized Walmart with their minimal respect for workers in general and for minorities and women in particular.

Taken a rock or stick or shell from a National Park.

Killed a mosquito in a Park that only allows fishing (with a license), but no other hunting. And a tick. And stepped on an ant.

Eaten a cheeseburger, worn mixed-fiber garments, and trimmed my bread which are clearly forbidden by the Bible.

Bought a Toyots despite Japan's record on industrialized whaling.

Each of which is a behavior that could be abhorred by others and most of which would be viewed as stealing by some.

And yet I consider myself a pretty moral person. I try to leave the world a better place. I donate a lot of money. I volunteer my time. I teach a lot of classes for free. I try to increase other people's choices. I campaign to increase human rights and their more universal application.

I could do better. I consider my actions and consider changing them. I appreciate a thoughtful discussion of grey areas and try to grant that other moral people can have different opinions, experiences, and perspectives. And I fail at that sometimes, too.

[al b]

"Alan how do know that patents in most non-US countries don't cover manufacturing? And does that matter to most posters on here who do happen to be in the US?"
I looked it up. I don't live in the US, and were I live that is the case, and it would appear other places too.

"And for what seems like the billionth time, there are plenty of legal myog projects. This one started with linking to and praising a guy that is giving you a blue print to infringe an existing patent."

It would be appear that might be technically the case (ie illegal) in the US, although it sounds like it is essentially unenforceable there, but is not necessarily illegal elsewhere. In my view companies get patents as a defence against other companies not a few MYOGers.

"What is a shame is that you are ok with somebody getting ripped off."
I resent that.
MYOG frustums are not a rip-off, whereas selling a replica caldera cone would be, and I would definitely oppose that, irrespective of any patent.
Infringing the Trail Designs patent for MYOG (and I not sure if the script generated frustums do: lawyer(s) etc required for that) might not be technically legal in the US, but otherwise its no different from any other MYOG. MYOG is normally a friendly collaborative activity, and Trail Designs have been friendly to the MYOGers.

I think selling copies of patented items commercially is wrong (as well as illegal), as patents are a deal: in exchange for making their design public, the patent holder is offered a commercial monopoly for a limited period. Even with no patent I think most people would choose Trail Designs over a commercial clone, and so would I, but MYOG is OK, and if legal in your region, it is no different from any other MYOG.
Note I bought a cone first, I like the product, Trail Designs is successful, they are a nice company, if anyone asked about my homemade frustum windshield, I would mention them.
However, I think the US patent laws are wrong to include MYOG as an infringement (even if not enforced) that is not purpose of the patent "deal" described above, but I don't live there.

A frustum windshield is a simple idea, after that the postscript generated stoves deviate from the real caldera, so the "caldera clone" isn't actually a clone, its a snappy title for the original forum thread: perhaps "Caldera Tribute" would cause less grief whilst retaining a good will pointer back to Trail Designs).

"Nobody is acting like a rival company is setup"
I disagree.
A few MYOGers aren't a threat to Trail Designs, a rival company would be.
In my view companies get patents as a defence against other companies not a few MYOGers.

[Author]

Posts