Have any pack manufacturers adopted the McHale Bypass Harness design?

I have not seen it on any pack other than a McHale.

I would think or HOPE that others would not take his design out of respect for him and his work. It's kind of sad when people take others hard work and designs and seek to make a profit instead of making their own designs. I speak from experience, I've had my designs taken without my permission and profited from. Not a nice thing to do. IMHO

Why would it be not used out of respect? If a good idea has merit, it will be incorporated in other people's designs. The Patent gives an inventor exclusive rights for a period of time to allow them to make money off the concept. One does not own a good idea forever, otherwise we would all still be hunter/gatherers.

If this thread is correct, then he had a patent. That is reward enough. You can argue patents should be longer but that's about it.

If you really think this way I hope you never buy generic drugs…or any other product that uses an expired patent.

"I would think or HOPE that others would not take his design out of respect for him and his work."

+1. I simply wouldn't buy a pack that had Dan's harness design unless I was buying it from Dan.

The purpose of patents is not only to protect inventions.

It is also to disclose them, so they can be improved upon by others. Its called technological progress. You are not rewarded with exclusive rights for a period of time because you invented something. You are rewarded with exclusive rights because you invented it and DISCLOSED it.

Very frequently if you dont want a process copied, you dont patent it. This is true in pharma chemical processing. They may attempt to obtain a composition of matter patent on a drug, but not disclose the proprietary process, as it would give competition an edge.

Once a patent has expired, it is not unethical in any way to take advantage of that. That is how the world works. Actually its worse than that. Patents are outright infringed upon.

Sometimes, you can win the battle, but lose the war. One case that comes to mind is Yamaha got into the outboard motor business by carbon copying some OMC designs. OMC sued and eventually won. But by then Yamaha had firmly entrenched their business with a superior quality product, while OMC was known for lesser quality, and OMC went bankrupt anyway. The better , stronger, company won.

This strategy was used by many asian electronics manufacturers as they took the whole electronics industry from the US.

McHale had the patent since '91, a more than reasonable amount of time to profit from it.

I assume the primary reason it hasn't been widely coopted is that people are used to the traditional system. A secondary reason is that the bypass system is a bit more fiddly and labor intensive to construct, and given that (in my book) it's not that drastic an improvement, perhaps not worth the effort.

"given that (in my book) it's not that drastic an improvement"

Will disagree with you there, Dave C. Having used just about every system, I feel I can comment truthfully that it is significantly better at 'lifting the load' than any other load lifter 'system' available.

The issue of whether it is respectful to Dan McHale is important, but a bit outside of the scope of my inquiry, and is more of an ethical question. Personally, if I was in Dan's position, I might be pleased to see others recognize my insights into pack designs, and to see the design become the industry standard. Regardless of who uses the design, he will always be the one who gets the credit for inventing it.

David C, I suspect the same. That the reasons are a combination of the following:

1. It is more costly to construct

2. Manufacturers are not aware of the design

3. The majority of consumers don't really care. I mean, most people buying packs at stores like REI have no idea how to adjust a pack properly as it is. Thus, there may not be much incentive for a gear company to adopt it.

With regard to #1, construction, Dan's design may be a bit harder to construct, but I cannot see the minor additional complexity of the design stopping major manufacturers. They already incorporate much more complicated fabrication in their packs. If they wanted to use it, I think they would. For smaller operations, I could this being more of an issue.

The other thing that makes the P&G Bypass System unique is that it is completely modular – removable depending on the trip and load required. The complexity alone would scare off any mainstream manufacturer.

"I would think or HOPE that others would not take his design out of respect for him and his work."

"+1. I simply wouldn't buy a pack that had Dan's harness design unless I was buying it from Dan."

Do you only hold this position as pertains backpacking gear, or would you never buy anything that is built using some other party's expired patent? If the latter, you could never own a car, computer, or household appliance from ANY manufacturer. If the former, why is backpacking gear special?

"If the former, why is backpacking gear special?"

It's not. I never said I was consistent, and I'm really okay with my inconsistency since it's generally pretty minor.

I understand there's nothing wrong with anyone who wants to use the design in their own packs, nor do I judge those who would (that my post could be construed to say otherwise, I understand).

"I would think or HOPE that others would not take his design out of respect for him and his work. It's kind of sad when people take others hard work and designs and seek to make a profit instead of making their own designs. I speak from experience, I've had my designs taken without my permission and profited from. Not a nice thing to do. IMHO"

Since one of the purposes of patents is the free exchange of ideas why would no one not use it out of respect. "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery."

"I never said I was consistent, and I'm really okay with my inconsistency"

You sir, are like a ninja.

Thank you. I plan to wait for the right time and the right argument and use this deft example of the dark arts at home. She'll never see it coming.

"You sir, are like a ninja. "

In this particular instance, i was reminded more of a politician than a ninja. How about a ninjatician or polininja (this latter could also stand for ninja's that get around with multiple partners)?

As a sad example of my inconsistency, while I’d only buy a pack with Dan’s technology from Dan, I’d buy this from anybody.