Jump to content
Does the Patent affect Lure Spraying?
12 replies to this topic
Posted 18 October 2007 - 11:40 PM
This patent showed up in another search I was making. Does it help or hurt us or does it not apply?
Posted 18 October 2007 - 11:57 PM
Probally to specialized of a process, that could most likely be circumvented to produce nearly identical results without any infringement.
Posted 19 October 2007 - 12:01 AM
I can't tell. Sounds like he has some kind of painting technique. But without seeing his drawings, I'm guessing.
It looks like an International patent. In the USA patents for fly patterns were disallowed decades ago but lure painting could be allowed, IMHO.
Posted 19 October 2007 - 12:13 AM
It is very similar to the Sabatier effect in photography. I won't describe it here, too heavy. It is a way of producing a thin line of white between two black bodies. The result looks like a negative line drawing. Impressive, but hardly worth the six hours it took me to produce.
What I think he is saying, is that lacquer applied onto wet lacquer, will run upto the previous coat, but not quite reaching it, leaving a rim of white. A good application for painting the eyes, with a very thin white rim.
The fish will be well impressed and will select your piece of plastic over the real thing, any day!
Posted 19 October 2007 - 12:45 AM
Its the technique not the color pattern, and it must not have been that impressive in result or not that protectable one. (have you ever seen it before?)
Posted 19 October 2007 - 01:16 PM
So you are saying it's a very labor-intensive process? And the trade off for all this labor is beautiful product? Sorry, I just don't understand and I've re-read the thing 4 times! What can he do with lacquer that is new and patentable? Lacquer, and Wapsi lacquer specifically is 30-40 year old technology (or more). What can he be doing that 100s on this forum haven't already done?
Posted 19 October 2007 - 01:21 PM
No I just stumbled across it in another search. The list of countries where it is protected does NOT include the USA. I have not seen his technique touted in any sales literature either.
Posted 19 October 2007 - 01:24 PM
Don't know. Describe "marbleing".
Posted 19 October 2007 - 01:34 PM
I don't know. Most of us have used lacquer and lacquer-like materials every way possible. If they are thin, they dry fast and layers can't bleed into each other. If lacquer coatings are thick, then you have to deal with gravity which moves lacquer around not merging with other partially dried coats. Does he apply multiple colors at the same time?
Posted 19 October 2007 - 03:48 PM
Your statement about the coatings being thin and drying fast is dependent on what the lacquer is thinned with. Lacquer paint thinned and sprayed
with fast evaporating thinner does to a degree bite into the coat underneath it. If you thin lacquer with retarder you enhance that significantly and it remains wet for sometime dependent on the amount used. When lacquer paint was mainstay in the auto refinishing industry a technique used to blend lacquer over lacquer is to spray lacquer thinner over the area to be blended to soften the existing paint and allow the blend to burn in with existing paint, as not to leave a blend line when polished out.
I am not sure exactly what the processs described in the patent produces.
Posted 19 October 2007 - 04:45 PM
A patent or copyright is worth only as much as you are willing to spend on lawyers to enforce it against competitors. These days, they're mostly used by big companies to harrass other big companies and gain market advantage (regardless of the legal merits). I wouldn't worry unless you are planning to use the exact process and sell 500,000 lacquered flies.