Jump to content
7 replies to this topic
Posted 13 December 2009 - 12:52 AM
Hey guys. I was looking into making some lures that could have weight added/subtracted. I couldn't find any patents from Tru-Tungsten considering they have the swimbaits that you can add/subtract weight to. I don't think that the idea of having a weight system to add/subtract could be patented but potentially the process. Ex: I can understand TT being able to patent the way that their lure holds weight and the design in which it can have it added/subtracted (the pin design). I have heard of other lures having buoyancy alterations in the past. If I do recall, there was a lure that was able to fill with water for a similar affect. Any thoughts?
Posted 13 December 2009 - 02:32 AM
This doesn't have anything to do with my question, but I found this patent for a self propelled lure patented in 1985... kinda cool.
patent # 4536985
go to google patents and punch in the number to get images and stuff.
Posted 13 December 2009 - 09:03 AM
I think the adjustable ballast idea is do-able. Some kind of embedded tube/container. It does not need to by dry or sealed. A simple pin to stop the weight from falling out would work.
Other ideas on the same theme would be adjustable ballast location rather than adjustable mass. This would be a threaded S/steel ballast, riding on an adjustable screw. Either adjusting fore/aft position or top/bottom position.
At the end of the day, these ideas would make nice projects for your own use/gratification, but as saleable products, I am not so sure. The user would select the best mass/position and stick with it. Might as well do that for him and fix the position.
As for the patent! What can I say!!!
Another do-able home project, just for fun. The patent claims that it replaces the skill required by the angler! Not too sure about that. As far as I can see, the lure has no action or wiggle, but simply stops and starts in a straight line or slight curve, controlled by a rudder. A simple lipped crankbait would have more action.
I can think of several improvements to the patent. Firstly, battery technology has come a long way since 1985, so the 9V battery can be discarded. I would include a socket so that the battery could be charged. I would replace the manual switch with a resistance sensor, so that it switches on automatically when in water. I would also vent the water jet out of both sides, with some kind of flap valve to direct the flow, to give the lure some movement.
Not so sure it was worth the expense of a patent. Haven't seen it in the shops yet.
Thanks for posting, it was a good read. I could actually understand the patent, as I am messing about with 555 timers at the moment.
Edited by Vodkaman, 13 December 2009 - 09:06 AM.
Posted 13 December 2009 - 10:52 AM
I really depends on how the patent was written. You'd be suprised sometimes how little a patent covers, or how much. RIght now at work we are working for a client to package their product in another "container" technology (currently in a plastic jug) because a extremely large company patented putting the same product in plastic molded containers.... and they get paid 15 cents from our client for every package they make!!!! Ridiculous!!!
My guess would be to agree with your suggestion that most patents would cover the method for adding subtracting weight.... although if written very well, might actually cover specific types of baits, materials used, and other specifices as well, further narrowing your field of options. You could see where they might reference adding weight to baits with multiple segments, and which segment the weight sits... etc...
Posted 13 December 2009 - 02:11 PM
I have a pretty good idea brewing up as far as the methodology for inserting weight.
@ Vodkaman, the whole pin idea is exactly what Tru-tungsten uses and the unit is not sealed to my knowledge... so I'm sure TT might not appreciate that one.
One of my buds has had the pin fall out before and I've seen the process for him inserting weight on his other TTs. What I have in mind would not require disassembling the lure (if I remember correctly) like TT and actually would have the weight inserted in a different section. I liked the idea of being able to insert weight, I just thought there was a better way to do it. Just wanted peoples opinions on this to avoid getting sued! (because I'd like to try and sell a few of these if they work out right) I'll post some pics in the weeks to come on this lure.
Yeah, thats the way I view it. I'd say the only thing similar between what I'm working on and TT is the idea that you can add weight. Other than that, the weight placement is different and the method for inserting the weight is different.
Just browsing the google patent site for fishing lures stuff is interesting. You see lots of stuff that never made it... even though the ideas were interesting.
Thanks for your replies guys.
Posted 13 December 2009 - 03:20 PM
Not so sure the pin retaining idea is even patentable. I'm sure the idea has been used many times in industry, but I cannot think of an example at the moment. If TT do not claim a patent for it on their web site, then the chances are that it is not patented. I would be inclined to run with the idea. The worst that can happen would be a cease and desist order.
I am not telling you to copy anyones work, in fact I am dead against such practice. But some ideas are so simple, basic, obvious and in use in other industries, they should not be allowed to be patented. I did a quick search and could not find anything relevant. But this search is by no means conclusive.
Posted 13 December 2009 - 03:49 PM
Good. Thats reassuring! I couldn't find anything either. I dug up a patent that had a wire hanging underneath the lure and you could slide what looked to be worm weights on it I think the patent # was 6718684). I don't recall ever seeing that one in the stores either. But yeah, I'm totally against duplicating another persons work now. However, I don't see anything wrong with modifying an idea. Not saying trying to duplicate isn't bad idea for people starting out. I know my first lures were "based" off of shad raps just to see if I could have it work the same. It helps when first figuring out the basics to the lure making puzzle... little different when it comes to selling a lure though. I am not particularly a fan of doing perfect dublicate paint schemes either... unless of course my favorite crankbait color is discontinued then I figure its for the sake of fishing!
Posted 13 December 2009 - 03:58 PM
I totally agree with your statement.
I saw that patent too. Fortunately, the internal slot or embedded tube is a much better solution and is available to all.
If I think of any other solutions to your problem I will let you know.