Trek’s Active Braking Pivot Issued US Patent
Proprietary suspension design now protected by federal law
(Waterloo, WI) - Today, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued Trek Bicycle a patent on its Active Braking Pivot (ABP) suspension system, #7,837,213.
Invented by Trek suspension engineers James Colegrove, Dylan Howes, and Jose Gonzalez, ABP has been praised for being the first suspension technology to effectively separate braking and suspension forces. This separation allows the suspension to remain active while the rear brake is engaged.
Trek’s ABP patent has broad implications, as it covers a concentric pivot in combination with much more sophisticated and varied types of rear suspension designs.
ABP, utilizing a concentric rear pivot, was first introduced to the marketplace in May of 2007 and has since evolved to become the foundation of Trek’s full-suspension bikes, offered on eight platforms to date.
From its origins in 2006 to today’s 2011 Trek full suspension lineup, Active Braking Pivot remains a competitive performance advantage found exclusively on Trek and Trek’s Gary Fisher Collection full-suspension mountain bikes. Now patented, ABP is further proof of Trek’s commitment to leading the world in mountain bike technology.
I dont think the floating shock has anything to do with the patent...Im guessing maybe someone made a mistake @ the patent office a gave DW the patent a little too early OR they both came up with the exact same idea at the exact same time???I believe this is the official reason but find it quite hard to believe...I mean , what are the odds something like that would ever happen?
Trek must have written this press release. There's no way to completely separate braking and suspension forces. They're connected together at the pivot!
I guess they didn't want to license the FSR patent...
No, the Split Pivot patent specifies a number of different ways to mount the shock, so that's not it - the meat of the patent is in the placement of the rear pivot (concentric with the rear wheel axle). And in that respect, there are NO differences between the patents.
I can't believe they were not able to decide who invented the thing. And I can't believe such a cop out (granting 2 patents) is allowed either.
Well, there's more apparently:
_______________________________
Trek Awarded REAL Split Pivot Patent: 7,837,213
Congratulations to James Colegrove, Dylan Howes and Jose Gonzales of Trek on being granted the spilt pivot patent in October and receiving their patent number in November.
After a long discussion with the patent examiner and many official letters from the designers about the conception and production of split pivot samples, the guys proved they designed, made and even test rode split pivot frames before Dave Weagle was able to file his patent. The Session 77 and a Patty Fatty test bikes have proven more valuable than just initial concept test bikes but through emails and other internal official documents from James, Dylan and Andrew Shandro, they have been started before Dave.
Trek looks to continue strong now that the patent office has finally concluded an extensively long look into prior art, historical data and personal interviews with the many guys involved with this from the start.
-------------------------------------
I wish somebody could point to the definitve authority on this (if there is one), and also let us know what will become of DW's patent now? Can Trek sue for compensation?
Devinci, Morewood...Im not sure if any of those bikes have actually been sold but I know demo bikes have been out there from quite a while already.I bet the simple fact they've used the wording "split pivot" to promote the brand and generate sales could be a valid reason for Trek to go after Dave...That said , all of Dave's work has been done well before the patent was file so I dont see how they could sue him since they didnt have the patent before...Wonder now what will happen to Devinci and Morewood as well...
Suing isn't gonna benefit our sport in any ways and sure hope something more productive will come out of all this...
Well, since the US patent office is no longer a government organisation and changed it's definition of patent worthy to "can sign own name and pay fees," what exactly did you expect?
There's a reason US patents aren't recognised internationally, although it's a shame for Mr Weagle to be seemingly getting shafted again by a major manufacturer. Maybe he should design some deliberately awful suspension to get the big fish to sink millions into developing dead ends...
Wonder if Trek are going to do anything with this patent now.
Trek obviously has been using this before DW, he tried to go behind them and patent it. ABP has been sold as standard on trek bikes for at least 3 years and Dw just started licensing it. Trek has every right to say "uhh no way man, we've been doing that for years" and patent their design. If DW doesn't get to sell split pivot bikes, that's too bad. He shouldn't have tried to shaft Trek by attempting to patent THEIR idea because they never bothered to.
Devinci, Morewood...Im not sure if any of those bikes have actually been sold but I know demo bikes have been out there from quite a while already.I bet the simple fact they've used the wording "split pivot" to promote the brand and generate sales could be a valid reason for Trek to go after Dave...That said , all of Dave's work has been done well before the patent was file so I dont see how they could sue him since they didnt have the patent before...Wonder now what will happen to Devinci and Morewood as well...
Suing isn't gonna benefit our sport in any ways and sure hope something more productive will come out of all this...
There's a reason US patents aren't admissable to support Canadian, UK or European patent applications and are considered a running joke around the world.
Devinci, Morewood...Im not sure if any of those bikes have actually been sold but I know demo bikes have been out there from quite a while already.I bet the simple fact they've used the wording "split pivot" to promote the brand and generate sales could be a valid reason for Trek to go after Dave...That said , all of Dave's work has been done well before the patent was file so I dont see how they could sue him since they didnt have the patent before...Wonder now what will happen to Devinci and Morewood as well...
Suing isn't gonna benefit our sport in any ways and sure hope something more productive will come out of all this...
Trek obviously has been using this before DW, he tried to go behind them and patent it. ABP has been sold as standard on trek bikes for at least 3 years and Dw just started licensing it. Trek has every right to say "uhh no way man, we've been doing that for years" and patent their design. If DW doesn't get to sell split pivot bikes, that's too bad. He shouldn't have tried to shaft Trek by attempting to patent THEIR idea because they never bothered to.
I seem to recall DW and Trek announcing the Split Pivot/ ABP on the same day, or at least the same week.
Edit: I believe it was discussed that Trek was riding prototypes and had artwork a few years before DW applied for his patent. Trek did not have them on the market before DW applied, if I understood what was implied.
Just to point out that I don't really care if anybody sues anybody...nor does it matter all that much who is "right" here...I just find it quite ridiculous how the whole thing has come up. And, I'm pretty sure that DW would NOT have gotten his patent AFTER Trek, had it been the other way around...
As it stands, it looks as though DW applied first...I guess Trek managed to prove prior art or something then. Note that Treks patent abstract does not even mention a pivot around the rear axle...that is pretty strange?
TREK
Bicycle rear wheel suspension system
Abstract
A bicycle frame assembly having a number of rotatable members configured to absorb shocks and impacts associated with operation of the bicycle. The assembly includes a frame constructed to support a rider and a chain stay having a rearward end that extends toward a wheel hub and a forward end that is pivotably connected to the frame. An absorber is pivotably connected to the forward end of the chain stay and extends to a rocker arm that is pivotably connected to the frame. A seat stay is pivotably connected to a rearward end of the rocker arm and extends to the rearward end of the chain stay. The rearward ends of the seat stay and the chain stay are pivotably connected to rotate about a common axis.
Inventors: Colegrove; James (Lake Mills, WI), Howes; Dylan (Monona, WI), Gonzalez; Jose (Santa Clarita, CA)
Assignee: Trek Bicycle Corporation (Waterloo, WI)
Appl. No.: 11/735,816
Filed: April 16, 2007
Split Pivot
Vehicle suspension systems for seperated acceleration responses
Abstract
The invention relates to suspension systems comprising, in certain embodiments, a pivoting means concentric to a wheel rotation axis so that braking forces can be controlled by placement of an instant force center, and so that acceleration forces can be controlled by a swinging wheel link.
i thought the US patent runs by 1st use. the person who uses it first to conduct commerce is the rightful owner of the patent regardless to the patent registration issuing date. i guess either way treks pockets would be too deep to take on.
i thought the US patent runs by 1st use. the person who uses it first to conduct commerce is the rightful owner of the patent regardless to the patent registration issuing date. i guess either way treks pockets would be too deep to take on.
That I believe is one of the fundamental issues with legal systems in general, how much $$$ you have should not have an influence on the out come of a court case or make you too difficult to bring to justice.
Patents aint worth the paper they are written on, unless you have money to defend them.
and Ultimately, 99% of the world doesnt give a fart anyway
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Mountain Bike Reviews Forum
15.4M posts
515.2K members
Since 1990
A forum community dedicated to Mountain Bike owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about bike parts, components, deals, performance, modifications, classifieds, trails, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!