Tsunami & DCC/Sound Impact of MTH Lawsuit

[AntonioFP45]

[:(!]For everyone concerned about DCC/Sound systems the following is a letter that I received from Mr. Bruce Petrarca at Litchfield Station:
It is unfortunate that QSI and Soundtraxx have been impacted.

From Bruce Petrarca; Litchfiled Station
Here's the status: I was talking to Nancy at Soundtraxx about 10 days ago and she said there was no real (update) news.

I have no quarrel with anybody protecting what they invent. As an engineer, I have a MAJOR hack with (MTH) mincing words to try to patent someting which somebody else created and brought to commmercial practice years before.

What that means to me is: MTH has issued a "cease and desist" letter to and has sued QSI. QSI has disabled BEMF (back emf) motor control in systems they are shipping. MTH has sent registered letters to Soundtraxx, Digitrax, etc. with copies of their patents and a statement that MTH has "no interest" in licensing the patented technology. No existing Soundtraxx products are impacted, but the Tsumami as shown in September and Surroundtraxx would infringe on the patent "as issued".

What I believe the folks at Soundtraxx are doing (and this is just a guess on my part) is working (I believe, in concert with others in the DCC world) with lawyers trying to iron out what portions of the patent are defensible and what were in the public domain as a result of prior art. As I understand it, Soundtraxx could have shipped the Tsunami in December, as promised, by disabling the BEMF motor control, like QSI (Broadway LImited) has done. They (Soundtraxx) have taken a hit in their pocketbook to provide the best product they can design with the current hardware technology. I applaud that as loudly as I "BOO" MTH!
The Bi-Directional communications portion of the patent, if upheld, could have a major impact on Digitrax' Transponding, the NMRA standard, Soundtraxx and Lenz in the USA.

NCE's take on this is interesting: Jim has a modification for the PowerHouse Pro System to access F13 and F14 (used by the Tsunami) and can put it into production (and retrofit ProCabs) at any time. He also had a "heads up" and held back on BEMF decoders knowing this was coming. He also has modifications for his systems which will support the NMRA Bi-directional communication standard when that gets ironed out. Also, he might bow to what AJ has asked and support Digitrax Transponding, as JIm contends that both systems can be functional as the same time!

I presume you are of of 350 members on my newsletter group. I'll post any real news there as I get it! If not, send a blank e-mail to
[e-mail] I have many thousands of dollars worth of Tsunamis and almost as much installation business held up on this.

My mantra: DBFM - Don't Buy from MIke!

Thanks for supporting my little enterprise. Bruce Petrarca
www.LitcfieldStation.com Arizona, USA
Authorized dealer for Digitrax, Lenz, NCE, Soundtraxx, and TCS.
Your DCC installed here!

As I've said on another thread, [8D]this is why I prefer Litchfield Station over Tony's Trains (not knocking Tony Trains Xchange though) as Bruce stays up to date as well as perform top notch dcc decoder installations. I've written an e-mail to MTH and "respectfully" let him know the frustrations many of us are experiencing. [V][#dots] Those of you waiting for the Tsunami or intending to purchase a Broadway locomotive should do the same! Let's not lose hope or get too impatient! This frustrating situation will be resolved. How many of you all are planning on dcc/sound or planning to purchase Broadway locomotives? I'm looking foward to the SD40-2 that's supposed to be coming later this year. I also want the Tsunami for several of my H.O diesel EMD and GE locomotives.

[RhB_HJ]

Thanks for the update!

That MTH get's away (or tries to) with this kind of garbage is at least in part a result of a completely screwy USA Patent law.

As far as I know in Europe it is the applicant's burden to prove that his/her gizmo is patentable. Of course in the USA you can patent just about anything without being bothered to prove that it is absolutely unique.
Actually that isn't a big surprise, come to think of it it is perfectly logical, how else would one keep all those lawyers busy!? [}:)][}:)][}:)][}:)][:(!][:(!] Only in the USA you say? Thank God for that!

BTW from what I've read so far the European DCC mfgs just shrug and put it down to one more crazy American idea. After all anyone with more than 10 years of electronics experience knows that whatever MTH holds a USA patent on is in the public domain.

[Anonymous]

Actually US patent law dictates that you must prove it is totally unique, and since this can take years to do, they allow the copywriting of said item until the patent is awarded. look at the underside of any electronic item and you'll see it says "Patent Pending", but it will be copywrited.

A US patent is a lifetime deal, a copywrite is only good for 10 years. after that the competition can make the item without impunity. And if i've been reading this right for the last few weeks, MTH is appling for a patent over 10 years after supoosidly making the item. the best they can possibly get is a copywrite on any New versions of said product. Current version will still be able to be manufacvtured by the competition, but they'll be barred from producing any enhancements to it. That is if the Judge rules in MTH's favor. The judge could rule against them, citing that the product is public domain since it's already in wide use.

Jay

[Anonymous]

NTDN...

Thanks for the legal explanation. Very informative approach to the situation.

The frightening part of this issue is that MTH does not appear to want to "license" the technology if they do win. I mean, politically speaking. Most of the other companies typically decide to join rather than fight if there is a close call and licensing is possible. But the hard line that MTH is taking bodes a dark cloud on the horizon if they win. As a result, the other companies cannot make an offer to settle this and move on, if they do not fight, we will not be able to buy Surroundtraxx, etc.

Why? Because if MTH wins the patent, the remaining companies will intentionally tighten up their hold on their patents and refuse licensing for THEIR side of the technology. (If they refuse MTH, they will technically have to refuse most if not all license requests.)

I am all for people making a living or a profit on their ideas, it's how we got to where we are. In fact, the worst monopolies and power grabbers in our country were after all the coal and railroad industries. If you look at history, they are cited as the main reasons we have such tight patent and anti-monopoly laws on the books. (And this is after all, the industry we emulate.)

The downside is that when these companies work against each other, they lock up the market for years. So, hold on tight and get ready for the fallout.

[nfmisso]

QUOTE: Originally posted by NTDN

A US patent is a lifetime deal, a copywrite is only good for 10 years

Jay;

Neither of the above statements is true, please see:
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/index.html#ptsc
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/index.html#copyright

Also see: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=0&p=1&f=S&l=50&Query=IN%2FNigel+AND+IN%2FMisso&d=ptxt
[:D]

[RhB_HJ]

Nigel,

Thanks for the links!

QUOTE: In order for an invention to be patentable it must be new as defined in the patent law, which provides that an invention cannot be patented if: “(a) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for patent,” or “(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country more than one year prior to the application for patent in the United States . . .”

Reading the above would make me think that MTH's chances are not so good.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone have the patent number? I would be interested in reading it. Patents that have been granted are available online.

[nfmisso]

Here are all of the patents assigned to "Mike's Train House":

PAT. NO. Title
1 6,662,917 2 rail to 3 rail conversion apparatus for use in model trains
2 6,655,640 Control, sound, and operating system for model trains
3 6,619,594 Control, sound, and operating system for model trains
4 6,604,641 Low-power electrically operated coupler
5 6,491,263 Power supply unit and rail switching mechanism for model track layouts
6 6,457,681 Control, sound, and operating system for model trains
7 6,281,606 Plural output electric train control station
8 6,019,289 Modular track segment for model railroad track and electrical accessory therefor

And the link if you want to read them:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=Mike%27s+Train+House&FIELD1=ASNM&co1=AND&TERM2=&FIELD2=&d=ptxt

Okay, I guess that is too long; go here http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/search-adv.htm and put this in the Query box:

AN/"Mikes Train House"

INCLUDING the quotes.

[johncolley]

Comrade Reguspatoff strikes again! Seriously I hope they come to their senses and see how they are just hurting themselves. I love my BLI E-7 and will get my second unit the end of the month. I am anxiously looking for the sw-2's coming out in March, too. I can't wait for them to come out with FT's or F-3's. Sound is the way of the future and it really makes you want to operate realistically. johncolley tholcapn sailnrail

[Anonymous]

Talk about Vague.... You would think reading the abstracts for the three patentents concerning Control, sound, and operating system for model trains, that MTH invented model railroading and DCC all by themselves.... Not to mention the detail of the patents reading like NMRA Standards for DCC, or the entire idea for soundtraxx in general.

HERES THE QUOTE from the following link http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=/netahtml/search-adv.htm&r=6&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=ptxt&S1=('Mikes+Train+House'.ASNM.)&OS=AN/"Mikes+Train+House"&RS=AN/"Mikes+Train+House" :

"Abstract
A model train operating, sound and control system provides a user with increased operating realism. A novel remote control communication capability between the user and the model trains includes a handheld remote control on which various commands may be entered, and a Track Interface Unit that retrieves and processes the commands. The Track Interface Unit converts the commands to modulated signals (preferably spread spectrum signals) which are sent down the track rails. The model train picks up the modulated signals, retrieves the entered command, and executes it through use of a processor and associated control and driver circuitry. A speed control circuit located inside the model train is capable of continuously monitoring the operating speed of the train and making adjustments to a motor drive circuit. Circuitry is connected to the Track Interface Unit to an external source, such as a computer, CD player, or other sound source, so that real-time sounds stream down the model train tracks for playing through the speakers located in the model train. Coupler designs and circuits, as well as a smoke unit, can also be used with the model train system. "

[swknox]

Well all I can say as being new to large scale I will not be sending any of my money to MTH for any of thier products! If they want to do something as foolish as this not to mention the fallout from this no matter who wins and how bad it will hurt us the customers and the vendors than they don't desserve my money to help them fight in court. I hope some of you are with me on this... I just hope they don't find out who I am and come after me!!![tdn][#oops][banghead]

[Anonymous]

It's hard to believe that someone can enforce a patent that increases operating realism of a model train, when by defenition a "model train" is a small scale reproduction that should freely include what the large scale versions already have, such as motion control, sound, smoke, lights and couplers. They can enforce a patent that creates this in a unique way, but there are many ways to do this and they can't nail down every one.

[Anonymous]

I really have nothing more to add. I just wanted to point out that this is running in two threads. (http://www.trains.com/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=11001)

I wanted to copy a comment from Big_Boy_4005, that shows this is evidently not a new trend for MTH...

Quote:
" have ignored this topic for a while now, not knowing what a Tsunami was in model railroading terms ( in Japaneese, its a tidal wave). Now that I have read it, I find it very interesting, not that I have any use for the product, but because I have some similar feelings about MTH.

I am a 3rail O modeler, and have heard mention of legal action being taken with regard to MTH and DCC, but nobody on that side of the tracks knew the details. This explains alot.

My gripe with MTH is really at the root of your gripe with MTH. Lionel developed their TMCC system years before Mike patented his DCS system. The way I see it, if Mike had acccepted Lionel licensing terms in the first place, none of this would be happening. I don't know if Mike was already in the process of developing DCS when Lionel made the TMCC license available, but either way, the DCS system has been the source of a great deal of contraversy in the 3 rail world, and now it has spilled over to the 2 rail world."

[Anonymous]

I'm reading this topic for the first time, although I did see something reguarding it on the BLI website, but wasn't sure what it was about. Looks as if Mike might be digging his own grave over this one. My guess is he is after licensing fees, which in turn increases the price for you and me. I'll bet though with the waves made already, he will hurt his future business.