Help us beat the patent infringement lawsuit

As most of you know, since April I have been fighting a patent lawsuit in federal court. The lawsuit was filed by SB Tactical, a company that makes a product that, like the Blade, attaches to an AR buffer tube.

Without boring you with the details, the lawsuit is a design patent infringement lawsuit. I am told that the test for design patent infringement is whether an ordinary observer would think the patented design and the Blade look so similar that it’s confusing.

My attorney created these composite images showing the design patent drawings overlaid on the Blade. What do you think?

So what do you think? Are the patent drawings and the Blade so similar that you’re confused? Personally, every time I look at these drawings I am amazed that this lawsuit even exists.

Although my attorney says we don’t need it, one way we can show the court how different the patent and the Blade are is by comparing the patent to earlier products. For example, the Plaintiff thinks that Fig. 5 looks like my product. But Fig. 5 looks at least as much like an M4 stock:

Since the patent drawings look like an M4 stock, which has been around for many years, the Plaintiff’s claim is moot.

So here’s where you come in. If you would like to help us fight this lawsuit, we welcome your input. Please send photos of gun parts that look like the patent drawings to this email address: shockwave_f7fd@sendtodropbox.com. The photos have to be older than January 28, 2013. It’s helpful if you can describe the photo or where you found it. And if you could share this blog post on forums and social media, we would be very grateful.

Thank you for your continued support of Shockwave.

Thank you and God Bless,
Marty Ewer

3 thoughts on “Help us beat the patent infringement lawsuit

  1. I don’t see why Colt hasn’t sued them for what is an obvious ripoff of their M4A1 stock. This is Colt we are talking about. They sued Bushmaster over the idea that they alone owned the rights to the capital letter M and the number 4!

  2. I don’t see the relation in the two. They are both two different products with different outlines even do they serve the same purpose.

    After all 75% of inventions are re-inventions of a previous existing one with a modified or altered design. what is their deal with this lawsuit? So does this means that whoever invented the “carriage” or “wagon” should have sued the Karl Benz (first inventor of the automobile with combustion) because he put an engine on a wagon with 4 wheels?? Hey mister, I was the first one to invented the box with 4 wheels said the Cowboy I’m gonna sue you for infringements on similarity of the 4 wheel design!! This lawsuit is stupid and a waste of everyone’s time and resources.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *