Dampp-Chaser Patent #6,133,519

[Avery]

Thanks, Roger.

Avery

At 10:38 AM 5/1/2007, you wrote:

>Dear List,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = 
>"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
>
>
>
>Avery has asked that I post to the list 
>regarding the Dampp-Chaser patent on the 
>undercover and the backside cover.  As a 
>manufacturer, we maintain a strong business 
>relationship with our local patent 
>attorneys.  When we come up with a new idea we 
>get their law firm involved.  They complete an 
>initial evaluation of potential 
>patentability.  If they make a positive 
>recommendation, we work with them to complete an 
>application.  They obviously use their “special” 
>terminology and illustrations that deliver a 
>document designed to meet a government patent 
>inspector’s expectations.  Then we enter into a 
>review and appeal process that after some (often 
>seemingly endless) period of time can result in 
>a patent being issued.  Sometimes we are told 
>that the idea is obvious and not patentable at 
>the end of this journey.  Costs are considerable 
>as the attorneys charge by the minute at a rate equivalent to $250 per hour.
>
>
>
>Patents are often drafted to include “anything 
>under the sun” type claims.  Then some claims 
>get rejected during the iterative review 
>process.  The patent as issued can then have 
>some inconsistencies within the document based 
>on these activities.  With regard to the patent 
>under discussion, I believe we had a long list 
>of materials for use as an undercover or 
>backside cover and tried to achieve maximum 
>material design freedom in the final document 
>subject to the judgments of the patent inspector.
>
>
>
>The Mylar was initially used on upright pianos, 
>but was never tried on a grand.  We feel that 
>our current material falls within the scope of 
>the patent as do most materials purchased at 
>fabric stores, but others may disagree.  We have 
>heard the argument that the patent was issued 
>for an obvious idea.  Indeed this topic is in 
>the news with a recent Supreme Court ruling 
>saying that too many patents have been issued 
>for obvious ideas.  With these changes in the 
>air, critics of our patent may have a means to 
>“reverse” it in the future


if they have the 
>time, energy and money to participate in the process.
>
>
>
>Kindly note we have not been pushy about the 
>patent.  In the numerous training programs we 
>conduct I simply mention the patent, explain 
>that we are not the patent police, and ask 
>technicians to do what they feel is right.
>
>
>
>Our intention was and is to develop a climate 
>control system that provides maximum benefit to 
>the piano.  I was skeptical of the undercover 
>benefit at first, but over the years I have seen 
>it improve system performance in many grand 
>installations.  In this regard, we are 
>considering making it standard equipment in the 
>grand systems sold in <?xml:namespace prefix = 
>st1 ns = 
>"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" 
>/>Europe.  I do appreciate the kind comments 
>about our product in this thread that has 
>certainly morphed from a data logger 
>discussion.  I also thank you for your support 
>of our organization over the years.
>
>
>
>Sincerely,
>
>
>
>Roger Wheelock, VP
>
>Dampp-Chaser Corporation
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:avery1 at houston.rr.com>Avery
>To: <mailto:pianotech at ptg.org>Pianotech List
>Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 11:21 PM
>Subject: Re: Dampp-Chaser Patent #6,133,519
>
>John & others,
>
>I just sent this to Roger Wheelock at Dampp-Chaser. Maybe he'll have something
>to say.
>
>Avery
>
>At 08:54 PM 4/30/2007, you wrote:
>>Paul,
>>
>>I looked at this last night. (www.uspto.gov) It appears to be the only
>>patent for a cover to be used in conjunction with a DC system. I
>>didn't look everywhere, but this was one of the three patents I found
>>for Dampp-Chaser Corp.
>>
>>Anyway, what this appears to be talking about is the older way of
>>doing it with the mylar type plastic material. I think I installed
>>only one of those, as it was right around the time that I started
>>working full-time as a piano tech.
>>
>>The undercover in use now is speaker fabric.
>>
>>There is a possibility that there might be a patent pending. Maybe
>>someone could contact Dampp-Chaser and find out. Or maybe someone from
>>there will comment here on the list.
>>
>>There are a number of us who want to abide by the law, and it would be
>>helpful to know exactly what that is.
>>
>>JF
>>
>>P.S. After reading the patent lingo, one thing I hope I never have to
>>become is a patent lawyer. Ugh!  :-)  No offense to any of you who
>>like that kind of thing.
>>
>>On 4/30/07, paul bruesch <tunergeek at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>I found the Dampp-Chaser's patent online:
>>>http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6133519.pdf
>>>(you might have to create an account to look at the pdf, for some darned
>>>reason)
>>>
>>>According to the abstract, the under/back cover patent is for a "...moisture
>>>impervious aperture free sheet...".  In the detail of the patent write-up,
>>>under "Background of the Invention" it specifies "MYLAR or felt" (caps
>>>theirs) "... having a plurality of apertures or holes..." (which, to my
>>>mind, contradicts the abstract portion... but then again I'm not a lawyer.)
>>>
>>>So, what sort of fabric/material is Dampp-Chaser's under/back cover made
>>>of?  I'm not a rocket scientist, nor even a acoustic engineer, heck, I'm not
>>>even an RPT, but the idea of Mylar back/under cover on a piano sounds to me
>>>like it would sound a bit bizarre. Wouldn't it?? And wouldn't felt mute and
>>>muffle the sound?  (see previous disclaimers regarding my qualifications)
>>>
>>>I wonder what a "plurality of apertures or holes" means... several holes
>>>and/or apertures in the cover, or is that phrase intended to include an open
>>>weave like speaker cloth, being what it sounds like many techs are using.
>>>An open weave certainly has a "plurality of holes," but it would make a lot
>>>more better sense to say "open weave fabric."
>>>
>>>Please understand that I'm not trying to get around anyone's patent, or
>>>infringe on same... when the time comes I'll order the DC cover simply for
>>>the convenience of it, if for no other reason. My curiosity is piqued about
>>>this patent for a new way to use a piece of cloth... and I'd just like to
>>>understand it better. Judging from the amount of traffic generated by this
>>>topic, I don't think I'm alone.
>>>
>>>Paul Bruesch
>>>Computer Geek and PTG Associate, who typically plays by the rules but wants
>>>to understand them. And I don't run with scissors.
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech/attachments/20070501/995be933/attachment.html