- Messages
- 2,946
- Reactions
- 5,007
I've had SIGs for decades and they're still my preferred carry, but I can't help but think Ron is dragging SIG down the wrong road and in another decade they'll be making the same survival decisions as Colt.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I know that patents take time to matriculate through the USPTOAlso mentioned the Springfield Hellcat has been on the market a couple of years, while SIG's patents were just awarded in March 2021.
It might be argued as an Ex Post Facto matter. Article I Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution prohibits Congress from passing ex post facto laws, but that provision has generally been applied in the context of criminal or civil sanctions imposed to punish persons for past acts.I know that patents take time to matriculate through the USPTO
Yup. Springfield sucks. Besides the M-1/M-14.Not surprised as Springfield hasn't done anything that wasn't almost a direct copy of someone else's design. Springfield is definitely not known as an innovative company.
Maybe, but not. This actually happens all the time. The patent is in effect from the date of filing (in USA) once it is granted. This scenario plays out all the time. If that's what happened.Without further details of the claims, it's reasonable to presume this might be part of the defense, if infringement had occurred.
Why aren't they suing SCCY over the very concept? In 1995, the American Rifleman did a comparo of the Kel-Tec and the gen 1 Kahr. Why didn't Sig sue back then?As much as I enjoy my P365, I have a much older Kel-Tec P-11 that holds 10+1 in about the same size as the P365. True, the Sig is a much more refined animal and it's striker fired rather than hammer fired, but they are far from the first subcompact, double stack, 9mm. Everybody always acts like these kind of things never existed, but it is not a new idea, just their rendition, which I think Sig did a great job on. Suing Springfield seems a bit hypocritical to me.
The patent probably isn't on "small magazines that hold 10"Why didn't Sig sue back then?
Just what we need when demand is outstripping supply: internecine warfare. What's with these Euro-snobs anyway? Gaston Glock sues S&W over its 'Chinese' copy. Sig sues Springfield over a feature that was actually invented and patented by Elbert Searle at Savage arms in 1905! Surely, the Searle family should sue all double-stack makers, if only to get great-grandpa's name stamped on the mags.The patent probably isn't on "small magazines that hold 10"
Springfield makes some decent and some fine 1911's - for a long time.Yup. Springfield sucks. Besides the M-1/M-14.
Springfield makes some decent and some fine 1911's - for a long time.
About time they caught up"Oh yeah?"
Springfield replies by introducing 15 round Hellcat magazine.
I hope more of these micro gats follow making 15rnds. Hey at least the Springfield one is only $39.99 vs SIGs $49.99 I paid for 15rnds.Regarding the lawsuit: "Oh yeah?"
Springfield replies by introducing 15 round Hellcat magazine.
Rifles had staggered mags for a while now. This patent doesn't seem to be about the staggered mag as such, it's claimed (AFAICT) to be an invention that improves the staggered stack magazine.Didn't one of the ComBloc handguns come with the double stack to single stack magazine, way back in the 1950s?