Articles
   
       
Pics/Video
       
Wake 101
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WakeWorld Home
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Boats, Accessories & Tow Vehicles

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old     (07launch22ssv)      Join Date: Feb 2007       06-30-2015, 3:00 PM Reply   
http://www.boatingindustry.com/news/...t-mastercraft/
Old     (slidin_out)      Join Date: Apr 2010       06-30-2015, 4:31 PM Reply   
Just watched the Surf Gate video and NXT2 video. They take two different approaches to manipulating the wave. I can see where Nautique's system is somewhat similar but don't see it on the Mastercrafts.
Old     (cbarguy1)      Join Date: Dec 2012       06-30-2015, 5:00 PM Reply   
I'm with you. The Malibu patent must be pretty broad.
Old     (Shockthis)      Join Date: May 2014       06-30-2015, 5:49 PM Reply   
Will not ever consider buying a malibu because of this. To bad it is a sad time we live in.
Old     (scuba_steve)      Join Date: Oct 2013       06-30-2015, 5:54 PM Reply   
I havent looked into the patent myself but from reading the following threads on The Malibu Crew and Master Craft Team Talk here are a few things others have said.

The Malibu Crew

http://www.themalibucrew.com/forums/...oing-after-mc/

Master Craft Team Talk

http://www.mastercraft.com/teamtalk/...ad.php?t=68127

The patent in questions can be view here - https://www.google.com/patents/US8578873

The full lawsuit writeup - http://www.boatingindustry.com/wp-co...6713058359.pdf


The biggest part of the patent wording that I can tell from the other threads is the following

""The 873 Patent provides a system for generating a surf wake behind a watercraft travelling through the water.""

This must be the ground that Malibu is trying to stand on saying that the Gen 2 Tabs violate the patent.
Old     (King12)      Join Date: Jul 2012       06-30-2015, 6:19 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shockthis View Post
Will not ever consider buying a malibu because of this. To bad it is a sad time we live in.

Doesn't seem like a great reason to never consider a whole brand. Are you also knocking out correct craft for the whole patenting any tow tower thing?
Old     (feral)      Join Date: Oct 2011       06-30-2015, 7:20 PM Reply   
"Malibu prays for judgment against MasterCraft"

a system that even allows such a case to go to court is just broken.

If you change the words you could easily argue that Reginald Boat (the inventor of the boat) and his linear descendants should sue Malibu (and any other manufacturer) for trying to gain market share in BOATS

"This technology modifies the wake formed by a boat travelling through water, which, in part, creates a better quality surf wake and enables users to surf on either side of the boat’s wake at the push of a button"

this technology modifies the world by creating a boat which travels through water, which in part, creates a better quality of life enabling users to travel through water without the skill to walk on water

after that case has been heard Clarence Carpet could follow the precendent suing anyone who improves his product (particularly in a boat sense whereby one manufacturer is rumoured to have invented waterproof carpet (to protect their market share) and another apparently uses press studs in some yet to be dertmined manner hence underming the Carpet family legacy.

Cyril Seat probably doesn't have much of a case as the bum has dropped out of that market but Rodney Rack, Bill Bung and Vera Vinyl (and their linear descendants) are all encouraged to join the class action. Fergus Fibreglass has apparently already attempted action but did not register his patent correctly and (spelling error) and is now left "praying for a judgement".

of course the bigger worry that Malibu will be pursuing in the future is that putting you foot in the water "modifies the wake formed by a boat travelling through water" and unless we have special dispensation from Malibu we must all register before putting a foot in the water and pay a royalty to Malibu each time we modify the wake,
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       06-30-2015, 8:35 PM Reply   
I see it Less & Less about Brand X suing Brand Y to Me its not about One brand being Greedy or another Copying somthing, when it come to How these things end up in court. You wonder "How the hell did this ever get b4 a Judge" I do work in Buildings all up and down the Bay Aera. Some of the Most lavish well appointed office's and buildings are FULL top to bottom with patten Lawyers. I could totally see how a large company like Malibu & Natique have lawyers just waiting to Sue and more importantly BILL $$$$ hrs and go to trial. In some ways they are glorified Ambulance Chaser's "Better Call Saul"
Old     (Froggy)      Join Date: Nov 2013       07-01-2015, 6:54 AM Reply   
Next up Supra , Moomba , MB, Tige and any other boat that makes a wake?
Old     (allzway)      Join Date: Feb 2014       07-01-2015, 7:54 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Froggy View Post
Next up Supra , Moomba , MB, Tige and any other boat that makes a wake?
Guaranteed.. go after the biggest fish first, then go after the smaller ones.
Old     (MalibuGold)      Join Date: Oct 2014       07-01-2015, 8:11 AM Reply   
Feral - Your reply is a bit silly IMO. Malibu came up with a surf system and they want people to pay for the rights to use something even if similar, it was still their idea. Just like when towers came out there are still royalties being paid, even though some were a little different. It's not fair for someone to invent something and then someone else to barely change it and then market it as their idea. My $.02 your comparisons don't hold water.
Old     (Rusty)      Join Date: Mar 2014       07-01-2015, 8:26 AM Reply   
The timing of this announcement is definitely a little interesting with MC recently filing an IPO. Malibu had a long time to bring this lawsuit but now it's announced right when MC is filing... Seems pretty coincidental to me, doubt MC is very happy at all with this timing.
Old     (Nordicron)      Join Date: Aug 2011       07-01-2015, 10:07 AM Reply   
I don't know, I think BU has a case. All boat manufactures since BU have jumped on the idea of putting a device on their boat that would make it a wakesurf wave. Malibu was first to market it's tabs as a dynamic devise that changes wave shape and allows switching and all that Jaz. Yes MC had tabs, but these tabs were nothing more than a couple stock lenco tabs not the modified giant flappers they have become since surf gates.
Old     (all2matt)      Join Date: Apr 2015       07-01-2015, 11:59 AM Reply   
I guess Im still confused how malibu won vs nautique. those are 2 very very different designs. is it because they are both mounted on the back of a boat? to me they are like comparing a water ski and wakeboard and saying they are the same becuase they both ride on water? just weird.
and the MC tabs are just that trim tabs that have been on boats for how long? 20, 40, 100 yrs ago. UH OH they are used on airplanes I guess malibu should sue BOEING too. per wikipedia "Trim tabs are most found on cruisers, sport fishing boats and center console boats ranging from 20 feet and up" I guess malibu should go after eveyone that puts them on their boat, plane, etc.....
Old     (denverd1)      Join Date: May 2004       07-01-2015, 12:10 PM Reply   
when filling a patent, you file for the broadest use possible and leave even more open to interpretation. Protecting your IP is the right thing to do, no matter who agrees with it.

Matt, yes the patent is that broad
http://www.google.com/patents/US8539897
Old     (denverd1)      Join Date: May 2004       07-01-2015, 12:22 PM Reply   
You're all acting like they should play fair in the playground. Business is war and Malibu is kicking ass right now.
Old     (JJwake)      Join Date: May 2014       07-01-2015, 2:35 PM Reply   
I recall using trim tabs on a 2011 mastercraft to help improve the surf wake. Were they patented? I'm sure Leno or bennett marine has a patent out there somewhere. Were they patented for "surfing", doubtful.
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       07-01-2015, 2:40 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJwake View Post
I recall using trim tabs on a 2011 mastercraft to help improve the surf wake. Were they patented? I'm sure Leno or bennett marine has a patent out there somewhere. Were they patented for "surfing", doubtful.
Sanger was using them (ala MC Gen 1) as early as 2008.
Old     (MattieK27)      Join Date: Mar 2010       07-01-2015, 3:06 PM Reply   
Malibu is reaching for sure, but depending on the patent interpretation and legal teams, it might pay off for them.

I will tell you one thing though. Regardless if you hate Malibu, are the biggest 'Bu fanboy alive, or anywhere in between, Malibu winning this suit is bad for the towboat industry. Because if they win this one against MC, they have opened the door to be able to successfully sue EVERY boat manufacturer that uses ANY type of device to create a surf wake. Any guess who pays for the royalties that every boat company will have to pay Malibu? That's right, us, the boat buyers...
Old     (behindtheboat)      Join Date: Aug 2006       07-01-2015, 3:49 PM Reply   
So if you invent something, and patent it, you're cool with people copying and slightly modifying it and selling it as their own?
Old     (denverd1)      Join Date: May 2004       07-01-2015, 3:59 PM Reply   
Its as though you guys don't understand what a patent is or why you would protect your intellectual property.

Boat prices have more than doubled in the last 15 years. And we've had 1 lawsuit that I'm aware of. Helluva lot more going on with inboards than Bu vs CC
Old     (supersonicmi)      Join Date: Sep 2005       07-01-2015, 4:01 PM Reply   
in order to claim someone is copying you it means you actually have to invent something... trims tabs have been around forever and that in effect what we are talking about... the mastercraft surf system is nothing like surfgate...

the whole thing is out of control and the system is broken... someone should just patent "a hull designed to produce a wake for watersports" and claim everyone else owes them...
Old     (denverd1)      Join Date: May 2004       07-01-2015, 4:04 PM Reply   
trim tabs were not used on the port side to produce a better wave on the starboard -- as the patent clearly states.
Old     (MattieK27)      Join Date: Mar 2010       07-01-2015, 4:05 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by behindtheboat View Post
So if you invent something, and patent it, you're cool with people copying and slightly modifying it and selling it as their own?
Are you saying Mastercrafts tabs, which predate surfgate by the way, is a copy of surfgate and a slight modification? Does the MC system even work on the theory of delayed convergence???

Have you seen surfgate and MC's surf tabs? Yea, slight modification....

Quote:
Originally Posted by denverd1 View Post
Its as though you guys don't understand what a patent is or why you would protect your intellectual property.

Boat prices have more than doubled in the last 15 years. And we've had 1 lawsuit that I'm aware of. Helluva lot more going on with inboards than Bu vs CC
Protecting intellectual property and over-reaching a patent are two different things. There have been plenty of law suits in the tow boat industry, and you can thank a ridiculous patent Nautique originally had on towers for added cost on 4-point towers for years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by supersonicmi View Post
in order to claim someone is copying you it means you actually have to invent something... trims tabs have been around forever and that in effect what we are talking about... the mastercraft surf system is nothing like surfgate...

the whole thing is out of control and the system is broken... someone should just patent "a hull designed to produce a wake for watersports" and claim everyone else owes them...
Bingo

Last edited by MattieK27; 07-01-2015 at 4:10 PM.
Old     (tonyv420)      Join Date: Jul 2007       07-01-2015, 4:14 PM Reply   
surf systems suck anyways LOL list your damn boat and you will get a better wave hands down, plus use less gas......I could care less who sues who, and if you have to have a system, make your own, it wouldn't be that hard to copy any of these systems out there. I doubt BU would come after the average joe for making their own.
Old     (supersonicmi)      Join Date: Sep 2005       07-01-2015, 4:23 PM Reply   
trim tabs have been used forever for many purposes such as to even out the distribution of the vessel, which in effect, manipulates the wake behind it... so in essence this is not a new concept at all... the only part that is new is the surfing aspect, the physics and water dynamics have been around for a looong time...so "new application of old technology" is even a stretch. what we are really talking about is "old application of old technology for a new purpose" which is totally common place in the world.

to me, it seems like a travesty that the patent was granted in what appears to be such vague fashion. though I will say it is smart of Malibu to be pushing the limits of the patent, so not knocking them for that... if I were them I would do the same
Old     (MattieK27)      Join Date: Mar 2010       07-01-2015, 4:28 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by supersonicmi View Post
trim tabs have been used forever for many purposes such as to even out the distribution of the vessel, which in effect, manipulates the wake behind it... so in essence this is not a new concept at all... the only part that is new is the surfing aspect, the physics and water dynamics have been around for a looong time...so "new application of old technology" is even a stretch. what we are really talking about is "old application of old technology for a new purpose" which is totally common place in the world.

to me, it seems like a travesty that the patent was granted in what appears to be such vague fashion. though I will say it is smart of Malibu to be pushing the limits of the patent, so not knocking them for that... if I were them I would do the same
My take on it as well. After reading through the claim

http://www.boatingindustry.com/wp-co...6713058359.pdf (for those that havent read it)

it seems its basis is the idea that Mastercraft has a system that creates a surf wake, it doesn't even matter how they create the wake. From the claim, "The 873 Patent provides a system for generating a surf wake behind a watercraft travelling through the water." How the surf wake is created is not emphasized; any system that generates a surf wake could be contested.

Again, my concern is this opens the door for Malibu to sue everyone. Vague and ridiculous, especially considering others had systems to produce a surf wake that predate the surfgate patent.

Last edited by MattieK27; 07-01-2015 at 4:33 PM.
Old     (JJwake)      Join Date: May 2014       07-01-2015, 4:39 PM Reply   
Wouldn't a ballast system fall under- a system that generates a surf wake behind a watercraft?

Anyways, If I IPO'd at a ridiculous value, I too, would have money to spend on lawsuits. Gotta keep those investors happy
Old     (supersonicmi)      Join Date: Sep 2005       07-01-2015, 4:43 PM Reply   
don't give them any ideas, haha. they might be coming after everyone's ballast systems now too
Old     (feral)      Join Date: Oct 2011       07-01-2015, 5:02 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by MalibuGold View Post
Feral - Your reply is a bit silly IMO. Malibu came up with a surf system and they want people to pay for the rights to use something even if similar, it was still their idea. Just like when towers came out there are still royalties being paid, even though some were a little different. It's not fair for someone to invent something and then someone else to barely change it and then market it as their idea. My $.02 your comparisons don't hold water.
Fair enough. Your call.
The comparisons are meant to be broad but when you read into it they are not suing over a copy of the surf gate, they are claiming its a device that alters the wake that they have rights too and I beleive that is far to broad to be fair.

My 2006 boat has a cab plate that altered the wake, there are plenty of old Skool boats with plates and devices (even hull design which alters the wake) and I don't think it should be patentable - the method or device you use to alter tha wake may be different but then again how do you deal with the fact that trim tabs have been around for many decades.

IMHO a Malibu type claim represents an unfair market distortion (limiting competition) which is not commensurate with the "IP" or "new knowledge" their version offered, particularly when they refuse to offer a retrofit or after market version. They are basically saying unless you buy a new Malibu from us you can't use it.
Old     (TTyler89)      Join Date: Jun 2015       07-01-2015, 5:27 PM Reply   
I bet if they advertise it as wake attitude adjustment system, Malibu won't have a case.
Old     (07launch22ssv)      Join Date: Feb 2007       07-02-2015, 1:26 PM Reply   
Mastercraft response.......



http://www.boatingindustry.com/news/...u-patent-suit/
Old     (scuba_steve)      Join Date: Oct 2013       07-02-2015, 2:18 PM Reply   
For the lazy..

"It is our general policy not to comment in detail on litigation matters. However, MasterCraft strongly denies the allegations made in the lawsuit filed by Malibu Boats, LLC, on June 29, 2015. We do not believe that Malibu’s claims have merit and we intend to defend the company vigorously against these claims. MasterCraft is an award-winning leader in innovation, a fact our customers, dealers and industry know very well.”

Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 6:47 PM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2016 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us