Full Version: The "Cart" before The Horse?
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#36]
14 Apr 2006
To: RALLYGUY (RALLYGUY1) [#35] 14 Apr 2006
That's the way I see it. There will be a deal hammered out, possibly before the TOG vs. ST case gets to court.
Depending on how strong TOG's position is, I don't know if they'd settle for becoming another Tropical Graphics distributor.
I also don't see the ST/TG alliance wanting to see a company selling ink for less than theirs.
The outcome will be interesting.
From: RALLYGUY (RALLYGUY1) [#37]
14 Apr 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#36] 14 Apr 2006
Alliance???? From my perspective it was a takeover....Absorbtion might be a better word.
I've started getting bills from SG the last time I ordered, and some of TG's phone extensions are answered as SG technologies now ........... :(
I almost was able to disconnect myself from the whole thing there for a while........................... Sigh........
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#38]
14 Apr 2006
To: RALLYGUY (RALLYGUY1) [#37] 14 Apr 2006
I don't know what kind of deal Paul hammered out with Sawgrass, but I doubt he did (or will) walk away empty-handed.
Even if there were financial damages paid, (or being paid), at some point those payments will have been paid up and as long as Sawgrass upholds their patents, Paul will remain an ardent cheerleader for Sawgrass.
From: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#39]
14 Apr 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#38] 14 Apr 2006
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#40]
14 Apr 2006
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#39] 14 Apr 2006
I imagine Paul had choices, but not many.
We'll never know what those choices were, if any, or what long-term ramifications they'll have.
Paul sees these posts, but I'm sure he's not at liberty to comment and I've never heard any of the details privately.
From: LaZerDude (C_BURKE) [#41]
14 Apr 2006
To: ALL
From: UncleSteve [#42]
14 Apr 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#34] 14 Apr 2006
I sure wouldn't! I would be pushing to be exempt from the patents due to the "prior art"... the fact that they were producing/selling sublimation inks before SG was ever created.
That would leave any other wannabees to have to prove prior art also...
:S
From: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#43]
14 Apr 2006
To: UncleSteve [#42] 14 Apr 2006
Any validated claim of prior art would invalidate the patent by the fact that they were not the originator of the idea and the patent should not have been issued.
By the way, as the patent reads it was for a formulation of ink. How the Markman ruling said it was for inkjet sublimation ink in entirety is a mystery to me and other far more knowledgeable people.
From: UncleSteve [#44]
14 Apr 2006
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#43] 14 Apr 2006
Could we start with the possibility that the judge was a 2nd cousin to the sister-in-law of the uncle's current wife? (devil)
From: RALLYGUY (RALLYGUY1) [#45]
14 Apr 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#38] 14 Apr 2006
Well I have absolutely no knowledge of what was worked out for Tropical. Speculating about it Isn't going to do anything but waste our time, as no one will ever know...
What I do know is that If I were TOG, I would be busting my butt to get them to settle with me so I could cozy up to the feeding trough and get cart support from Epson as well.
Winning may be like losing if they aren't careful. They may dump the market value of inks creating a much lower profit margin situation for them than could be had, or be victims of the Epson suit if they do win the actual patent debate, but don't have the opportunity to partner with Epson like ST has done.
I guess time will tell.
Brian
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#46]
14 Apr 2006
To: RALLYGUY (RALLYGUY1) [#45] 15 Apr 2006
I agree with you on those points:
1) We don't know the details of the Sawgrass/Tropical Graphics situation.
2) Only time will tell how the TOG/ST lawsuit will shake out.
But the speculating is always interesting. :-)
From: UncleSteve [#47]
15 Apr 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#46] 15 Apr 2006
At any point during the original case they could have gone to the judge and thrown a wrench into the proceedings but opted to wait for the final decision to make their move.
Had they joined in with TG, the legal costs for both could have been less but, then again, the venue MAY have been tainted...
"Where did you meet your wife?"
"At the family reunion back in Carolina, of course!"
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#48]
15 Apr 2006
To: UncleSteve [#47] 15 Apr 2006
TOG's decision not to jump into the original proceedings, may have been, (as you suggest), because the case was being heard in South Carolina; Sawgrass' home turf.
One would hope, in legal matters, the venue wouldn't play a role in a Judge's decision.
Evidently, TOG must have felt the ruling was biased, which is why they chose to initiate their case vs. Sawgrass, which resulted in successfully bringing the matter before a Texas court.
From: UncleSteve [#49]
15 Apr 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#48] 15 Apr 2006
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#50]
15 Apr 2006
To: UncleSteve [#49] 15 Apr 2006
That theory would rely on TOG, knowing the outcome of the Sawgrass/Tropical Graphics case, beforehand.
From: Mick [#51]
15 Apr 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#50] 15 Apr 2006
From: UncleSteve [#52]
15 Apr 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#50] 15 Apr 2006
They didn't have to "know" it.. just have a strong sense of the way the case was going and act on instinct. The whole proceeding looked skewed from the start so no reason to interfere.... until it became a threat.
From: UncleSteve [#53]
15 Apr 2006
To: Mick [#51] 15 Apr 2006
You are correct about the way it started, but the final result looked very different to me.
It seems to have gone from "you are infringing on my ink formula" to "I own sublimation ink! Period!' At least that is what I took from the Markham ruling.
From: Chap (TROPICAL) [#54]
15 Apr 2006
To: UncleSteve [#42] 15 Apr 2006
Hi Steve
Steve you will find that any prior art is "Prior Art" and must have been in the public domain so if TOG do win there is no way of hiding the prior art it is open for everyone.
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#55]
15 Apr 2006
To: Chap (TROPICAL) [#54] 15 Apr 2006
In retrospect, do you think your case against Sawgrass, being held in South Carolina, had an affect; or was their case strong enough to prevail, regardless of venue?
As Steve suggests, I've seen the act of running sublimatable ink, through ink jet printers, referred to as the "Sawgrass Process" which makes claims beyond ink formulation.
That's the claim which TOG is challenging, so to compare TOG's action with your case, is apples to oranges, as Mick points out.
Show messages: 1-15 16-35 36-55 56-75