Found a copy of Malibu's suit on the NSS system

[archcityblues]

http://www.scribd.com/doc/181356257/...at-Company-pdf

With my legal background, I would only assume a counter is in progress from the Nautique side.

[scottb7]

http://www.google.com/patents/US8539897

http://www.google.com/patents/US8534214

[JamesHawk101]

This is all crap. Malibu needs to think about improving the sport not getting money from Nautique or whatever.

[shag]

Whatever happened to all the other companies that took the 'wakeboard tower' design.... I thought Correct Craft patented that..

[scottb7]

I am pretty sure Nautique is up for the challenge. No worries.

[gride]

all those other companies paid nautique.

[AirTool]

all those other companies paid nautique.

Generally correct. I priced a new _________ ( too ashamed to say it ) and the tower license fee was included on the build sheet / window sticker.

[axeman]

I'm not a lawyer but the 897 patent consistently references "positioning the flap relative to a longitudinal axis" which if I'm not mistaken the NSS does not infringe on since it's relative to the vertical axis. Thoughts? Wonder how this will all turn out.

[AirTool]

I'm not a lawyer but the 897 patent consistently references "positioning the flap relative to a longitudinal axis" which if I'm not mistaken the NSS does not infringe on since it's relative to the vertical axis. Thoughts? Wonder how this will all turn out.

Over specifying can provide dangerous cracks.

I saw a case one time where a part was made from plastic and there was a note about the benefits from it being plastic and the part could not be made from metal. A competitor made it from metal and got away with it.

[jbkriss]

IMO, they all use the same technology that's been around for years- trim tabs (Lenco)... though NSS doesn't use a traditional Lenco tab, the big 3 all use Lenco actuators. MC was the first one to market with a surf specific system, all Malibu did was flip it on its side. IDK, just seems like a claim against Malibu by MC would have more merit than Malibu's claim against CC.

[Zach@n3]

I think they can make it fly. The piece in the NSS system is by no means a flap by my understand of the definition. A flap moves in an up and down radius style motion on a common hinge (like a bird wing or a surf tab). The Nss plate is just that, an extendable plate. No hinges it just runs in and out on a track. I think if the two systems show up side by side in court any competent judge and jury would laugh at Malibu for accusations that the systems operate on the same premise. They do not. That would be like patenting a 4 stroke piston engine vs a Mazda rotory engine. They do the same thing but in different ways.

[AirTool]

.....That would be like patenting a 4 stroke piston engine vs a Mazda rotory engine. They do the same thing but in different ways.

Similar lawsuits are perhaps the reason we've ended up with both tacos and chalupas.

In the end, they both come out the same.

[scottb7]

Volvo could sue then? It would seem that NSS is same idea as the QL tabs just formed to hull. But how do we know what is going on behind the scenes? Maybe Nautique is paying a per click fee to Volvo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0glfycRhizU

[Zach@n3]

See, Mailbu stated somewhere in the documents that a flap used for modification of a surf wake. So the Volvo vs Nautique wouldn't matter because they don't use the pieces to get the same result(unless they stated it). If Malibu didn't specify for modification of surf wake they would have been filing a suit against everyone who has ever made a hinged trim tab. Don't remember the exact wording.

[iamcdn]

Countersuit
http://www.scribd.com/doc/181672342/...libu-Boats-pdf