Ouch. I would think some sort of royalty aggreement will be made.
Might want to buy them up now just in case though.
That can't be good
you missed 2 key phrases
first stage of patent dispute
The ruling is subject to review by the ITC
Last edited by TroyBoy30; 08-06-2015 at 07:09 AM.
I've followed this a little bit. Hard to tell what Navico and Johnson Outdoors agreed to when they settled, but it seemed impossible to me that Garmin wasn't infringing someplace either on a patent or an exclusive license.
Navico has filed an almost identical complaint against Garmin which was rejected recently. A similar complaint against Raymarine was settled. Navico also sued Garmin a few years ago after Garmin raided their engineering staff and hired the three named inventors of Navico's SS patents.
Last edited by CatFan; 08-06-2015 at 06:44 AM.
If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don't have integrity,
nothing else matters.
This is old news. If you notice the date in this article is May. This will be tied up in appeals for no telling how long and an out of court settlement will be reached.
Rick Collis
903-473-8820
Ya but if a cease and desist order has been issued by the Judge, that is immediate I believe.
"A cease and desist order has also been issued prohibiting Garmin from selling any infringing products from its inventory. The ruling is subject to review by the ITC. - See more at: http://www.angling-international.com/johnson-outdoors-wins-first-stage-of-patent-dispute/#sthash.UE3ciJVV.dpuf"
It's international timestamp. Which occurred yesterdayOriginally Posted by Rick Collis
look into apple vs samsung cease and desist orders over the last 4-5 years. they never have to stop selling or importing
I'm confused. So yesterday, internationally, was May 8th?
SE Kansas grass grower
ROCK CHALK
The biggest difference I see in this case and the one against Lowrance is that Lowrance worked out an agreement with Humminbird prior to the case being decided. We don't know what it cost them to settle but with this case farther along I would expect it to cost Garmin more to settle since Humminbird is in such a strong position at this time. They could hold out until the ITC rules. If they do and they lose there too it will cost them big bucks.
Garmin press release on July 14:
Garmin® to Appeal ITC Judgment | Garmin Newsroom
Garmin Pro Team
If you read the case, Johnson Outdoors gives hints about how the Navico case was resolved. They mention the change from the LSS-1 to LSS-2, and also specifically mention that three of their four patents held up to re-examination. What that implies is that one patent didn't hold up, and that the crystal organization in the transducer, sonar transmitter remote from the transducer and live integration of GPS are the major claims that Johnson emphasizes.
That fact that the same commission ruled against Navico in the Garmin filing, but in favor of Johnson Outdoors would make you think it's those areas where the violations occurred. The big question comes down to what exactly the terms of the Navico/Johnson Outdoors licensing agreement are. It can't be exclusive, because Johnson Outdoors licenses to Humminbird (You read that right) and Navico, but it could be limited. The Johnson/Navico case probably involved licensing both ways, so it is possible it includes terms that encourage or prohibit Johnson from licensing other manufacturers. The fact that both cases were filed about the same time might indicate some cooperation.
If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don't have integrity,
nothing else matters.
Curious what the patents are? Did H/b actually invent sidescan sonar? I thought it had been around for years doing ocean exploration. Is it something to do with the compact type transducer that can be mounted on a boat, rather than a towfish style?
No, Navico had patents for SS dating back to the 1950's. They even include a mention of mounting the transducer on the boat. From the court cases, I infer that the GPS integration and something about the transducer arrangement are the major patent claims. The transducer can easily be avoided as the LSS-2 demonstrates. The GPS integration in my opinion is the key piece of the puzzle, because it is clearly a Johnson Outdoors patent and it is a key to making the sonar useful to bass fishermen.
Looks like Navico is in a win-win situation here. If Johnson Outdoors doesn't defend the patents, Navico would be able to use them at will. If by some means Garmin would go to court and win, Navico would be able to use the technology freely again. Garmin almost has to either negotiate licensing or litigate. They can't stay in the sonar market without a side scan sonar offering.
If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don't have integrity,
nothing else matters.
Kinda reminds me of the 80's when Harley Davidson was unwilling or unable to innovate, they lobbied for a protective tariff on Japanese motorcycles over 750 cc and got it. In these kinds of situations, technology stagnates and the consumer suffers.
Yep, lot of meat to the bone here Todd. I noticed not getting attention it deserves in this thread. At the end of the day Lowrance pioneered the end result.....Much to do about nothing. Garmin is not going anywhere. They'll modify and adjust and consumers will buy their products except those who have a different passion and agenda. Glad I have Garmin's in my boat, best marine electronic experience I've witnessed to date and that is after owning Hummingbird and Lowrance. Can't wait to get out and use my Garmin's. They flat out have the innovation energy right now and I don't expect that to change anytime soon.
i believe he means internationally they transpose the day and month.....5/8 internationally is August 5th.
Reply With Quote
