Nightforce suit by Leupold & Stevens for patent violations

[Artful]

http://www.ammoland.com/2016/08/leup...6e06a-20820973

BEAVERTON, Ore. —-(Ammoland.com)- Leupold & Stevens, Inc., has filed a civil suit in the U.S. District Court of Oregon alleging patent violations by Lightforce U.S.A., doing business as Nightforce.

In the suit, Leupold & Stevens, Inc., alleges that Nightforce is marketing and selling products that infringe on a variety of patents owned by Leupold & Stevens, Inc. and is seeking all available remedies.

The lawsuit is based on six patents for riflescope adjustments, internal optical mechanisms, and flip covers.

Leupold & Stevens, Inc., has been pioneering riflescope and sporting optics technology since 1947, when it developed a non-fogging riflescope charged with nitrogen. Today, Leupold® has been granted over 151 patents and design registrations in 18 countries, representing Leupold’s continued commitment to innovation and development of sports optics. For more information on Leupold products, please visit us at www.leupold.com.

Leupold & Stevens, Inc. is committed to protecting its intellectual property and the innovations developed by its engineering and design teams.

Join the discussion on Facebook, www.facebook.com/LeupoldOptics, on Twitter atwww.twitter.com/LeupoldOptics or on Instagram at www.instagram.com/LeupoldOptics.

Founded in Oregon more than a century ago, Leupold & Stevens, Inc. is a fifth generation, family owned company that designs, machines and assembles its riflescopes, mounting systems and tactical/Gold Ring® spotting scopes in the USA. The product lines include rifle, handgun and spotting scopes; binoculars; rangefinders; mounting systems; and optical tools, accessories and Pro Gear.

Leupold & Stevens, Inc., P.O. Box 688, Beaverton, OR 97075-0688, U.S.A.
Phone: (800) LEUPOLD or (503) 526-1400 • Fax: (503) 352-7621 • www.leupold.com

Someone may be in trouble

[Bent Ramrod]

Nightforce might be in line for treble damages if the suit is successful. But if I had to pick a winner, it would be the lawyers.

[needausername]

It's a good thing no one ever patented a shovel. If they had, we'd have 20 libraries full of laws defining what a shovel "is" or "isn't" and they would cost $1500 a piece. Not counting the 2 years of training and licensing that would be required to operate such a device.

In my mind, the patent thing has gotten way out of hand. While I'll agree with intellectual property to an extent, with modern manufacturing processes taken into consideration, the modern equivalent to a 25 year patent 200 years ago would be what, 6 months? So they have patents in 18 countries. Are the rest free to reverse engineer at will? Let's not forget how the patent on bored through cylinders did nothing but postpone progress.

2 cents and all.

[garym1a2]

Patents only good for 20 years. As an engineer I always hated when competitors copied my designs.

It's a good thing no one ever patented a shovel. If they had, we'd have 20 libraries full of laws defining what a shovel "is" or "isn't" and they would cost $1500 a piece. Not counting the 2 years of training and licensing that would be required to operate such a device.

In my mind, the patent thing has gotten way out of hand. While I'll agree with intellectual property to an extent, with modern manufacturing processes taken into consideration, the modern equivalent to a 25 year patent 200 years ago would be what, 6 months? So they have patents in 18 countries. Are the rest free to reverse engineer at will? Let's not forget how the patent on bored through cylinders did nothing but postpone progress.

2 cents and all.

[runfiverun]

I'd be stoked if someone copied my work.

[lefty o]

obviously leupold has become worried, because their scopes just dont compare with many on the market. id think if they had a claim, they would have gone after them a long time ago.

[garym1a2]

If they violated all these six patents they deserve to be sued. Patent are quite specific what they cover. You can find the details of the claims on google patents.


8,006,429 – Locking turret knob
8,516,736 – Locking adjustment knob for a sighting device
9,188,408 – Auto-locking adjustment device
9,170,068 – Locking adjustment device
6,816,305 – Pre-assembled pivoting lens unit
7,721,480 – Pivoting lens covers for riflescopes and the

[roysha]

obviously leupold has become worried, because their scopes just dont compare with many on the market. id think if they had a claim, they would have gone after them a long time ago.

What in the h*** are you talking about?

[lefty o]

What in the h*** are you talking about?

the plain and simple truth. leupold scopes while decent dont compare optically or mechanically with the better options on the market. luepy's are decent scopes, but they dont compare.

[35remington]

Sorry. Not my opinion, nor that of many operators and experts. Leupolds do well. Just find the price range you want that does what you want. It is there.

The criticism is unfounded, in my opinion. You are entitled to yours, but that don't make it true for others.

[lefty o]

did i speak for you, no. when people are given a choice to buy what they want, in the upper end market nightforce,us optics and smidt&bender are far away chosen by more than leupolds are. even the upper end vortex (chinese made) are beating out leupold. i own more than a small number of leupolds, some are even pretty darned new, but in the same price point nightforce smokes em.

[Iowa Fox]

Nothing good ever comes from from these suits for either party. I've owned Leupolds for over 50 years and they were the leader of the industry but they just haven't kept pace with the shooting industry in my opinion. My last new one from Leupold was about 3 years ago and had so many problems with it it might be the last. Yes they corrected the issues but I was out shipping and gas money to the post office. Plus a lot of Bsing around. Rather than law suits the CEOs & CFOs should simply look in the mirror, that's where the problems usually start.

[dkf]

obviously leupold has become worried, because their scopes just dont compare with many on the market. id think if they had a claim, they would have gone after them a long time ago.

Their wonky magnification ranges on several models and using smaller 1" internals and glass on many of their 30mm scopes is what has kept me away from Leupold. When most people go to drop over $1000 on glass they don't go with Leupold.

[dragon813gt]

If I held patents and someone was infringing on them I would take them to court as well. Doesn't matter why, other than patent infringement. Anyone that says otherwise is lying to you. You have a patent for a reason, to make money. If someone is using your patent to make money then they owe you money. It's pretty simple.

All the other arguments may have some validity. The other brand being better doesn't matter if they're truly infringing on the patent. Maybe Leupold tried to settle this out of court but that didn't work? Can't blame them for taking it to court.

[Walter Laich]

If I held patents and someone was infringing on them I would take them to court as well. Doesn't matter why, other than patent infringement. Anyone that says otherwise is lying to you. You have a patent for a reason, to make money. If someone is using your patent to make money then they owe you money. It's pretty simple.

All the other arguments may have some validity. The other brand being better doesn't matter if they're truly infringing on the patent. Maybe Leupold tried to settle this out of court but that didn't work? Can't blame them for taking it to court.

respectfully...and the lawyers will again no matter how the suit is settled

[akajun]

Sorry. Not my opinion, nor that of many operators and experts. Leupolds do well. Just find the price range you want that does what you want. It is there.

The criticism is unfounded, in my opinion. You are entitled to yours, but that don't make it true for others.

Sorry but leupold sat on its laurels for years because they thought they were the best and didn't need improvement . Meanwhile companies like NF, Sightron, and March actually came out with scopes that tracked properly and had glass you could read mirage with at 600 and 1000yds.
If leaupolds were so good , you would see more of them in the winners circle at f class bench rest and sniper challenge matches instead of the three companies I listed. Hell for a long time benchresters would have a leupold " frozen " and put into an external adjustment mount, some even went back to the old unertl scopes.
Leaupold had to come up with their mark 6 and mark 8 line to compete.
Now for a deer rifle whose zero pretty much doesn't move for a year a regular leupold is fine, but for something your cranking the knobs on they just don't hold up.
A funny side note, now that CMP rules allow scopes in high power , the shooters using a certain model leaupolds that fit the rules also carry a small dead blow hammer to bop the scope with when making a windage change due to the poor tracking .

[B. Lumpkin]

I concur with others on the Leupold situation. They sat on the laurels for to long. Others came out and kicked them off the top of the heap a good while back. Leupold is still a good option in the sub $1,000 range, but when you go over $1,000 dollars and even farther into the high end arena, then Leupold takes a back seat in many categories. The Mark 6 and 8 lines are priced in S&B territory and given the choice, I'd take the S&B everyday over the Leupold.

All of that is irrelevant to patent infringement though.

[dtknowles]

Just because someone else make better scopes does not mean they have the right to steal their competitors intellectual property. Doing that and forcing them into court to get compensated hurts everyone except the Lawyers.

Tim

[B. Lumpkin]

I agree.

[lefty o]

Just because someone else make better scopes does not mean they have the right to steal their competitors intellectual property. Doing that and forcing them into court to get compensated hurts everyone except the Lawyers.

Tim

i agree it doesnt give anyone the right to steal, but i believe if leupold really had a claim, they'd have gone after them 15yrs ago.