Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum - FT86CLUB

Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum - FT86CLUB (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/index.php)
-   Forced Induction (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=78)
-   -   FRS Rear Turbo (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16355)

subatoy 09-03-2012 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreenHell (Post 419129)
Not true. A patent grants the right to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing the patented invention.

There's a research exemption clause that allows entities to experiment with the patented invention by building it but that's still an affirmative defense.

no profit= no damage, so whats the point?
Also if this patent is a US patent and this person is
outside the US there is NOTHING the patent holder can do.

Roadstercycle 09-03-2012 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by subatoy (Post 418565)
no intercooler???????!!

At 4 lbs of boost and the aluminum tubing run back that does some cooling an intercooler was deemed unnecessary for this. The turbo is in the back so it is not getting heat soaked from the engine compartment.

Sportsguy83 09-03-2012 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by subatoy (Post 419395)
no profit= no damage, so whats the point?
Also if this patent is a US patent and this person is
outside the US there is NOTHING the patent holder can do.

Agree with you no profit no damage, but to correct he is in CA.

Roadstercycle 09-03-2012 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thongpocket (Post 418689)
Does that sticker say have fun hurt nuns?!!?! lol

It says Have Fun / Hurt None. Which translated means, have all the fun you want but don't hurt anyone doing it.

Roadstercycle 09-03-2012 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by czar07 (Post 418650)
how much does all that piping weigh?

Actually the whole system weighed less than the stock exhaust. The turbo itself weighed a lot less than the stock muffler.

JoeBoxer 09-03-2012 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roadstercycle (Post 419404)
At 4 lbs of boost and the aluminum tubing run back that does some cooling an intercooler was deemed unnecessary for this. The turbo is in the back so it is not getting heat soaked from the engine compartment.

That seems reasonable, what are you using for tuning? I wonder what John could do with a setup like this on E85?

Roadstercycle 09-03-2012 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeBoxer (Post 419423)
That seems reasonable, what are you using for tuning? I wonder what John could do with a setup like this on E85?

I'm using John Visconti for tuning. As far as E85, I've only heard rumors for getting it in Ca.

Opposed 09-03-2012 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeBoxer (Post 419423)
That seems reasonable, what are you using for tuning? I wonder what John could do with a setup like this on E85?

I think he was tuned by John if I remember correctly.

Roadstercycle 09-03-2012 03:48 PM

Wow, I did not know that a rear turbo unit would bring out the lawyers. I feel like I designed a crime scene. I googled rear turbo and it seems everyone and their Grandmother around the US has pictures and every setup possible. I saw a couple STS systems but most were home grown. They are everywhere. Is Don's turbo considered rear since it's rear of the engine in the exhaust? What does rear mean? More than half way back? Anyway I'll play, oops, experiment with this setup for my own enjoyment and if I hear from STS I'll see what has to be done. I'll just consider it as my resume for a job there. Maybe I can patent a roof mounted turbo. I like it.

Hotlava86 09-03-2012 03:53 PM

still no video...

Roadstercycle 09-03-2012 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVOturboworld (Post 418853)
Given that they only have (or claim they have) U.S. patents, I find that interesting that they try to go after individuals in other countries, given that there's not a single legal leg to stand on. Though I wager it's a simple form letter sent out whenever anybody posts anything in regards to a rear mount turbocharger.

It looks like there Patent is mostly based on the rear oiling system to and from the turbo, since I'm running water cooling and no oil pump I'm not sure they have an issue with me.

2gnt2wrx 09-03-2012 04:43 PM

This is interesting, would there be any benefit to attaching cooling fins to the pipe? I know at 4psi it wont matter but at some point you will want to turn up the boost.

Roadstercycle 09-03-2012 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2gnt2wrx (Post 419519)
This is interesting, would there be any benefit to attaching cooling fins to the pipe? I know at 4psi it wont matter but at some point you will want to turn up the boost.

Actually I have been thinking about a finned pipe ever since I started doing it. I've looked for some but have not found it. I have even thought about doing it myself. You can see a small sample of finned tube at siliconeintakes.com. They are short sections but I have to call them to see if they can make longer ones.

GreenHell 09-03-2012 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by subatoy (Post 419395)
no profit= no damage, so whats the point?
Also if this patent is a US patent and this person is
outside the US there is NOTHING the patent holder can do.

The point is that you’re oversimplifying issues.

I wish things were as black or white as you make them out to be. There’s a reason it takes 3 years of legal education to become a lawyer, and years of practice to become proficient.

Here’s what the law says about damages: adequate to compensate for the infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by the infringer, together with interest and costs as fixed by the court.

I believe what you’re trying to say with the “no profit” scenario is the “lost profits” provision for patent damages. It might be hard for the patent holder to prove lost profits in this scenario but it is not impossible. The patent holder can seek lost profits under (1) future lost profits, (2) damage to reputation and goodwill, (3) business losses etc.

If the patent holder cannot claim lost profits in this particular case, he will be able to claim reasonable royalty damages from the infringer.

Then there’s the treble damages for willful infringement if it can be shown that the infringer had notice.

Lastly, US patent or not, if the patent holder has PCT coverage in the country in question, he can enforce his rights in said country.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:47 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.


Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.