Ruger Files Lawsuit Against Smith & Wesson Over 10/22 Rifle Design

[hminsky]

It really irks me how little improvement the Ruger 10/22 has had. Crappy sights is the number one complaint, crappy bolt release, crappy trigger. The Thompson
is an improvement in a number of places, if Ruger actually cared about their customers they'd have made a lot more improvements in the last 50 years.

This is in contrast to the Browning 1911A1, which is pretty much perfection, except for crappy sights.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

What ever happened to the concept of an expired patent?

 

[rivet_42]

What ever happened to the concept of an expired patent?

I suspect the patents on the 10/22 are expired and that's why Ruger is invoking "trade dress" in their suit rather than patents. Unlike patents, trade dress doesn't expire.

I can't imagine what's so unique looking about a 10/22 that it supports a claim of infringement of trade dress. (For those not familiar, "trade dress" is a set of visual characteristics that serve to distinguish one manufacturer's products from another's. Similar to a "trademark" but it's not limited to things like a logo or a brand name rendered in stylized type.)

 

[dhuze]

I can't imagine what's so unique looking about a 10/22 that it supports a claim of infringement of trade dress. (For those not familiar, "trade dress" is a set of visual characteristics that serve to distinguish one manufacturer's products from another's. Similar to a "trademark" but it's not limited to things like a logo or a brand name rendered in stylized type.)

See my earlier post below. Their receiver is almost identical.

The trigger group/receivers look nothing alike. As seen in this photo.

 

[dcmdon]

The concept of a trade dress suite is based on confusion in the marketplace. More like a trademark than a patent. I would think that if Smith and Wesson put HUGE lettering on both sides that said THOMPSON CONTENDER, you could fix the problem.

 

[bigben111435]

Such a ruger move.
But I don't blame them.
Sturm Ruger puts extra design time into many of their firearms to make them non compatible with other manufacturers parts.
Gotta protect the revenue stream.
SW sucks anyways

 

[June4th]

SW has been stealing other people's idea ever since they copied Colt's design but had the cylinder rotating the opposite way to avoid patent lawsuit.

 

[dcmdon]

SW has been stealing other people's idea ever since they copied Colt's design but had the cylinder rotating the opposite way to avoid patent lawsuit.

You mean like the original Sigma being so closely copied from the Glock 17 that some parts were interchangeable??

 

[straightshooterjake]

SW has been stealing other people's idea ever since they copied Colt's design but had the cylinder rotating the opposite way to avoid patent lawsuit.

You mean like the original Sigma being so closely copied from the Glock 17 that some parts were interchangeable??

Copying other people's designs is the intent of the patent system. Having competition as soon as the patent expires is not an accident, and I would not call it stealing. A patent gives about 20 years of monopoly, but you have to publish the design to get the patent. The intent is that two decades of monopoly pricing is sufficient incentive to encourage innovation, but after the time is up, the free market will quickly balance out a fair price. So after the patent expires, other companies and consumers all get to benefit from the open availability of the design.

However, in this case, the patents are long expired on the 10/22, and various companies have been making copies for years. The issue here is that Ruger claims that the S&W copies look to much like their versions, and may confuse the customer. I can't comment on the legal strength of their claim, but I do know that I don't have much sympathy. Ruger's real problem is that they have not paid attention to what customers want, and that is no one's fault but theirs.

 

[dcmdon]

I understand very well how the patent system works having worked in pharma for 10+ years. I don't think June4th really meant stealing.

Although, I did really mean stealing with respect to the sigma. S&W was sued by Glock and had to pay Glock an undisclosed amount of money (the settlement is sealed) and change the design of the Sigma. Now that Glock's early patents that covered the fundamental (occasionally revolutionary) functions of the gun, like locking the barrel into the ejection port, makers are free to copy the key features that make a Glock a Glock. Mossberg did this with their new polymer handgun.

I've commented on the Trade Dress issue already. Its been well covered.

The S&W Ruger copies don't look any more like the SR than rifles made by Tony Kidd, Volqhartsen, or Tactical Solutions. The difference is that these tiny makers don't make many and their product is priced in the $800 - $1200 range. So they aren't stealing sales from SR. In contrast, S&W is large and is pricing the TC rifles in line with SRs, maybe even better when you consider all the extras they throw in.

 

[rocket500]

Easiest way to understand trade dress is knockoff golf clubs. For example back in the day they used to sell cheap Chinese knockoffs of Callaway Big Bertha irons under names like Big Bursar or something equally stupid. They didn’t infringe on any patents Callaway may have had and they weren’t fakes but they copied the look enough that it was too close legally.

 

[dcmdon]

I actually remember the Big Bursar.

I also used to have a set of Golfsmith custom clubs that were King Cobra knockoffs. They were King Snakes.

 

[rivet_42]

Remember when Harley-Davidson tried to sue Honda because they alleged that Honda had copied the characteristic "potato-potato-potato" irregular exhaust sound?

 

[42!]

The concept of a trade dress suite is based on confusion in the marketplace. More like a trademark than a patent. I would think that if Smith and Wesson put HUGE lettering on both sides that said THOMPSON CONTENDER, you could fix the problem.

You mean like the big TCR22 thats on the side of the receiver?

Law suite soundlike a bit of a reach. Patent is expired, move on. They could have improved the 10/22 filing a new patent for the improvements, but they didn't. They new the the rules.

 

[Coyote33]

CONCORD — A jury could decide this spring whether a rival company illegally made and sold a lookalike of the iconic, New Hampshire-made Ruger 10-22 rifle, ...

I did not realize they were made in NH. I always thought all Ruger stuff was made in Connecticut. What town in NH?

It really irks me how little improvement the Ruger 10/22 has had. Crappy sights is the number one complaint, crappy bolt release, crappy trigger. The Thompson
is an improvement in a number of places, if Ruger actually cared about their customers they'd have made a lot more improvements in the last 50 years. ...

Yeah, but is it sold for the same price? I doubt it. The only improvements I would ask for would be sights and a metal trigger guard if they are plastic now.

 

[Mesatchornug]

I did not realize they were made in NH. I always thought all Ruger stuff was made in Connecticut. What town in NH?

Ruger is headquartered in CT. Most of their rifles are build in Georges Mills, NH, and their handguns are in Prescott, AZ

 

[Broc]

Its not about moving down market. Its about bringing the features that the aftermarket provides for similar money. Like:

1) a drilled receiver that facilitates cleaning from the breach.
2) a rear receiver tang
3) last round hold open
4) Auto bolt release (normal 10/22 you have to fiddle with a sheet metal release while holding the bolt back to release it.)
5) extended mag release
6) decent sights
7) integral rail
8) improved barrel attachment method.
9) Improved trigger - Ruger's own aftermarket trigger looks to be identical to the factory stock trigger, except with slightly different springs and geometries.)

Many of these things are simply changes in how something is stamped (bolt release) or attached (barrel) and would't cost adime more to manufacture.

Not sure about number 1, but all others can be added.

If Ruger offered a gun with all that, people would still change everything and then complain the gun is too expensive. So, why risk it?

For example, the Ruger Vaquero SASS. Plenty of people love them, plenty of people say they are not worth the price when you can buy a regular Vaquero, change the hammer to a black hawk hammer ($30), change the springs ($30) and polish some internal parts (very easy to do).

Ruger already offers a 10/22 target version that comes with a nice barrel and stock. I have one with a KIDD trigger I built back in 2012-2013.

 

[dcmdon]

Except that the SASS version of the Vaquero is identical to the regular one other than coming in a matched pair and having an oversized ejector tab.