TOMAR, Patents, and LED's

Insider

In an earlier thread I was asked about TOMAR's 940 Siren Controller and some issues with Federal Signal patents. I thought this topic was worthy of it's own thread and an expanded discussion.

Tomar, who by the way has 18 patents of its own and has never been found to be infringing anybody�s patent in 36 years of operation, has reviewed the two Federal Signal patents that are most closely related to our 940 siren. Although the operational characteristics of Tomar�s 940 are outwardly similar to that described in the Federal Signal patents, when trying to read a patent on a product, the devil is in the details of the language of the patent claims. The claims of the Federal Signal patents are quite detailed and specifically define how a device covered by Federal�s patents must be constructed and used in order to infringe the patents.

After review of the Federal Signal patents, Tomar�s opinion is that Tomar�s 940, coupled with one of Tomar�s lightbars and speakers, internally operates in a way sufficiently different from the claims of Federal Signal�s patents to be non-infringing. Federal Signal has never contacted Tomar with a claim of infringement. If they did and Federal had a convincing reason why Tomar�s 940 infringed their patents, Tomar would modify its 940.

From a picture or a distance, the Tomar RECT-25L optic may look similar to the optics in the Whelen Liberty. For that matter, the Federal Signal Solaris technology also provides a similar looking display when viewed from afar. But if you get close you can see the Whelen and Tomar optics are very different indeed. The Whelen optic is a multi-piece, non-TIR based, concave, metallized, reflector with an optional, separate, plastic, central refractor. Tomar�s RECT-25L is a solid, one-piece, TIR reflector with an integrated central refractor. Tomar�s design is not claimed in Whelens� existing patent for the optic in the Liberty.

Tomar�s RECT-25L optics are based entirely on prior art technology. The shape and functionality of the TIR trough reflector with rotated ends is taken straight from our RECT-37S. The only difference is the replacement of the linear flash lamp with a linear string of LED�s at the reflector�s focus. The central portion of the optic is a refractive element whose obviously similar functionality is described in US patent number 5757557, assigned to TIR Technologies, Inc. that covers the use of a TIR optic with a central refractor element with a source that has a glass envelope. Many optics used by the major mfg�s of LED emergency lighting utilize the concept in this TIR Technologies patent. The physics of TIR (total internal reflection) has been known since the 1800�s. No lighting manufacturer in this marketplace invented it. TIR is the same phenomenon used in fiber optic cable to carry data.

With the rapid adoption of LED�s by the emergency lighting market place, there seem to be patents being granted that are nothing more than old halogen or strobe optics used with LED�s. The field of optics is hundreds of years old and most all simple optical techniques used in today�s lightbars have been thought of before. So in many cases it comes down to whether or not putting LED�s behind years old optical elements constitutes a patentable idea. No court case has yet been decided in the emergency lighting marketplace to answer that question. However, the world is full of examples where LED�s replaced other light sources when they became powerful enough and economically viable enough to do so. For example, LED�s replaced flipping cards and neon displays in digital clocks about 30 years ago, LED�s replaced strobes in end-of-train marker lights about 20 years ago, LED�s replaced incandescent in traffic lights and score boards about 10 years ago. Why should it not be obvious, after all this history, to replace halogens and strobes in emergency warning products as well?

I hope this information has been helpful.

The Insider

Insider

97 views and no comments? Was it that bad or that good? Very Happy

The Insider

Colonel

Just too over my head to really say anything.. I'll try.

John911

Your last paragraph provides indication that your background must be technical, not legal. I have a similar background but learned a bit about this legal phenomenon years ago.

The advent of LED technology has resulted in many patents in the vehicluar lighting industry alone where the LED light source rather simply took the place of an incandescent bulb. Some companies quickly grabbed patents on practically every required light on tractor-trailers, for example, in the mid-1990's. These patents stand today.

I, too, felt the same sense of injustice back then when my company was excluded from providing certain products to the market because of these \"dubious\" patents. But the legal department would not allow me to make any moves because of these seemingly silly patents.

I agree. Patents should be awarded only for true innovation, not adaptation.

Dana

Adaptation, if unique, IS innovation. There's very little in the field of optics that could be considered new, otherwise. Most courts reliably rule that this is the case, though the boundary for \"unique\" varies based on court and date.

In this light, it's daring for Tomar to claim their new lighhead is formed entirely of prior art. Given the precedent from the PTO to allow based on uniqueness of adaptation, I would think a significant bump forward in technology sufficient to cause the intense light output of the RECT25 would give Tomar a few things on which to file.

J. Thompson

Insider,

Very thorough and detailed report. Good technical information and historical data backup on the TIR, etc...

Can't comment too much past that, because of unfamiliarality with that particular product line.

JLT

Mark Y.

The 2 points that I brought up were based on my understanding of FedSig's patents relating to the Smart Siren. As I understand it, they are;

1) the ability to program the system via the control head (keypad) is patented

2) the ability to use a digital signal (on the RJ-style \"phone\" line cable) from the control head to the amp is patented

As I mentioned earlier, this is why Whelen doesn't do either with their Cencom. They 1) use a PC to program the siren, and 2) use a serial style cable to connect to the amp. Of course, Whelen being the marketing machine they are, attempts to pass both of these features off as a positive thing (you decide if they are or not!).

My thought was if Whelen couldn't get around the patents, then what makes Tomar think they can? Patent law is about as cryptic as anything I can think of, so I don't pretend to know the in's and out's of the fine details of those patents, and if Tomar got around them, how they did it.

I think it's clear that since you're inside the company and have the ability to talk directly to the legal department, and I can't do that as I don't work for FedSig, I won't be able to effectively comment on your points above.

M

	eLightbars.org Forum -> Lightbars, LED lights, strobes, and beacons	All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Page 1 of 1