Jump to content

Welcome to TheMalibuCrew!

As a guest, you are welcome to poke around and view the majority of the content that we have to offer, but in order to post, search, contact members, and get full use out of the website you will need to Register for an Account. It's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the TheMalibuCrew Family today!

Sign in to follow this  
TallRedRider

Tige agrees to pay Malibu for use of delayed convergence

Recommended Posts

TallRedRider

LOUDON, TN -- (Marketwired) -- 11/11/16 -- Malibu Boats (NASDAQ: MBUU), the world's largest manufacturer of watersports towboats, announced today that it has licensed its industry-leading wakesurfing patent portfolio to Tige Boats. Tige will use its license to continue equipping its product line with its existing wake surf offerings, but will not be offering Surf Gate or the Surf Gate brand.

"We are pleased that Tige has recognized the strength of our intellectual property and agreed to sign a license and forego potential litigation," said Malibu Boats CEO Jack Springer. Springer commented further by saying, "Respecting intellectual property rights helps encourage strong innovation in our segment and helps grow watersports for all of our loyal customers."

"I want to commend Tige for acting honorably and quickly, once we contacted them, to acknowledge the breadth and value of Malibu's extensive intellectual property for wake surfing. This allows both of our companies to focus on delivering boats and innovations to our customers."

 

Talk amongst yourselves.  

 

Edited by TallRedRider

Share this post


Link to post
shawndoggy

huh.  what differentiates the tige system from other downward tab systems like those used by mastercraft, supra, sanger, centurion, mb (GSA), etc etc?

Share this post


Link to post
The Hulk

Are they getting full SG for that list fee? Or were they doing something else and got scared into it? I don't think they're big wave plate thing on the back was worthwhile maybe they're losing market share or customers if they don't get something similar to surf gate?

Share this post


Link to post
minnmarker

This probably means Malibu is in the process of "contacting" all the competitors and discussing intellectual property. Tige be chose not to fight. Others may or may not depending on their management, lawyers, and how much Malibu is "asking."

Share this post


Link to post
DarkSide

I dont think Tige is using any of the surfgate system.   They are licensing delayed convergence. ..likely cheaper to settle than fight it

Share this post


Link to post
IXFE
31 minutes ago, shawndoggy said:

huh.  what differentiates the tige system from other downward tab systems like those used by mastercraft, supra, sanger, centurion, mb (GSA), etc etc?

I don't think Malibu makes a distinction on sideways vs downward. My evidence of this is the fact that immediately following settlement with Correct Craft, they filed suit against Mastercraft. I doubt they do that if they weren't being advised by some lawyer somewhere that they have grounds. 

Share this post


Link to post
TallRedRider
34 minutes ago, shawndoggy said:

huh.  what differentiates the tige system from other downward tab systems like those used by mastercraft, supra, sanger, centurion, mb (GSA), etc etc?

I agree.  I think their patent is on anything that creates delayed convergence, IIUC.  So I would not be surprised if they have had lawyers contacting everyone.  Tige just felt the settlement Malibu offered was worth the price of not dragging it on.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
The Hulk

in these matters it seems the 800# gorilla wins weather they are right or wrong.... those lawsuits can last years and the costs add up crazy fast... as mentioned above settling is probably much much cheaper than even attempting to fight... interesting that they patented anything thats delayed convergence. although trim tabs have been around for a LONG time so i dont think they would have a lot of grounds to stand on, although perhaps if its for (surfing) only maybe.... 

thats why one of these boat companies should pay me for my SS (Surf Scoop) idea... i'll just take a new boat as the lisc fee... ha. 

Share this post


Link to post
granddaddy55
3 hours ago, TallRedRider said:

I agree.  I think their patent is on anything that creates delayed convergence, IIUC.  So I would not be surprised if they have had lawyers contacting everyone.  Tige just felt the settlement Malibu offered was worth the price of not dragging it on.  

 

I don't get how you can patent physics, this is like airplane lift in many ways, the problem must be like Harley in the early century these idiots must not have pursued their own pending status which easily could have shielded them from this.  Malibu must have the superior patent and intellectual prop lawyers, but intellectual property is sn employer ftom employee protection.  How did they mind meld that ! These large companies must have s*** lawyers and advising staff.

Share this post


Link to post
bamaboy

This is super interesting.  I wonder what this means for the MC lawsuit if anything. 

Share this post


Link to post
23LSVOwner
2 minutes ago, bamaboy said:

This is super interesting.  I wonder what this means for the MC lawsuit if anything. 

It's all going to depend on how much money MC is willing to spend fighting it.

Share this post


Link to post
bamaboy
Just now, 23LSVOwner said:

It's all going to depend on how much money MC is willing to spend fighting it.

I just mean will this have any precedence in the MC lawsuit.  Like will the judge/lawyers look at it and say well Nautique settled, Tige licensed, sooo.....?

Or doesn't it work that way?  

Lawyers out there????

Share this post


Link to post
shawndoggy

I don't think it has any legal effect on subsequent lawsuits, but it has the practical effect of taking one of the many fronts that Malibu is fighting in this multi-front war and putting it in the win column.  

I would also think that if all of the manufacturers have been sued, especially the ones using similar downward pointing tabs like MC / tige / centurion / supra / supreme (are centurion and supreme covered by the nautique settlement?), they could move to consolidate their lawsuits and fight malibu together.  Dunno whether or how much of an appetite there is out there to work together against Malibu, but this settlement takes Tige out of the picture as a potential partner in the fight.

Malibu might've also given Tige an "early adopter" or "low volume manufacturer" sweetheart licensing deal that it's not willing to extend to MC.

Edited by shawndoggy
add a forgotten word

Share this post


Link to post
bamaboy

Here's one more interesting point.  MC Gen1 "surf tabs" came out well before surfgate.  

 

They do function more like listing aids though as opposed to "delayed convergence" devices

Share this post


Link to post
shawndoggy
1 minute ago, bamaboy said:

Here's one more interesting point.  MC Gen1 "surf tabs" came out well before surfgate.  

 

They do function more like listing aids though as opposed to "delayed convergence" devices

And the sanger surf tabs pre-dated the MC tabs by at least 5 years.  LOL and like the MC tabs, I don't think they actually worked very well.

Share this post


Link to post
jk13
1 hour ago, kerpluxal said:

Was out with the Tige Factory rep when he mentioned this case.... Malibu has a patent on any device that causes wave convergence..  does not matter how it is attached to boat (off to side, underneath, etc..).. It does not matter who came out with what first... It only matters that on who patent it first and what the patent covers... I guess Malibu was "smart" enough to apply for the patent... and very smart on not patenting the gate, but the philosophy of wave convergence.

Yep, they followed Nautique's 'raised tow point' patent for towers. Every boat with an OEM tower pays Nautique a dollar amount. Customers get invoiced $100.00 but I don't know if that full amount gets passed on. 

Share this post


Link to post
TallRedRider
2 hours ago, jk13 said:

Yep, they followed Nautique's 'raised tow point' patent for towers. Every boat with an OEM tower pays Nautique a dollar amount. Customers get invoiced $100.00 but I don't know if that full amount gets passed on. 

I was under the impression that the Nautique patent mentioned something about a 4 point tower, so the Illusion was exempt, and was part of the impetus for 2 mounting point tower designs.  

I have no idea where that thought came from, and am fully open to criticism I just made that up.  

Share this post


Link to post
Michigan boarder
3 minutes ago, TallRedRider said:

I was under the impression that the Nautique patent mentioned something about a 4 point tower, so the Illusion was exempt, and was part of the impetus for 2 mounting point tower designs.  

I have no idea where that thought came from, and am fully open to criticism I just made that up.  

Inconceivable.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Falko

I"m going to patent, "Surfing". And everyone will have to pay me monies.

I hate the idea of patenting a result, not an actual device. Can someone patent, "cooked hamburger"?

Share this post


Link to post
thtrog
47 minutes ago, TallRedRider said:

I was under the impression that the Nautique patent mentioned something about a 4 point tower, so the Illusion was exempt, and was part of the impetus for 2 mounting point tower designs.  

I have no idea where that thought came from, and am fully open to criticism I just made that up.  

Someone can interpret the patent, but I have been told 4 point also.  

http://www.google.com/patents/US6044788

Share this post


Link to post
TenTwentyOne
36 minutes ago, Falko said:

I"m going to patent, "Surfing". And everyone will have to pay me monies.

I hate the idea of patenting a result, not an actual device. Can someone patent, "cooked hamburger"?

BRB......... Mounting a wing on my pickup and Filing a patent for downforce.....

I'm with you, Falko. And nothing against Bu, but I hope they spend more $$ chasing these lawsuits, than they are able to recover. It's not like any company blatantly ripped off the idea of surfgate. Lawsuits, like this, just cost us money, and prevent the smaller companies from developing new innovations, that keep the big guys on their toes with their own innovations. It's just a pissing contest, and IMO, doesn't show well for the general attitude of the higher-ups in Malibu.

Whatever happened to healthy competition, and a desire to improve ones own product to stay ahead of the pack.

 

just the opinion of one business owner that has intellectual property get copied all the time....... And I have never filed a suit in my life. I go in the next day, and push forward.

Share this post


Link to post
jk13
16 minutes ago, thtrog said:

Someone can interpret the patent, but I have been told 4 point also.  

http://www.google.com/patents/US6044788

You should have enough new boat invoices from the last few years to pull one out and check. :Tease3:

Share this post


Link to post
shawndoggy
1 minute ago, TenTwentyOne said:

It's not like any company blatantly ripped off the idea of surfgate.

I guess you haven't seen the new wakecraft 24' boat?

slide2.png

Share this post


Link to post
TenTwentyOne
2 minutes ago, shawndoggy said:

I guess you haven't seen the new wakecraft 24' boat?

slide2.png

:lol::rofl:

You got me there, SD!! That whole thing looks like a Bu ripoff!

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...