Steyr is Suing SIG Over P320

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bobson

Bobson

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
4,293
Location
Kendall County, TX
Well, haven't seen anything about this here yet. Looks like Steyr is suing SIG, saying the P320 infringes on the patent Steyr was awarded in 2001 for their M-series pistols. Sounds like the gist of it is that this would have no impact whatsoever on the Army contract SIG won for the P320, but that they would need to pay hefty fines to Steyr. Interesting stuff.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...auer-steyr-patent-infringement-new-army-p320/

http://taskandpurpose.com/sig-sauer...gn=gear&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
 
Steyr is going to have a hard time with this case since the P320 is based on the P250, meaning it's been on the market for a decade now and Steyr has taken no prior action to defend their patent... even if the patent is similar enough to be infringed.
 
If it were ME on the jury, (and I doubt it will actually get that far,) that is the exact question I would ask. Why was it not a big deal until they got the DoD contract? How many years until such a patent would be gone anyway? How many of these pistols were they selling?
 
mljdeckard said:
If it were ME on the jury, (and I doubt it will actually get that far,) that is the exact question I would ask. Why was it not a big deal until they got the DoD contract? How many years until such a patent would be gone anyway? How many of these pistols were they selling?
Click to expand...
A companies decision to take legal action has to take into account the expense and potential reward. I have no doubt that the DoD contract was a big part of the decision to file suit. That has no bearing on whether or not there was patent infringement.
 
Other than appearance what makes the styer and sig similar? What makes a sig and glock different other than appearance?
 
HB said:
Other than appearance what makes the styer and sig similar? What makes a sig and glock different other than appearance?
Click to expand...
The Sig 320 and Steyr A1 don't look alike. They are of similar modular design which Steyr claims patent rights to. Glocks are not a modular design.
 
^thanks. I can't recall seeing a steyer in the flesh.

HB
 
ClickClickD'oh said:
Steyr is going to have a hard time with this case since the P320 is based on the P250, meaning it's been on the market for a decade now and Steyr has taken no prior action to defend their patent... even if the patent is similar enough to be infringed.
Click to expand...
Even without the military contract, the 320 has been greatly outselling the 250.
 
Okay so maybe I'm reading this wrong or just not understanding. Steyr is suing Sig over using a removable metal frame in a plastic grip (At least that is what I got out of the link above I skimmed). The thing is IIRC Kel-Tec was using a metal frame in a plastic grip before Steyr. I am far from an expert on patent law but I thought this technology was considered to be in common use or some such now. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.
 
It seems to me Steyr is looking to cash in on the successes of Sig and their pending contract with the U.S. Military. It's just how it looks to me, not fact of course.
 
Steyr already sued Beretta in Sept. 2015, claiming the PICO violated this same patent. Can't imagine that resulted in a huge financial gain, given the meh popularity of the PICO. Otoh, and I'm no expert - is seems that simply owning a bunch of patents and then suing companies who violate one (unintentionally or otherwise), is actually a worthwhile business plan (see SCOTTeVEST).
 
Too bad Star isn't still around for Steyr to sue; I think they had a modular fire control unit in their Models 28 and 30.
 
John Browning had patents on many firearms that were never produced. Winchester bought the patents because if the guns went into production it would make their current products obsolete.
If Sig did in fact use a design under a patent owned by Steyr and get a half billion dollar contract with it, Steyr is due some compensation.
 
Is a pistol with a removable chassis defensible? I seem to remember a rifle with such a design (name escapes me).
 
I think there has to be more to the alleged patent infringement than a modular receiver and chassis.
 
drunkenpoacher said:
I'm not an attorney but my guess is if something is patented it's defensible.
Harley Davidson won a suit against Honda for copying their engine exhaust sound.
Click to expand...
Did they actually win that? OR did they, as "I" remember it, try to patent it without success...

DM
 
Glock sued S&W over the design of the Sigma for patent infringement. S&W had to make changes to the trigger (which made it suck) and pay Glock $$$$.
 
if sig used steyrs patented design without permission........then they will have to pay. if they didnt..........they still had to pay but in hefty legal fees. gotta love our legal system.:) brand love has nothing to do with this. its law that matters.
 
jhb said:
if sig used steyrs patented design without permission........then they will have to pay. if they didnt..........they still had to pay but in hefty legal fees. gotta love our legal system.:) brand love has nothing to do with this. its law that matters.
Click to expand...
Yep. But wait, if someone sues you and loses, can't you counter sue for wasting your time and have them pay your legal fees? That would suck, man.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
"Voluntary trigger upgrade" for P320 offered by SIG Sauer
Replies
3
Views
582
pblanc
P
JonEvans1990FL
  • Locked
U.S Army picks Sig.
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
140
Views
11K
Shinbone
S
ilbob
  • Locked
GRAPEVINE: US Army Pays $207 Per Pistol to SIG SAUER for M17 Modular Handguns
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
mgmorden
mgmorden
Back
Top