3 ms·

The following patent numbers cited in this[1]: 6994638 8123632 8444507 9320944 8025593 8257201 7331878 6358161 7887439 7

The following patent numbers cited in this[1]: 6994638 8123632 8444507 9320944 8025593 8257201 7331878 6358161 7887439 7641572 7163472 [1] http://golf-patents.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/20170317-Complaint-Costco-v-Acushnet.pdf http://golf-patents.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/20170317-...

tedunangst 10y ago
> because, at the least, dimples on the KS golf ball do not cover more than 80% of the outer surface. Haha. Do I believe that? Even the legal filing is short on facts, just assertions. Like who counted the dimples and how many are there in reality? Thanks for the link. I think I fall somewhere between "willing to believe what I'm told" and "willing to do extensive research". "Willing to not particularly care" is about right.
- setr 10y ago
  >Like who counted the dimples and how many are there in reality? Assuming the dimples and placement of them is uniform across the ball, and across all manufactured balls, Then it shouls be pretty simple to get the size of a ball, the size of a dimple, and the spacing between two dimples, and then extrapolate the actual coverage
  - tedunangst 10y ago
    Yeah, sure, it's pretty simple. But why won't anybody tell me what those numbers are? I'm not going out to Costco to buy a set of balls they no longer sell to find out. It seems so obvious that the easiest way to convince me X != Y is to tell me X and Y. Is that weird?
  - gervase 10y ago
    Give 5 interns 5 balls each, and a black sharpie. Have them count the dimples on each ball by putting a dot in the ones they have counted. If there were more than 500 per ball I would be shocked - the group could be done in under an hour. Not sure how many you'd have to do to get a legally-valid "representative sample", but I imagine as a supportive factor to other methods of determination, it's not the worst option. It also has the advantage of being dead-simple to explain.
  - chrisbennet 10y ago
    As a data point, the dimples aren't all the same size on the same golf ball. (I'm not a golfer but I looked at a lot of them for a machine vision project.)
- starky 10y ago
  Do you not think there is a CAD model of that golf ball for making the mold for the cover? It isn't even a 10 minute job for someone to measure the dimple/surface area ratio.
acomjean 10y ago
Great document: Costco goes through every single patent claim and say, Nope we don't do that. Then ask for money for their lawyers. > an award to Costco of its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285 or as otherwise permitted by law;
- henrikschroder 10y ago
  It's even funnier, not only do they go through each patent and say they don't infringe because of X, they also say that each patent is invalid because of Y. And then they ask for money for their lawyers. :-D

tedunangst 10y ago

> because, at the least, dimples on the KS golf ball do not cover more than 80% of the outer surface. Haha. Do I believe that? Even the legal filing is short on facts, just assertions. Like who counted the dimples and how many are there in reality? Thanks for the link. I think I fall somewhere between "willing to believe what I'm told" and "willing to do extensive research". "Willing to not particularly care" is about right.

setr 10y ago
>Like who counted the dimples and how many are there in reality? Assuming the dimples and placement of them is uniform across the ball, and across all manufactured balls, Then it shouls be pretty simple to get the size of a ball, the size of a dimple, and the spacing between two dimples, and then extrapolate the actual coverage
- tedunangst 10y ago
  Yeah, sure, it's pretty simple. But why won't anybody tell me what those numbers are? I'm not going out to Costco to buy a set of balls they no longer sell to find out. It seems so obvious that the easiest way to convince me X != Y is to tell me X and Y. Is that weird?
- gervase 10y ago
  Give 5 interns 5 balls each, and a black sharpie. Have them count the dimples on each ball by putting a dot in the ones they have counted. If there were more than 500 per ball I would be shocked - the group could be done in under an hour. Not sure how many you'd have to do to get a legally-valid "representative sample", but I imagine as a supportive factor to other methods of determination, it's not the worst option. It also has the advantage of being dead-simple to explain.
- chrisbennet 10y ago
  As a data point, the dimples aren't all the same size on the same golf ball. (I'm not a golfer but I looked at a lot of them for a machine vision project.)
starky 10y ago
Do you not think there is a CAD model of that golf ball for making the mold for the cover? It isn't even a 10 minute job for someone to measure the dimple/surface area ratio.

acomjean 10y ago

Great document: Costco goes through every single patent claim and say, Nope we don't do that. Then ask for money for their lawyers. > an award to Costco of its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285 or as otherwise permitted by law;

henrikschroder 10y ago
It's even funnier, not only do they go through each patent and say they don't infringe because of X, they also say that each patent is invalid because of Y. And then they ask for money for their lawyers. :-D