8 ms·

I think there are lots of people who would like to see this technology expanded. The issues going back more than a decade has been over the licensing of the pat

I think there are lots of people who would like to see this technology expanded. The issues going back more than a decade has been over the licensing of the patents. SawStop spent a lot of years aggressively suing over its IP and/or pushing for this legislation so that they could have regulatory capture. That's the problem, not the concept of safety. Maybe things have changed by now and we'll be able to see greater innovation in this space.

Red_Leaves_Flyy 3y ago
Weren’t the seatbelt and insulin famously given away? The people who own Sawstop IP are greedy people who have the blood, lost appendages, and deaths of a nearly countless number of people on their greedy shoulders. Absolutely shameless behavior. I won’t sit here and say I have the solution; but this status quo is undeniably bad. Unchecked capitalism like this makes want me to vomit. Think of how many people would be living a better life if every table saw had this technology mandated by law for the past decade. Really think about it.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- poulsbohemian 3y ago
  It's certainly an interesting problem to examine... my understanding was always that patents were designed to foster innovation by giving an inventor a way to make money on their IP so long as they gave the idea to the world. Somewhere along the way that got weaponized. So is the solution that we need to reform patents, or do we need some other way to both allow innovators to make money but in a way that doesn't exploit other parties trying to expand the footprint of a good idea? It's complicated.
- bdowling 3y ago
  This is a bizarre take because if not for SawStop, many, many more people would have lost blood, appendages, and lives to conventional table saws. In fact, SawStop the company only exists because 20 years ago every table saw manufacturer refused to license the technology from the inventor. None of them wanted it at any price because it would increase the cost of their saws and reduce their profits.
  - greedo 3y ago
    SS was not the only company to come up with blade sensing technology...
  - davemp 3y ago
    > None of them wanted it at any price Do we actually know this? Or could the license terms have just been too high?
    - bdowling 3y ago
      The analysis I read listed various reasons why existing manufacturers wouldn’t adopt the technology (sorry, I can’t find the link). Increased cost per saw was one, but adopting the technology would also create two product lines: “safe” saws and “unsafe” saws. So any manufacturer who adopted the tech partially would have to argue that half of their product lines were unsafe. Even if the license costs were zero, these problems would exist.
      - nothercastle 3y ago
        So it’s better that all products are unsafe lol. I get it from a liability pov but sucks for customers
  - lobsterthief 3y ago
    Many more people _who have the money to invest in a premium saw_ have saved their appendages. People who can’t afford the saw have continued to lose them. That’s part of the issue here.
- palmfacehn 3y ago
  Many who argue for unchecked market systems also dispute the validity of IP, because it is viewed as a destructive intervention from the state rather than a market system. https://www.stephankinsella.com/own-ideas/ https://www.stephankinsella.com/own-ideas/
pnw 3y ago
Sawstop already offered their key patent for free to get this technology adopted. https://www.sawstop.com/news/sawstop-to-dedicate-key-u-s-patent-to-the-public-upon-the-effective-date-of-a-rule-requiring-safety-technology-on-all-table-saws/ https://www.sawstop.com/news/sawstop-to-dedicate-key-u-s-pat...
- Junk_Collector 3y ago
  They offered to relinquish one important patent, but they have a huge portfolio of patents covering blade breaks specifically applied to table saws. If you go look at the actual testimony instead of a summarized article, SawStop's representative very explicitly will not even discuss relinquishment of their other patents including their patent on "using electrical signals to detect contact with arbor mounted saws" which does not expire until 2037. A large part of the testimony was companies such as Grizzly complaining that SawStop is unwilling to engage with them in good faith on licensing their technology. Given SawStop's history, I'm unfortunately inclined to believe them.
  - luma 3y ago
    And this right here is the key bit. SawStop was started by patent attorney Steve Gass. He has spent years claiming that other vendors won't talk to him while leaving out the actual terms of his licensing (which, by some rumors, was somwhere around "extortionate"). Bosch released a saw with similar tech in the US and then SawStop sued the product off of the market. Every step of the way Glass has not acted in good faith and instead acted like a patent attorney. We have little reason to believe that he has all of a sudden found goodwill toward man in his heart when there's a dollar somewhere he could instead put into his wallet.
    - chx 3y ago
      Yeah but in 2017 TTS (the parent company of Festool) acquired SawStop. https://www.sawstop.com/news/sawstop-to-be-acquired-by-tts-tooltechnic-systems/ https://www.sawstop.com/news/sawstop-to-be-acquired-by-tts-t... TTS is a magnitude bigger than SawStop and they might have different ideas than a narrow minded patent attorney.
davidee 3y ago
According to a recent Stumpy Nubs video, Saw Stop isn't the villain they've been made out to be (or at least has changed their tune substantially). TLDR; They've offered not to defend their patent (or whatever the patent mumbo jumbo is) if the legislation goes through. Stumpy Nubs on the subject: https://youtu.be/nxKkuDduYLk?si=c0GchB2hc3g0OtG4 https://youtu.be/nxKkuDduYLk?si=c0GchB2hc3g0OtG4 The recent CPSC hearing where many of the revelations came out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyJGE2Vyid0&t=0s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyJGE2Vyid0&t=0s
- poulsbohemian 3y ago
  I think they sold out to a European firm a few years ago - I stopped paying attention to this space a few years ago, so like I said in my OP - could be the playing field has changed, and perhaps the current owner of this IP is in a different place.
- luma 3y ago
  Stumpy Nubs is a fine woodworker and a great YouTuber, but he, unlike the CEO of SawStop, is not a patent attorney. Over and over in his video he glosses over serious problems with the Saw Stop proposal and presumes goodwill on behalf of SawStop. That goodwill is not warranted, nothing about Glass' or SawStop's behavior suggests that they're doing anything other than trying to force people to license their product by way of regulation. If they want to claim they are giving the license away, then do the whole patent portfolio (required for a functioning system), not just one of them. They've already sued their competitors to keep similar products off of the market and there is zero reason for us, the regulators, or the competition to trust this organization.
  - meowface 3y ago
    >Stumpy Nubs is a fine woodworker and a great YouTuber, but he, unlike the CEO of SawStop, is not a patent attorney. Gass also has a PhD in physics and was the person who designed and engineered the product. >If they want to claim they are giving the license away, then do the whole patent portfolio (required for a functioning system), not just one of them. They want to stay in business. If they give away all of the intellectual property of their entire system, it's likely that they wouldn't be able to for very long.
wolverine876 3y ago
> That's the problem, not the concept of safety. Per the article, SawStop offered to 'open source' (as we'd say) the patent. Also, in TFA, end users objected to the regulation.

Red_Leaves_Flyy 3y ago

Weren’t the seatbelt and insulin famously given away? The people who own Sawstop IP are greedy people who have the blood, lost appendages, and deaths of a nearly countless number of people on their greedy shoulders. Absolutely shameless behavior. I won’t sit here and say I have the solution; but this status quo is undeniably bad. Unchecked capitalism like this makes want me to vomit. Think of how many people would be living a better life if every table saw had this technology mandated by law for the past decade. Really think about it.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
poulsbohemian 3y ago
It's certainly an interesting problem to examine... my understanding was always that patents were designed to foster innovation by giving an inventor a way to make money on their IP so long as they gave the idea to the world. Somewhere along the way that got weaponized. So is the solution that we need to reform patents, or do we need some other way to both allow innovators to make money but in a way that doesn't exploit other parties trying to expand the footprint of a good idea? It's complicated.
bdowling 3y ago
This is a bizarre take because if not for SawStop, many, many more people would have lost blood, appendages, and lives to conventional table saws. In fact, SawStop the company only exists because 20 years ago every table saw manufacturer refused to license the technology from the inventor. None of them wanted it at any price because it would increase the cost of their saws and reduce their profits.
- greedo 3y ago
  SS was not the only company to come up with blade sensing technology...
- davemp 3y ago
  > None of them wanted it at any price Do we actually know this? Or could the license terms have just been too high?
  - bdowling 3y ago
    The analysis I read listed various reasons why existing manufacturers wouldn’t adopt the technology (sorry, I can’t find the link). Increased cost per saw was one, but adopting the technology would also create two product lines: “safe” saws and “unsafe” saws. So any manufacturer who adopted the tech partially would have to argue that half of their product lines were unsafe. Even if the license costs were zero, these problems would exist.
    - nothercastle 3y ago
      So it’s better that all products are unsafe lol. I get it from a liability pov but sucks for customers
- lobsterthief 3y ago
  Many more people _who have the money to invest in a premium saw_ have saved their appendages. People who can’t afford the saw have continued to lose them. That’s part of the issue here.
palmfacehn 3y ago
Many who argue for unchecked market systems also dispute the validity of IP, because it is viewed as a destructive intervention from the state rather than a market system. https://www.stephankinsella.com/own-ideas/ https://www.stephankinsella.com/own-ideas/

pnw 3y ago

Sawstop already offered their key patent for free to get this technology adopted. https://www.sawstop.com/news/sawstop-to-dedicate-key-u-s-patent-to-the-public-upon-the-effective-date-of-a-rule-requiring-safety-technology-on-all-table-saws/ https://www.sawstop.com/news/sawstop-to-dedicate-key-u-s-pat...

Junk_Collector 3y ago
They offered to relinquish one important patent, but they have a huge portfolio of patents covering blade breaks specifically applied to table saws. If you go look at the actual testimony instead of a summarized article, SawStop's representative very explicitly will not even discuss relinquishment of their other patents including their patent on "using electrical signals to detect contact with arbor mounted saws" which does not expire until 2037. A large part of the testimony was companies such as Grizzly complaining that SawStop is unwilling to engage with them in good faith on licensing their technology. Given SawStop's history, I'm unfortunately inclined to believe them.
- luma 3y ago
  And this right here is the key bit. SawStop was started by patent attorney Steve Gass. He has spent years claiming that other vendors won't talk to him while leaving out the actual terms of his licensing (which, by some rumors, was somwhere around "extortionate"). Bosch released a saw with similar tech in the US and then SawStop sued the product off of the market. Every step of the way Glass has not acted in good faith and instead acted like a patent attorney. We have little reason to believe that he has all of a sudden found goodwill toward man in his heart when there's a dollar somewhere he could instead put into his wallet.
  - chx 3y ago
    Yeah but in 2017 TTS (the parent company of Festool) acquired SawStop. https://www.sawstop.com/news/sawstop-to-be-acquired-by-tts-tooltechnic-systems/ https://www.sawstop.com/news/sawstop-to-be-acquired-by-tts-t... TTS is a magnitude bigger than SawStop and they might have different ideas than a narrow minded patent attorney.

davidee 3y ago

According to a recent Stumpy Nubs video, Saw Stop isn't the villain they've been made out to be (or at least has changed their tune substantially). TLDR; They've offered not to defend their patent (or whatever the patent mumbo jumbo is) if the legislation goes through. Stumpy Nubs on the subject: https://youtu.be/nxKkuDduYLk?si=c0GchB2hc3g0OtG4 https://youtu.be/nxKkuDduYLk?si=c0GchB2hc3g0OtG4 The recent CPSC hearing where many of the revelations came out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyJGE2Vyid0&t=0s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyJGE2Vyid0&t=0s

poulsbohemian 3y ago
I think they sold out to a European firm a few years ago - I stopped paying attention to this space a few years ago, so like I said in my OP - could be the playing field has changed, and perhaps the current owner of this IP is in a different place.
luma 3y ago
Stumpy Nubs is a fine woodworker and a great YouTuber, but he, unlike the CEO of SawStop, is not a patent attorney. Over and over in his video he glosses over serious problems with the Saw Stop proposal and presumes goodwill on behalf of SawStop. That goodwill is not warranted, nothing about Glass' or SawStop's behavior suggests that they're doing anything other than trying to force people to license their product by way of regulation. If they want to claim they are giving the license away, then do the whole patent portfolio (required for a functioning system), not just one of them. They've already sued their competitors to keep similar products off of the market and there is zero reason for us, the regulators, or the competition to trust this organization.
- meowface 3y ago
  >Stumpy Nubs is a fine woodworker and a great YouTuber, but he, unlike the CEO of SawStop, is not a patent attorney. Gass also has a PhD in physics and was the person who designed and engineered the product. >If they want to claim they are giving the license away, then do the whole patent portfolio (required for a functioning system), not just one of them. They want to stay in business. If they give away all of the intellectual property of their entire system, it's likely that they wouldn't be able to for very long.

wolverine876 3y ago

> That's the problem, not the concept of safety. Per the article, SawStop offered to 'open source' (as we'd say) the patent. Also, in TFA, end users objected to the regulation.