Does SVS Hold Patents On Their Tube Design? (1 Viewer)

[Chuck C]

??

 

[Jack Gilvey]

On the use of a cylinder for a sub? I don't think that's possible, or Hsu would have done it back when the Go-Go's were big.

 

[SVS-Ron]

No, even Hsu didn't invent the idea AFAIK.

Some other thoughts since the patent topic seems to be of interest lately:

There are some patented parts on our subs but they are avail. to all. In our experience, unless you are willing to spend big $ to depend your patent, and then show MAJOR buck damages when the inevitable happens, the patent/infringement arena is for folks with more money and time than SVS has at the moment.

Our designs are our own, but I like to think it's the SVS business model that sets us appart (besides the performance and value of our products that is). Good luck to anyone trying to copy that (start by donating your labor for 2 years and then go from there).

Any patent attorneys interested in a free sub can always contact us about the stuff we have that almost certainly is patentable. ;^)

Ron

 

[Jack Gilvey]

No, even Hsu didn't invent the idea AFAIK.

Yup, I wouldn't claim he invented it, just that he may have tried to patent it if that were feasible. Probably too broad.

 

[Scott Garmon]

Speaker enclosure shapes, features, materials, and construction methodologies are all patentable items, eligible for both utility and ornamentation patent types. I have not run a patent search on Dr. Hsu or any of his inventions, but one could easily do so at http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html.
An inventor has up to one year to file a patent claim on their invention from the time the product is first introduced to the public. After one year, the product is considered "public domain" and no one can file any sort of patent claim against it. This doesn't mean that just anyone can file a claim against any product - you must also demonstrate and prove that you were the first person to reduce the invention to practice. This requires physical, dated documentation to support your claim.
There's a good chance that either Dr. Hsu didn't feel he needed patent protection on his cylindrical sub enclosure design, or couldn't obtain it due to the existence of prior art (meaning he could have based his design on someone else's design that pre-dated his design, which either was or was not patented). It's safe to assume that Ron and Tom would have heard from Dr. Hsu by now had he indeed received patent protection for his cylindrical sub enclosure designs. All this being said, Ron and Tom probably have a few features in their sub designs that are unique to all other speaker enclosure designs that could be protected as intellectual property. Other than scaring off would be imitators, it's hard to hard to quantify the ROI or added revenues that could be attributed to any such patent protection.

 

[Scott-C]

Our designs are our own, but I like to think it's the SVS business model that sets us appart (besides the performance and value of our products that is).

Ron, from what I've seen and read regarding your company, I would have to agree with your quote above. It takes more than just a fancy product - it also takes the other aspects of your business model, and quick, friendly customer service is a big part of it!

 

[Tom Vodhanel]

There were various cylindrical speakers before the Hsus. Even some full range models in there too
For some reason *ohm* acoustics seems to ring a bell.
I've seen pictures of all sorts of weird things in the *70-80's* stereo reviews...I remember seeing 2-3 different companies using cylinders back then. Gallo uses them now too,hsu,svs,I know there's one or two more I'm forgetting about.
TV