Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/4946336/

Topic: RR Tries To Stop GTF Through Courts
Username: BoeingVista
Posted 2010-10-04 20:24:14 and read 5359 times.

Quote:
Rolls-Royce in late August filed a complaint alleging infringement by United Technologies (UTC) of the patent for the Rolls-Royce swept fan blade–the same design, claims Rolls, that UTC subsidiary Pratt & Whitney used in its PW1000G PurePower geared turbofan for the Bombardier C Series and Mitsubishi MRJ. The complaint specifically identifies the fan stages on both the PW1000G and Engine Alliance GP7200 engine and alleges that a number of other UTC civil engines infringe on the Rolls-Royce patent. In a statement released last month, Rolls-Royce said it seeks unspecified damages and injunctions.

The UK company said it expects a jury to hear the case in the first half of next year in the Federal Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.

According to Rolls, the origins of the case date back to the late 1990s, when UTC unsuccessfully applied to the U.S. Patent Office to strike the patent in question from the registry.

I was scoffed at when I said that the RR lawsuit filed against UTC in August was about the GTF, well guess what guys, Its about the GTF. This (the word "injunction") has to add risk to the C Series and A320NEO programs, even a short stop work order or ruling that certain technologies are propriety to RR could derail the engine economics / timelines and any program built on it.

http://www.ainonline.com/news/single...of-rolls-lawsuit-26635/?no_cache=1

Topic: RE: RR Tries To Stop GTF Through Courts
Username: JerseyFlyer
Posted 2010-10-05 06:09:54 and read 4992 times.

Quoting BoeingVista (Thread starter):
This (the word "injunction") has to add risk to the C Series and A320NEO programs

Of course the Leap X will be offered on the A320 NEO also

Topic: RE: RR Tries To Stop GTF Through Courts
Username: par13del
Posted 2010-10-05 06:28:50 and read 4913 times.

The focus is on the GTF, does the patent infringement also affect the engine on the A380, which is more immediate since the GTF is not yet flying on any production a/c.

Topic: RE: RR Tries To Stop GTF Through Courts
Username: parapente
Posted 2010-10-05 07:18:06 and read 4739 times.

This has been discussed before - although within a different topic.

I cannot believe RR owns "swept fans" in any way.What they do own (as I understand it) is the very special method they use to create hollow titanium swept blades.That deff' is top secret.If "somehow" P&W are using this technique then yes there would be trouble - big trouble.This is as I understand it a major RR invention/secret.

Does not effect GE who mastered a woven carbon technique.

Topic: RE: RR Tries To Stop GTF Through Courts
Username: EA772LR
Posted 2010-10-05 07:35:18 and read 4664 times.

If somehow PW actually took IP from RR and infringed upon RR's patent for making fan blades, this would be the nail in the coffin for PW. Their commercial future is hanging largely on the success of the GTF.

Topic: RE: RR Tries To Stop GTF Through Courts
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-10-05 10:19:51 and read 4398 times.

Or it could be one's way of neutralizing a competitor's lead in the market. And demanding royalties for what could be foregone sales.

Topic: RE: RR Tries To Stop GTF Through Courts
Username: lightsaber
Posted 2010-10-05 10:24:44 and read 4379 times.

Quoting parapente (Reply 3):
I cannot believe RR owns "swept fans" in any way

   The first discussions (non-patents) are more than 20 years old, thus invalidating any patent for the basic concept.

Quoting EA772LR (Reply 4):
If somehow PW actually took IP from RR and infringed upon RR's patent for making fan blades,

No. Pratt wouldn't need to 'take' technology. That isn't the same as not infringing on a patent though...

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 5):
Or it could be one's way of neutralizing a competitor's lead in the market. And demanding royalties for what could be foregone sales.

That is the most likely scenario.

Pratt and RR have quietly been fighting a patent battle for over 15 years. Each trying to patent what they think the other is developing to 'trip them up.' RR is simply trying to 'trip up' Pratt.

Lightsaber

Topic: RE: RR Tries To Stop GTF Through Courts
Username: BoeingVista
Posted 2010-10-05 13:48:54 and read 4104 times.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 6):

The first discussions (non-patents) are more than 20 years old, thus invalidating any patent for the basic concept.

Though patent law isn't really my thing I do know that you can patent shapes and concepts, these days you can even own colours and genes. The fact that a concept was discussed (even built) and not patented at the time does not mean that it can not be patented at a later date, [see windsurfers].

The point though is that Pratt has already failed to get the patent struck out as invalid and that jury's can be unpredictable, also some organisations continue to defend actions and infringe copyrights way past the point it is obvious that they have lost the case [see WWF (environmentalists) v WWF (wrestling)]

I think that this case has legs and it shouldn't be ignored, the potential remedies available in the event that copyright infringement is established should scare Pratt and Bombardier and give Airbus pause.

Quote:
Because the owner loses the value of a copyright when infringement occurs, relief is often sought through filing a lawsuit in federal court. If infringement is established, the court can grant preliminary and permanent injunctions, or court orders that restrain the offending party from continuing to infringe the copyright. A court may also award monetary damages as a remedy for copyright infringement. The copyright owner can recover for actual financial losses and any additional profits that the infringer earned from the infringement.


[Edited 2010-10-05 13:50:58]

Topic: RE: RR Tries To Stop GTF Through Courts
Username: Bennett123
Posted 2010-10-05 13:52:11 and read 4082 times.

It would be nice to see firms competing by having the best Engineers, not the best Lawyers.

Silly me.

Topic: RE: RR Tries To Stop GTF Through Courts
Username: Pyrex
Posted 2010-10-05 21:49:10 and read 3846 times.

Quoting parapente (Reply 3):
I cannot believe RR owns "swept fans" in any way.What they do own (as I understand it) is the very special method they use to create hollow titanium swept blades.That deff' is top secret.If "somehow" P&W are using this technique then yes there would be trouble - big trouble.This is as I understand it a major RR invention/secret.

Actually, by definition, a patent is not a secret. In fact, quite the opposite. If you want a patent, all your designs and the description of your technology become public - patent filings are a matter of public record and anybody can look them up. You have exclusive rights to it but it is still public record - the logic is that you want to protect inventors while still advancing science and technology (I believe the standard for disclosure in a patent filing is anyone with a reasonable grasp of the field should be able to replicate it).

Now if you do want to protect your trade secrets from nosy eyes then you can, of course, simply lock them behind closed doors and never even let anyone know they exist. The risk you take in that case is that, if anyone arrives to the same result as you did independently, then you are entitled to exactly nothing (unless, of course, those third parties had obtained the secrets through industrial espionage, which is extremely difficult to prove).

Topic: RE: RR Tries To Stop GTF Through Courts
Username: BoeingVista
Posted 2010-10-05 23:04:48 and read 3769 times.

Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 8):
It would be nice to see firms competing by having the best Engineers, not the best Lawyers.

Silly me.

If you have the best

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 9):
The risk you take in that case is that, if anyone arrives to the same result as you did independently, then you are entitled to exactly nothing (unless, of course, those third parties had obtained the secrets through industrial espionage, which is extremely difficult to prove).

But if you worked on a joint project which utilized the patented concepts it becomes more difficult to argue that you arrived at these concepts independently when you bolt them onto your own products.

Topic: RE: RR Tries To Stop GTF Through Courts
Username: GCT64
Posted 2010-10-06 02:16:42 and read 3646 times.

Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 8):
It would be nice to see firms competing by having the best Engineers, not the best Lawyers.

Sometimes:
Firms with the best, most knowledgable engineers invent new things and patent them. Firms with less good (or less knowledgable) engineers copy other's work and then try to argue the case (with the best lawyers) that there is prior art, the invention is obvious, they aren't infringing the patent etc.

Sometimes:
Firms manage to get patents granted that should not have been granted had the patent examiners done their job thoroughly. They then use the best lawyers to defend and argue their assertion that they own the invention and everyone should pay royalties, stop making products etc.

Unless are an expert and you spend a lot of time investigating the minutae of a particular area, it is pretty much impossible to tell which case applies.

As CEO of a high-tech, patent / IP based company, I try and stay away from these patent arguments as they suck up engineering resource (with no useful output), cost money (with no useful output) and get in the way of running and growing your business.

Topic: RE: RR Tries To Stop GTF Through Courts
Username: Pyrex
Posted 2010-10-06 05:13:37 and read 3473 times.

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 10):
But if you worked on a joint project which utilized the patented concepts it becomes more difficult to argue that you arrived at these concepts independently when you bolt them onto your own products.

That's my point - if it is indeed patented then it doesn't matter if you developed it on your own or not, you cannot use it without permission. If it is a trade secret then whoever discovered it first is not entitled to anything.

Topic: RE: RR Tries To Stop GTF Through Courts
Username: Burkhard
Posted 2010-10-06 06:44:59 and read 3376 times.

Airbus wants the the GTF through IAE anyways, so I don't see that for A32X NEO this is more than about the relative share of money, but for the C-Series this could make it more expensive.

Topic: RE: RR Tries To Stop GTF Through Courts
Username: BoeingVista
Posted 2010-10-06 12:09:03 and read 3142 times.

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 13):
Airbus wants the the GTF through IAE anyways, so I don't see that for A32X NEO this is more than about the relative share of money, but for the C-Series this could make it more expensive.

But IAE looks like it's heading to the divorce courts, RR & PW fundamentaly disagree about the usefullness of GTF technology as implimented in the PW1000 / 1524, and RR is asserting that PW is using its technology without permission so an IAE GTF is not looking likley.

The operative word in the lawsuit is injunction, if RR wins the case and they are so minded they can insist that their patented technology is removed from PW development engines (PW 1524 / GTF), which could kill the engine as it will take years to remove the tech rebuild and retest the engine, if the engine is in production (GP7200) they can probably only get a licence fee but looking at the EK A380 engine count this could still be worth a few quid.


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/