User Panel
Posted: 8/5/2020 3:37:27 PM EDT
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-05/u-s-weapons-maker-seeks-ban-on-chinese-competitor-s-sights?srnd=politics-vp
U.S. Weapons Maker Seeks Ban on Chinese Competitor’s Sights A Michigan weapons maker is seeking to halt imports of what it says are cheap Chinese knockoffs of its battery-powered pistol sights. Trijicon Inc. filed a patent complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission on July 29, saying that Holosun Technologies Inc., of Los Angeles County, is working with a manufacturer in China to sell “red dot” sights that replicate features on which Trijicon has held a patent since 2013. While the Trump administration has made intellectual property protection a key plank of its policy towards China, patent cases such as Trijicon’s are subject to detailed legal procedures. Ben Langlotz, a gun patent attorney with Langlotz Patent & Trademark Works LLC not working on the case, said there are multiple patents on red-dot sights, spanning a variety of characteristics. Trijicon claims its sights have housing with increased durability and easier use. The technology is used in Trijicon’s Specialized Reflex Optic, which has a recommended retail price of $749. The most expensive Holosun sight referenced in the complaint goes for about $471, its website shows. Trijicon, whose biggest source of revenue last year was from federal law enforcement agencies, said in its complaint said that its sights are used by hunters in competitions and for target shooting. The market for guns and related products has boomed amid rising social unrest in the U.S. this year. Trijicon also filed a mirror suit in federal court in California, but that’s likely to be on hold until the ITC case is done. Agency investigations typically take 15-18 months, while a typical patent case in district court lasts two to five years. Trijicon declined to comment, as did a representative from Holosun. The ITC case is In the Matter of Certain Red Dot Sights and Components Thereof, 337-3477, U.S. International Trade Commission (Washington). The district court case is Trijicon Inc. vs. Holosun Technologies Inc., 20-6742, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Los Angeles) |
|
Nice to see a 2A giant like Trijicon go after a smaller company like Holosun. Not.
I don't think people who can afford trigi's will go for holosun. EDIT: or trijicon make some cheaper shit if you want that market. |
|
This will help all those guys waiting for their Holosun 508t v2s.
|
|
There is very little resemblance between Trijicon and Holosun sights othe than footprint. Also, Holosun is beating Trijicon on innovations and features. Trijicon sounds like sour grapes.
|
|
Is Trijicon regretting having some of their products manufactured in China now? Who didn't see this coming?
|
|
IMO it's telling that they didn't elaborate on what was the patent infringement.
Sour grapes, because no one wants to pay twice as much for less features. |
|
Trijicon is too expensive, probably for a few reasons, for many. Many people don't want to pay that kind of money so they go for an alternative source.
Perhaps Trijicon could try to manufacture some optics for the lower budget minded people? |
|
Trijicon cant beat their price point or innovation.
Force them out of buisness |
|
Quoted: There is very little resemblance between Trijicon and Holosun sights othe than footprint. Also, Holosun is beating Trijicon on innovations and features. Trijicon sounds like sour grapes. View Quote Yeah, the Chinese worked out the technology all on their own and Trijicon is just mad they're making it cheaper, not like they're known for stealing tech or anything. |
|
Quoted: Nice to see a 2A giant like Trijicon go after a smaller company like Holosun. Not. I don't think people who can afford trigi's will go for holosun. EDIT: or trijicon make some cheaper shit if you want that market. View Quote Nice to see an American support IP theft by the fucking Chinese. Not. |
|
I’m so torn. Fuck China, and I LOVE Trijicon as a company. I have more trijicon optics than other makes combined, and I’ve got a lot of optics. Still, Holosun is doing some really neat stuff in the pistol RDS market. I wish Trijicon were making a 507K competitor, for example, but they don’t. I REALLY want the batteryless RDS Holosun prototyped too. That’s some futuristic Star Trek shit.
|
|
That Holosun in has lots of features. Seems more feature rich than trijicon. What features are the suing over?
|
|
Looks like charging $500-$800 for basic, featureless red dots isn’t working out for them anymore.
|
|
Quoted: Trijicon is too expensive Perhaps Trijicon could try to manufacture some optics for the lower budget minded people? View Quote Attached File |
|
Trijicon is the HK of the optics business.
They do not care about you civilian consumer types .... We are not their primary market and never will be. |
|
Trijicon is exercising their rights as an American company?
GD: fuck them. Also the GD: Buy American! |
|
Quoted: Nice to see an American support IP theft by the fucking Chinese. Not. View Quote Easy there cowboy. Didn't necessarily say I like Holosun (I am an eotech fan) but competition is good for the market. Might push Trijicon to move forward a bit. Lets be honest, that new MRO for $800+ is ridiculous. Edit: I see it is 630 on optics planet. Still high. I think eotech and aimpoint are high as well, but we do pay for durability. |
|
A company that can't build a red-dot without magnification or durable (not counting was accused by Meprolight for stealing their reflex design 25 years ago)
or A company that's known to building milspec red-dot sights.......................................for the Chinese paramilitary... ......I'll have a coke, bud.... |
|
In
I have a Holosun, but would have chosen a trij had it not been for the price tag. |
|
Quoted: Trijicon is too expensive, probably for a few reasons, for many. Many people don't want to pay that kind of money so they go for an alternative source. Perhaps Trijicon could try to manufacture some optics for the lower budget minded people? View Quote Same with 3M/Peltor Comtacs. Two choices (if you don't want to risk eBay/ used market) Spend almost a grand on a comms headset or spend ~150 on a comms headset. I know if there was a commercial version of the Comtac that went for 350-400 (with EVERYTHING, not just the headset and then another 400 in parts to make it work), I would buy that. |
|
Quoted: Trijicon is too expensive, probably for a few reasons, for many. Many people don't want to pay that kind of money so they go for an alternative source. Perhaps Trijicon could try to manufacture some optics for the lower budget minded people? View Quote Or just buy the Fakog factory and start marketing them as legit Trijicon optics. |
|
Quoted: Trijicon is too expensive, probably for a few reasons, for many. Many people don't want to pay that kind of money so they go for an alternative source. Perhaps Trijicon could try to manufacture some optics for the lower budget minded people? View Quote Buy Chinese shit then. I’ll keep buying Trijicon and Aimpoint. |
|
Arfcom: F China for stealing American intellectual property!
Also Arfcom: but Muh cheap Red Dot! |
|
|
|
|
Quoted: IMO it's telling that they didn't elaborate on what was the patent infringement. Sour grapes, because no one wants to pay twice as much for less features. View Quote Trijicon's complaint filed in federal court is very specific about the infringement. Don't blame Trijicon because the Bloomberg reporter didn't or can't summarize it. As best as I can summarize, Trijicon holds a patent on mini/reflex red dots constructed a certain way with certain features. Holosun copied Trijicon's patented design. You could certainly have a broader discussion about recent trends in patent law and the USPTO's willingness to issue patents, but I don't see how Trijicon can be faulted for correctly using U.S. intellectual property protections. I'm surprised at the number of people here on the "If the Chicoms can rip it off and make it cheaper, screw the people that made it first and patented it if it saves me a few bucks" bandwagon. And we sit around wondering what happened to U.S. manufacturing. Apparently, the American people themselves sold it to the low bidder. |
|
|
I'm kinda surprised with all the "China is a**hole" and "F**k China" sentiment on this board that so many people in this thread are running to defend Holosun.
So patent infringement is OK if the original product is "too expensive?" I'd like to see what the courts say. |
|
Quoted: Arfcom: F China for stealing American intellectual property! Also Arfcom: but Muh cheap Red Dot! View Quote What do expect? If you wanted to start manufacturing a cheap red dot here in the US, you would get ran out by the top dogs. EoT,AP and triji. Not to mention we can make anything cheap here. Thanks unions. |
|
Fuck the Chicoms, if they are stealing patented things they are thieves and need to be treated as such
|
|
Quoted: Easy there cowboy. Didn't necessarily say I like Holosun (I am an eotech fan) but competition is good for the market. Might push Trijicon to move forward a bit. Lets be honest, that new MRO for $800+ is ridiculous. Edit: I see it is 630 on optics planet. Still high. I think eotech and aimpoint are high as well, but we do pay for durability. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Nice to see an American support IP theft by the fucking Chinese. Not. Easy there cowboy. Didn't necessarily say I like Holosun (I am an eotech fan) but competition is good for the market. Might push Trijicon to move forward a bit. Lets be honest, that new MRO for $800+ is ridiculous. Edit: I see it is 630 on optics planet. Still high. I think eotech and aimpoint are high as well, but we do pay for durability. IP theft ? Competition |
|
ARFCOM: Fuck China, IP theft, COVID, etc, etc.
ALSO ARFCOM: Im to cheap to buy American so fuck Trijicon for suing a company who makes cheaper knock offs. |
|
Quoted: Uh, WTF? View Quote I will say it one last time. I am not supporting commie china. It is more for market competition. I didnt even know about the 508t until this thread. Lets be honest again, half the 'supposed gun guys in GD' buy shit because it is used by the .mil. It would be nice to see the top 3 move forward a bit. Eotech I am looking at you with battery life. |
|
Quoted: Trijicon does not violate other's patents, then illegally manufacture other's intellectual property with lower quality in China. Get it now? View Quote Seems doubtful Holosun has used Trijicon "proprietary" technology. And I don't think you can patent a "pistol mounted sight" as a protected technology. |
|
Quoted: Seems doubtful Holosun has used Trijicon "proprietary" technology. And I don't think you can patent a "pistol mounted sight" as a protected technology. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Trijicon does not violate other's patents, then illegally manufacture other's intellectual property with lower quality in China. Get it now? Seems doubtful Holosun has used Trijicon "proprietary" technology. And I don't think you can patent a "pistol mounted sight" as a protected technology. |
|
I'd like to know what IP Holosun, a relative newcomer to the MRDS market has supposedly stolen from Trijicon. Burris, Insight, Docter, Fowler, CMORE, Leupold, and probably others all had MRDS offerings that existed prior to Holosun even incorporating in 2015. Did they steal Trijicon's IP?
The Holosuns use an RMR footprint is the only real similarity between them. By all means if Trijicon feels Holosun did steal IP, sue them. That's what the court is for. I just have a hard time believing that's actually the case in this instance. |
|
|
|
|
|
GD: fuck china!
also GD: hold my beer while I buy every chinese product in sight china is gay, fuck china. |
|
|
Quoted: Seems doubtful Holosun has used Trijicon "proprietary" technology. And I don't think you can patent a "pistol mounted sight" as a protected technology. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Trijicon does not violate other's patents, then illegally manufacture other's intellectual property with lower quality in China. Get it now? Seems doubtful Holosun has used Trijicon "proprietary" technology. And I don't think you can patent a "pistol mounted sight" as a protected technology. Yeah I guess this is where I’m at. If they’re legitimately using their patented R&D fuck that. If it’s some sour grapes thing, then fuck that. I really like Trijicon so I want to give them the benefit of the doubt here, but until I know that I don’t feel good casting onto either side of this. |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.