User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:32:28 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why not just downgrade some of the components and make commercial versions for a lesser price? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Trijicon would charge less if they could... but if you have an item you sell to dcma/gov for one price (ie: M2/M4/T2 are overpriced as hell because Uncle Sam doesn’t care about money) you can’t turn around and sell that same item for significantly cheaper to the public. Trijicon would have to develop a specific lineup of budget optics to sell to civs. Of course as soon as that happened, when gov FWA auditors see an almost identical looking civilian market optic at 1/5th the price and BETTER performance as the contracts optic from their same vendor, they use that grounds for a justification review or contract rebid effort. Major headaches all around, basically. Trijicons hands are kind of tied if they want to keep the government contracts they have been doing at the same prices they’ve been doing them at. Trijicon is who they are because of gov sales... not public sales. Best not to bite the hand that feeds. I can understand their choices. Why not just downgrade some of the components and make commercial versions for a lesser price? I don’t know, I’m not privy to their market/production analytics. I do think it’s ridiculous that the gov still pays what it does for “red dot” technology. I think that’s the real problem here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:33:50 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Back in about 2005 I did an electrical job at a Caterpillar plant. I thought it was interesting that there was a great big John Deere tractor on the floor being disassembled by a couple of techs. Yep, we all do this, because if you want to be in that market you have to ensure your own product is not violating patent and copyright claims of your competitors |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:35:21 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Back in about 2005 I did an electrical job at a Caterpillar plant. I thought it was interesting that there was a great big John Deere tractor on the floor being disassembled by a couple of techs. Companies reverse engineer competitors products all the time. Everytime I did a job a GM Tech Center they had some competitors vehicles tore apart in a garage. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:35:26 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is Trijicon regretting having some of their products manufactured in China now? Who didn't see this coming? What Trijicon optic is made in China? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:35:31 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Trijicon is exercising their rights as an American company? GD: fuck them. Also the GD: Buy American! How DARE you bring logic and reason into this! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:35:36 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For everyone complaining about trijicon prices... Trijicon would charge less if they could... but if you have an item you sell to dcma/gov for one price (ie: M2/M4/T2 are overpriced as hell because Uncle Sam doesn’t care about money) you can’t turn around and sell that same item for significantly cheaper to the public. Trijicon would have to develop a specific lineup of budget optics to sell to civs. Of course as soon as that happened, when gov FWA auditors see an almost identical looking civilian market optic at 1/5th the price and BETTER performance as the contracts’ optics from their same vendor, they could use that grounds for a justification review or contract rebid effort. Major headaches all around, basically. Trijicon’s hands are kind of tied if they don’t want to risk the government contracts they have been doing at the same prices they’ve been doing them at. Trijicon is who they are because of gov sales... not public sales. Best not to bite the hand that feeds. I can understand their pricing choices. Aimpoint did it with the PRO and ACO... I also have no idea what the government contract prices are on Trijicon's optics, but for most things, those prices are much cheaper than consumer retail. Look at .gov unit prices on things like the M4 or M17 for an idea. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:35:56 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think you are missing the point. If the Chinese company can innovate with ideas and features that don't steal from another company no-one would object to that being manufactured wherever. Heck I would buy it if it did what I wanted at a good price. I think I am right on the point. It is a silly suit. If your ever in my neck of the woods (lol at people wanting to visit ohio) I will grab a beer with you. I am a little unorthodox about my ways, but I call a spade a spade. Making a more robust shell around the glass is not IP. It is making a better product. This toes that line of trijicon having a monopoly over 'making a more durable product?'. Eotech puts a squarish shroud over the glass... is that not acceptable? America is in a very tough spot. This is a super rough and non educated guess, but I would bet this falls into the 50% of cases that are not important. Just someone looking to take a cheap shot. If they want to burn Holosun, than do it with something a little more legitimate. I would say the replies are 50/50 as well. All of us agree 'fuck china' except for you DU fucks that linger here. Some of us just see this is as a 'flex'. And obviously china doesnt give a fuck about us, so there will be knock offs of everything until a meteor obliterates earth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:35:59 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I just find it interesting that the company Trijicon chooses to make a claim against is the only company making a sight that is comparable to the RMR in durability. Fuck sake. Trijicon Pursues Legal Action Against ACOG Patent Violation |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:36:07 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Holy shit what MRDS wouldn't violate such a broad claim? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401505/document-4_Page_01_jpg-1534230.JPG https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401505/document-4_Page_02_jpg-1534231.JPG https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401505/document-4_Page_03_jpg-1534232.JPG https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401505/document-4_Page_04_jpg-1534233.JPG https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401505/document-4_Page_05_jpg-1534234.JPG Kinda what I was thinking too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:36:54 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I’m ok with it. Fuck China. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:37:55 PM EDT
[#11]
What patent is being infringed on specifically?
The holosuns only share the footprint as far as I can tell. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:38:26 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Arfcom: F China for stealing American intellectual property! Also Arfcom: but Muh cheap Red Dot! Yep. see it pretty regularly. Fuck China until you can get a great deal. Then Fuck whatever American company that is getting screwed. Anything for a deal, right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:39:07 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don’t know, I’m not privy to their market/production analytics. I do think it’s ridiculous that the gov still pays what it does for “red dot” technology. I think that’s the real problem here. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Trijicon would charge less if they could... but if you have an item you sell to dcma/gov for one price (ie: M2/M4/T2 are overpriced as hell because Uncle Sam doesn’t care about money) you can’t turn around and sell that same item for significantly cheaper to the public. Trijicon would have to develop a specific lineup of budget optics to sell to civs. Of course as soon as that happened, when gov FWA auditors see an almost identical looking civilian market optic at 1/5th the price and BETTER performance as the contracts optic from their same vendor, they use that grounds for a justification review or contract rebid effort. Major headaches all around, basically. Trijicons hands are kind of tied if they want to keep the government contracts they have been doing at the same prices they’ve been doing them at. Trijicon is who they are because of gov sales... not public sales. Best not to bite the hand that feeds. I can understand their choices. Why not just downgrade some of the components and make commercial versions for a lesser price? I don’t know, I’m not privy to their market/production analytics. I do think it’s ridiculous that the gov still pays what it does for “red dot” technology. I think that’s the real problem here. Sorry, I didn't mean to infer you had the answer or knew the reasoning. Just a rhetorical question really. Agreed on the red dot tech/price point though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:39:49 PM EDT
[#14]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:39:56 PM EDT
[#15]
Cheap Chinese knockoffs? Maybe 5 years ago. I wouldnt call Holosun a "cheap" Chinese knockoff these days though.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:41:13 PM EDT
[#16]
The right answer is always FUCK CHINA
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:43:47 PM EDT
[#17]
Didnt Doctor optic have a MRDS years before the RMR existed? Maybe they should come back and sue trijicon.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:44:38 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't support the theft at all. However, there is a legit discussion of lack of innovation, price point, and market going on as well. Maybe I am forgetting something, possibly. But who created the most used pistol red dots? Was it designed as a piggyback to another high quality optic? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:44:42 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Holy shit what MRDS wouldn't violate such a broad claim? Qft. If trij wants to die on this hill they’ve got aimpoint, Burris, and a handful of other sellers to go after as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:45:40 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Didnt Doctor optic have a MRDS years before the RMR existed? Maybe they should come back and sue trijicon. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:45:55 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Didnt Doctor optic have a MRDS years before the RMR existed? Maybe they should come back and sue trijicon. Actually I think Tasco beat everyone to the punch . |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:45:58 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I would happily pay for an RMR if they made the window larger than a peep hole and used glass that does not look like they sourced it from the bottom of a coke bottle. They don't so I buy the only other viable option for my application. I thought the SRO would be the perfect solution until Trijicon basically said "Don't expect it not to break if you use it hard." ^^^This Trijcon needs have solid options that appeal to a larger crowd. Right now Holosun is filling that void, better sue them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:45:59 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This will help all those guys waiting for their Holosun 508t v2s. Of which I am one. I also just got an SRO but this is the same company selling two screws for $16 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:47:34 PM EDT
[#24]
Never thought I'd see this much support for China here.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:48:04 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401505/document-4_Page_06_jpg-1534235.JPGhttps://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401505/document-4_Page_07_jpg-1534236.JPGhttps://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401505/document-4_Page_08_jpg-1534237.JPGhttps://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401505/document-4_Page_09_jpg-1534238.JPGhttps://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401505/document-4_Page_10_jpg-1534239.JPG That's silly. I don't own a Holosun, but if those are the points they're picking, then why aren't they going after EOtech (+/- buttons) or Aimpoint (canted objective lens on their micro dots)? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:48:12 PM EDT
[#26]
I just returned a Holosun HE510C. The recital would dim and brighten if you barley bumped the rifle. I'm going to replace it with something not made in China. I'll spend a few hundred more, but I think it will be well worth it in the long run.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:48:16 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Holy shit what MRDS wouldn't violate such a broad claim? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401505/document-4_Page_01_jpg-1534230.JPG https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401505/document-4_Page_02_jpg-1534231.JPG https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401505/document-4_Page_03_jpg-1534232.JPG https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401505/document-4_Page_04_jpg-1534233.JPG https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401505/document-4_Page_05_jpg-1534234.JPG So every non-tubular red dot with autobrightness is infringing? When was the patent put into place? Open red dots with auto brightness have been around for a LONG time (see the Elbit Falcon from the 80s).  The Docter reflex sights are almost 20 years old (so probably pre-date the patent) and also have those design elements.  How do those not meet those same design elements just as much as the Holosun? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:49:40 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Never thought I'd see this much support for China here. People often defend their purchases and decisions. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:50:04 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:51:15 PM EDT
[#30]
I believe the standard ARFCOM GD response is go be poor somewhere else.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:51:29 PM EDT
[#31]
Reading the complaint, it basically boils down to the Holosun optics being shaped the way they are, with a forward facing LED, buttons on the side, photo sensor, and the order of the buttons controlling auto and manual mode.
Affected optics: HS407K, HS407C-V2, HE407C-GR V2, HS407CO V2, HS507K, HS507C V2, HE507C-GR V2, HE508T-RD V2 and HE508T-GR V2 Here's the patent: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17389558/1/1/trijicon-inc-v-holosun-technologies-inc/ Dunno, it's pretty detailed but is it something that really warranted the patent? Not well versed in patent litigation aside from working for companies that have been caught up in it. Definitely seen cases where a patent that shouldn't have been granted wielded like a weapon. All fun and games until your obvious patent gets invalidated in the suit but that's after millions of dollars get burned in litigation. I do know Holosun is pretty popular with shooters right now, so Trijicon bloodying them might have a PR cost. You might have taken away your competition (at a price point you don't want to play at anyway), but those consumers probably aren't going to come crawling on over to you afterward.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:52:03 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For everyone complaining about trijicon prices... Trijicon would charge less if they could... but if you have an item you sell to dcma/gov for one price (ie: M2/M4/T2 are overpriced as hell because Uncle Sam doesn’t care about money) you can’t turn around and sell that same item for significantly cheaper to the public. Trijicon would have to develop a specific lineup of budget optics to sell to civs. Of course as soon as that happened, when gov FWA auditors see an almost identical looking civilian market optic at 1/5th the price and BETTER performance as the contracts’ optics from their same vendor, they could use that grounds for a justification review or contract rebid effort. Major headaches all around, basically. Trijicon’s hands are kind of tied if they don’t want to risk the government contracts they have been doing at the same prices they’ve been doing them at. Trijicon is who they are because of gov sales... not public sales. Best not to bite the hand that feeds. I can understand their pricing choices. The "they could charge us poors less, but they're too busy overcharging our government" defense? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:52:15 PM EDT
[#33]
I'll wait and see how this shakes out. The claim seems rather broad but if it violated a patent it violated a patent.
Now the conversation about innovation and pricing is also very interesting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:54:48 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm with Trijicon on this one Have you actually looked at the features they're considering patentable? All of which were absolutely available before this patent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:55:20 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: People often defend their purchases and decisions. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Never thought I'd see this much support for China here. People often defend their purchases and decisions. I've bought my share of Chinese garbage but decided to stick with American as much as is feasible now. I'm up to 4 Trijicon optics now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:56:54 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Seems doubtful Holosun has used Trijicon "proprietary" technology. And I don't think you can patent a "pistol mounted sight" as a protected technology. Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. Wolf range patented the color red and multiple shades for their knobs, it has held in court. Brand identity is a thing, as is tech, fuck the Chicoms You want cheap optics, do the American thing and bring them to market. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:57:12 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I've bought my share of Chinese garbage but decided to stick with American as much as is feasible now. I'm up to 4 Trijicon optics now. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Never thought I'd see this much support for China here. People often defend their purchases and decisions. I've bought my share of Chinese garbage but decided to stick with American as much as is feasible now. I'm up to 4 Trijicon optics now. I'm with you there, have a couple floating around that I figured would be garbage but I never really intended them to be anything serious use. Take a look at the pic threads sometime, you'll notice a lot of the Chinesium optics are pushed over Trijicon/Aimpoint. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:57:13 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. Not certain that's all 100% fair, but for example somehow Vortex developed a made in USA holographic sight with significantly better battery life and 25% lower cost than an exps3 that's what? A decade old? I HATE Chinese patent infringement though, so even if some of the US mfgs do seem to lag I'll never cheer Chinese theft. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:57:41 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Maybe I am forgetting something, possibly. But who created the most used pistol red dots? Was it designed as a piggyback to another high quality optic? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I don't support the theft at all. However, there is a legit discussion of lack of innovation, price point, and market going on as well. Maybe I am forgetting something, possibly. But who created the most used pistol red dots? Was it designed as a piggyback to another high quality optic? I'm not sure what you are getting at here. What do your questions have to do with the points I made? I'm not supporting the theft of the tech. I am bringing up the point that Holosun might not even exist in its current quality/quantity if Trijicon did more to support the average buyer over the years. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:59:07 PM EDT
[#40]
It's the button layout and functionality that's the issue.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:59:12 PM EDT
[#41]
Sounds like Trijicon has a good case.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 4:59:56 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I would happily pay for an RMR if they made the window larger than a peep hole and used glass that does not look like they sourced it from the bottom of a coke bottle. They don't so I buy the only other viable option for my application. I thought the SRO would be the perfect solution until Trijicon basically said "Don't expect it not to break if you use it hard." That’s not really what they said, but of course the RMR has the right design to be more rugged for drop testing on concrete. FWIW out of a sample size of 32, there’s been no issues with durability of any of the SROs we’ve had. They’re not treated gently or unused, I think in the year plus we got them every gun has been through enough rounds to need new recoil spring assemblies, striker springs, and barrels. Maybe not so much “need” but the maintenance schedule we use has those parts changed after 15k rounds. These things have been banged around in vehicles, hit doorways in shoot houses, been used with SIM ammo in ECQC training, and some have gone on deployments and come back fine. A good holster that covers the optic reduce a lot of the scenarios suggested as causing the optic to be damaged as well. Anecdotal I know, but it’s proven to me that I’m okay not worrying too much. Just like any other optic, it’s an asset that can fail in certain conditions. That’s what the suppressor sights are for. But given how much faster I’ve found presentation to be with the SRO compared to the RMR it’s something I’m comfortable with. It’s hardly as fragile as a condensed YouTube review might suggest. Not saying that video’s results aren’t true, just that they’re not an absolute condemnation either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 5:00:00 PM EDT
[#43]
I would like to know what tech was stolen.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 5:01:01 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Trijicon is exercising their rights as an American company? GD: fuck them. Also the GD: Buy American! Funny how that works huh.... I'm waiting on Tijicon to release a slimmer RDS made for my G43X 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 5:01:23 PM EDT
[#45]
Sounds like the Yeti vs RTIC lawsuit. RTIC ended up having to shape their cooler to look less like the yeti. Probably why Trijicon is going after Holosun because it shares the same footprint.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 5:02:56 PM EDT
[#46]
If you can't beat em', sue em.
This is a great look for Trijicon.  Instead of hiring lawyers maybe they should've brought in more engineers. Lawyers are cheaper and easier. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 5:03:41 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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? Then you’re not tier one. It’s your funeral pal |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 5:04:22 PM EDT
[#48]
Ha! Ha!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 5:04:36 PM EDT
[#49]
good luck, they ban import of holosun and next week horosun starts being imported, followed by hellosun.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2020 5:05:45 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Fuck sake. Trijicon Pursues Legal Action Against ACOG Patent Violation Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I just find it interesting that the company Trijicon chooses to make a claim against is the only company making a sight that is comparable to the RMR in durability. Fuck sake. Trijicon Pursues Legal Action Against ACOG Patent Violation |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
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.
Attached File