Sawstop's Patenet To Expire in 2021 Cheaper Saws?

[Bruce Wrenn]

With Sawstop's patent set to expire in 2021, will the market be "flooded" with less expensive (sounds better than cheaper) saws? When Biesemeyers patent was set to expire years ago, the market was flooded with Biese clones. Suprisingly, none of the manufacturers recognized that Biesmeyer had rescended his patent years earlier.

[Edwin Santos]

I wish I knew how to articulate it properly - but a post in one of the many Sawstop patent discussion threads in this forum mentioned that there are techniques that a sharp patent lawyer can use to tweak, amend, append, supplement a patent that can effectively keep the clock running indefinitely. The knowledgeable poster who talked about this basically said don't hold your breath.

I don't know for sure if any of this is accurate, but with the way the world seems to be, it wouldn't surprise me. Especially since the story goes that the Sawstop founder is a patent lawyer.

I really admired Elon Musk's move to abandon Tesla's patents in favor of open source in 2014. His blog post that announced it is quite inspiring, and if you're inclined, you can read it here (https://www.tesla.com/blog/all-our-patent-are-belong-you)

[tom lucas]

I read an article about 6 months ago where the government was considering making a saw-stop like feature a requirement. Me, I'm on the fence. I don't want to see the costs go through the roof, and I think there are likely better technological solutions that don't result in a $300 cost when the safety feature is triggered. It's probably best if the government stays out it and lets the market drive it.

[Ole Anderson]

In all fairness to woodworkers worldwide, I hope SS doesn't try to extend their patent. They recouped their development costs and, I am sure, made a fair profit. They will continue to sell a quality saw, but probably at slightly reduced cost due to competition. To extend the patent is greed at our expense. I hope they do the right thing.

[Art Mann]

The inventor of Sawstop behaved in a very unethical manner in my opinion. As I understand it, he sold the company. Maybe the new owners will have a better sense of right and wrong but I'm not holding my breath.

[Simon MacGowen]

My contact at Festool corporate office (its parent co. is now the owner of SS) said no one in his office there seems to be sure about exactly when the different patents of SS will expire. The executives and lawyers of course do

As a longtime user of SS, I am the first one who hope the SS technology will be made free for others to copy as soon as possible. I have friends who have had saw injuries and I am scared by seeing so many youtubers use their saws as if they were immune from accidents. They talk, move stock, move their hands across, while sometimes even throwing a glance at the camera or something. SS won't stop them from doing that, but at least it will stop them from getting hurt seriously.

Like seatbelts and airbags, I support government regulations on tablesaw technology. I agree many can't afford the higher prices and so the sooner the SS patents expire, the better. Clones will drive prices down. In fact, if the saw industry group had not turned down Gass' offer (which would have hiked a regular saw by $300 or so), Gass would not have formed his company and everyone today would have been enjoying the SS technology widely and at much affordable prices. SS today is the #1 selling cabinet saws in N.A. because it is a great saw in addition to its finger saving feature. I hope future clones will try to match its performance, otherwise, a lousy saw with a SS feature will still be a lemon.

Just imagine how many fingers will be lost between now and 2021(?) or 2025 or whatever dates all the SS patents expire. According to one source (CSPC?), it will be 10x365x 3, or 10 x 365 x 7, or 10 x 365 x whatever the actual no. of years that the SS patents are still effective.
Simon

[Scott Brader]

The inventor of Sawstop behaved in a very unethical manner in my opinion. As I understand it, he sold the company. Maybe the new owners will have a better sense of right and wrong but I'm not holding my breath.

This is why I am not looking at a SS as I shop for a new table saw.

[Andrew Hughes]

With all the talk from inventors and this new generation of tech kids. Flying cars smart homes robots etc. I'm thinking the days of handfed machines are numbered. Esp tablesaws soon the furniture machine where you stick wood in one end and out pops your piece that's assembled in your house.
The satisfied home owner proudly shares his ability to make what he wants. And declares himself a woodworker.:)

[Simon MacGowen]

With all the talk from inventors and this new generation of tech kids. Flying cars smart homes robots etc. I'm thinking the days of handfed machines are numbered. Esp tablesaws soon the furniture machine where you stick wood in one end and out pops your piece that's assembled in your house.
The satisfied home owner proudly shares his ability to make what he wants. And declares himself a woodworker.:)

This is happening not just in commercial woodworking but in every aspect of mass production. I once had a chance in an IKEA factory tour and witnessed for myself that the speed of production makes it possible for IKEA to sell their furniture at such low prices while making a good profit.

Hobby is different. We can choose our tools and methods. But increasingly, CNC machines/ routers are accepted as a woodworking machine. With such machines, future woodworkers would be able to build pieces with very complex joints, all without sweat. Dry fitting could even be made unnecessary!

Simon

[Rod Sheridan]

I read an article about 6 months ago where the government was considering making a saw-stop like feature a requirement. Me, I'm on the fence. I don't want to see the costs go through the roof, and I think there are likely better technological solutions that don't result in a $300 cost when the safety feature is triggered. It's probably best if the government stays out it and lets the market drive it.

Hi Tom, I agree with letting the market choose the solution, however I think it's time for regulations to mandate active safety systems once the patent expires.

That should give a few years to develop regulations as to what the machines have to sense, how fast, what sort of injury is acceptable etc.

regards, Rod.

[Pat Barry]

I believe Sawstop could simply renew their patent by paying the recurring cost and still own the IP and thus block competition.

[Pat Barry]

I read an article about 6 months ago where the government was considering making a saw-stop like feature a requirement. Me, I'm on the fence. I don't want to see the costs go through the roof, and I think there are likely better technological solutions that don't result in a $300 cost when the safety feature is triggered. It's probably best if the government stays out it and lets the market drive it.
Note - its a sad day when they can regulate what saw technology we can use but other, more lethal products, are readily available to virtually anyone

[Ray Newman]

Let's say that the SawStop patents expired.

Will the SawStop technology fit into existing table saw design? Or, will table saw design require changes to accommodate the SawStop technology?

If the SawStop technology requires a design change, will the consumer see the anticipated price breaks as the costs for redesign, retooling, etc., are reflected in the selling price and are passed on to the consumer.

In all the discussions/arguments/rants over SawStop, I cannot recall this issue of SawStop compatibility will current design discussed. Does anyone know??

[Steve Demuth]

I believe Sawstop could simply renew their patent by paying the recurring cost and still own the IP and thus block competition.

That's not how patents work. Festool may be able to extend some of their patents administratively beyond the nominal expiration date, if their issuance was delayed by government regulatory action, or delays at the USPTO. That could get them a few years extension. Beyond that, for mechanical patents like theirs, the patents become public property and can be copied by anyone.

The patents that protect the Sawstop mechanism are fairly dense and inter-related, and it's hard to know without a deep study exactly when they will be free, but it's almost certainly over by the mid-2020s.

[Steve Demuth]

You can, I think, reasonably assume that all the major mid-to-high end brands are already working on blade stopping technology, and talking to their (almost universally Chinese or Taiwanese) manufacturers to prepare.

[David Kumm]

To me it will be a bigger deal when the more expensive industrial machines will have the choice of the technology. Now it only works on hobby level saws with 10" blades. Hobbiests have a choice but professional workers don't. Hopefully that will evolve. Dave

[Mike Henderson]

I believe Sawstop could simply renew their patent by paying the recurring cost and still own the IP and thus block competition.

No, inventors wish that was the case. A patent has a specific life and extending it is very difficult, if not impossible.

Mike

[Mike Wilkins]

Maybe Bosch will wait until then and re-release their blade stop flesh sensing saw. Even though their application was different than the SS version, the courts were swayed by the SS owners to force Bosch to cease marketing their own machine.

[Mark Kanof]

With all the talk from inventors and this new generation of tech kids. Flying cars smart homes robots etc. I'm thinking the days of handfed machines are numbered. Esp tablesaws soon the furniture machine where you stick wood in one end and out pops your piece that's assembled in your house.
The satisfied home owner proudly shares his ability to make what he wants. And declares himself a woodworker.:)

Maybe, but I think a bigger potential "risk" is that people completely lose the ability to make things for themselves. I'm still a fairly young guy (35) and see a lot of people my age and younger, not only uninterested in building things themselves, but in some cases actually looking at building certain things as a magical process that can only be done by "professionals". At least as things stand now, I have a lot more in common in terms of the hobby of woodworking with someone that makes all their stuff on a CNC (even though I do my stuff with power tools that are human directed) than with someone who has zero interest in building things and just wants to spend their free time golfing or whatever. Basically, even if the feeding of materials is turned over to robots, there will still be a lot of room for creativity in what you build, which I think is the most important part of this hobby.

[Myk Rian]

I'm thinking the days of handfed machines are numbered. Esp tablesaws soon the furniture machine where you stick wood in one end and out pops your piece that's assembled in your house.
It's already been done. :D

379635

[Marshall Harrison]

It's already been done. :D

379635

That's neat. Where can I buy me one?

Hopefully I can get a bigger version. LOL

[Simon MacGowen]

To me it will be a bigger deal when the more expensive industrial machines will have the choice of the technology. Now it only works on hobby level saws with 10" blades. Hobbiests have a choice but professional workers don't. Hopefully that will evolve. Dave

Not sure what you mean by professional workers don't have a choice. Many cabinet shops now have the ICS saws and a lot of businesses with employees are using SawStop to prevent legal suits in case of accidents.

If you are talking about SS in a large saw, Google to find a video that shows the SS being tested in a huge sawing machine.

Simon

[Mike Henderson]

A different technology is used in the meat industry. Practically all meat is cut on a bandsaw these days. The workers wear blue gloves and there are multiple cameras pointed at the work area of the bandsaw. If a camera detects that a hand is going into the saw, the mechanism stops the saw immediately.

I can imagine that before that technology was developed there were a lot of meat cutters who had lost fingers.

At least that's my understanding of how it works. If someone is more knowledgeable, please post a correction.

Mike

[Robert Pugmire]

Let the market decide and i hope the tech doesn't get mandated by govt regulation. Besides the personal ownership issues, it would stifle innovation and increase cost waiting on govt approval. Look at other industries that are mandated, its not just the model, but color variations and any minor update has to go through the approval process over again.

I do know of other patents that were influential to the selling of there product were able get it trademarked.

[David Kumm]

Simon, SS ICS is a good saw but not built to the same standards as true commercial machines. It is used in many shops because of the technology but I've heard mixed opinions on how well it stands up to hard industrial use. My comment was the hope that larger heavier saws will also receive the technology. I've also hoped for a true sliding SS that could handle the 12-16" blades and give Martin, Altendorf, SCMI and others some competition. Maybe that will happen as competition increases. Dave

[Mike Henderson]

...I do know of other patents that were influential to the selling of there product were able get it trademarked.

Patents (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent)and trademarks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark)are very different things. A trademark is just what it says - it's a logo or sign that identifies the product. A trademark can last forever. A patent has a limited lifetime.

The whole rational for patent law is that the inventor "teaches" how to do the patented process and the government gives him or her the right to restrict others from doing the process for a limited period of time. After that time, the invention is "public domain" and open for any one to use without restriction.

And just as a side note, if you invent something and do not apply for a patent, but disclose the invention publically, after a fairly short time you lose the right to patent your invention and any one can use it without restriction.

Mike

[Tim M Tuttle]

The inventor of Sawstop behaved in a very unethical manner in my opinion. As I understand it, he sold the company. Maybe the new owners will have a better sense of right and wrong but I'm not holding my breath.

In what way was he unethical?

[johnny means]

SawStops have always had to be priced as completely as possible. It's not like they ever had a monopoly on the table saw market. I seriously doubt they were ever free to set their prices free of market forces, so I can't see how anyone else is going to be able to build similar products for much less.

[Patrick Irish]

Simon, SS ICS is a good saw but not built to the same standards as true commercial machines. It is used in many shops because of the technology but I've heard mixed opinions on how well it stands up to hard industrial use. My comment was the hope that larger heavier saws will also receive the technology. I've also hoped for a true sliding SS that could handle the 12-16" blades and give Martin, Altendorf, SCMI and others some competition. Maybe that will happen as competition increases. Dave

I'd much rather have a Mini Max cu 410 than a sawstop. A sawstop is a great saw for the price.

[Tim M Tuttle]

SawStops have always had to be priced as completely as possible. It's not like they ever had a monopoly on the table saw market. I seriously doubt they were ever free to set their prices free of market forces, so I can't see how anyone else is going to be able to build similar products for much less.

They have to be charging a higher premium now for the safety feature than they would if they had competition. I could see jobsite saws with his safety feature going for around $1000 on the low end but not a whole lot less. The Bosch was about the same price as the SS jobsite saw, wasnt it?

[Simon MacGowen]

Simon, SS ICS is a good saw but not built to the same standards as true commercial machines. It is used in many shops because of the technology but I've heard mixed opinions on how well it stands up to hard industrial use. My comment was the hope that larger heavier saws will also receive the technology. I've also hoped for a true sliding SS that could handle the 12-16" blades and give Martin, Altendorf, SCMI and others some competition. Maybe that will happen as competition increases. Dave

The video I referred to is a SS tech. used on an Italian industrial scale sliding (?) saw, if my memory is correct. Can any other member locate that video? SS might already be doing some joint work with another Euro saw before Festool's parent co. bought it.

Simon

[John Sincerbeaux]

The video I referred to is a SS tech. used on an Italian industrial scale sliding (?) saw, if my memory is correct. Can any other member locate that video? SS might already be doing some joint work with another Euro saw before Festool's parent co. bought it.

Simon

Griggio makes a slider with “Safety System”.

I think a slider with that system is way overkill. My hands are never close to the blade with a slider. With clamps and or a Fritz &Franz jig the tiniest of pieces of wood can be cut with your hands miles away from the blade.

[Robert Pugmire]

Patents (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent)and trademarks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark)are very different things. A trademark is just what it says - it's a logo or sign that identifies the product. A trademark can last forever. A patent has a limited lifetime.

The whole rational for patent law is that the inventor "teaches" how to do the patented process and the government gives him or her the right to restrict others from doing the process for a limited period of time. After that time, the invention is "public domain" and open for any one to use without restriction.

And just as a side note, if you invent something and do not apply for a patent, but disclose the invention publically, after a fairly short time you lose the right to patent your invention and any one can use it without restriction.

Mike

Ernie Emerson just recently trademarked his "emerson wave operner" after it patent was coming to an end.

Sal Glessor did a similar thing for Spyderco... not sure of the legal reasons but they both license it out it to other manufacturers

[Simon MacGowen]

Griggio makes a slider with “Safety System”.

I think a slider with that system is way overkill. My hands are never close to the blade with a slider. With clamps and or a Fritz &Franz jig the tiniest of pieces of wood can be cut with your hands miles away from the blade.

Thank you.

The sliding saw hot dog demo:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HmMKyZlcMM

Simon

[Martin Wasner]

With all the talk from inventors and this new generation of tech kids. Flying cars smart homes robots etc. I'm thinking the days of handfed machines are numbered. Esp tablesaws soon the furniture machine where you stick wood in one end and out pops your piece that's assembled in your house.
The satisfied home owner proudly shares his ability to make what he wants. And declares himself a woodworker.:)

Ha! I wish. Outfitting mama Fanuc to handle most facets of a cabinet shop would be crazy expensive.

I dream of a low employee count automated shop. I'd get a lot more sleep and way less heartburn.

[Bohdan Drozdowskyj]

Griggio makes a slider with “Safety System”.

I think a slider with that system is way overkill. My hands are never close to the blade with a slider. With clamps and or a Fritz &Franz jig the tiniest of pieces of wood can be cut with your hands miles away from the blade.


In my case it was the slider mechanism that resulted in the board that I was holding flipping over and putting my hand into the blade.

I was nowhere near the blade but the flipping board jerked my hand sideways into the blade. I will admit that I was doing something that was not correct but it was a new machine and I just did something that I had done on a different machine many times.

So even a slider can bite you if you get complacent.

[Ole Anderson]

My experience is that the initial patent must be renewed at 3, 7 and 11 years until at the 20 year mark, you can no longer claim exclusive rights. Each renewal is more expensive than the previous one. I was getting small royalties on my patent until well after it expired.

[Brad Alexander]

Sawstop technology is nothing new. It's a spring loaded blade brake operated by GFI circuitry. GFI circuitry that was developed because of government regulations.

[Pete Staehling]

Note - its a sad day when they can regulate what saw technology we can use but other, more lethal products, are readily available to virtually anyone
I agree with this 100%.

I don't think my table saw is anywhere near being the most dangerous tool in my shop. In close to 60 years of working with tools I have had a lot of injuries and the vast majority were from hand tools or handheld power tools. I have never in all that time had a table saw related injury.

Looking back on my injuries, I found that failure to use clamps or a vice or putting hands too close to clamped work pieces accounted for the overwhelming majority of my injuries. When that finally sunk in and I did better at not holding work pieces when using sharp tools my injuries became pretty rare.

[Roger Marty]

Each brake has a 32-bit processor. The algorithm to process the signal is not trivial. Don't entirely minimize their engineering as trivial and nothing new.

[Marshall Harrison]

Each brake has a 32-bit processor. The algorithm to process the signal is not trivial. Don't entirely minimize their engineering as trivial and nothing new.

If they have a copyright on the software algorithm that can last up to 150 years.

[Mike Henderson]

If they have a copyright on the software algorithm that can last up to 150 years.
A copyright applies to the specific code, not to the idea. Another person can start from scratch, write code that does exactly the same thing, and not violate the copyright. In essence, copyright protects against copying the work. That applies to a book as well as software code.

In no way would that prevent another company from doing the exact same thing that SawStop does. A patent, however, protects the concept. If someone did the exact same thing, the patent owner could assert against that person or company.

Mike

[A copyright would probably be of little use because Festool is not going to let anyone outside of the company see the code.]

[Mike Henderson]

Each brake has a 32-bit processor. The algorithm to process the signal is not trivial. Don't entirely minimize their engineering as trivial and nothing new.

There are many, many situations where companies have produced alternatives to very complex systems. For example, many people produce WiFi (802.11) products. The complexity of 802.11 is mind boggling. People are smart. If one person can do it, another can. And the implementations from different companies not only have to work, they have to work with each other. And that's a more complex problem.

Compared to 802.11, I imagine the software to detect a finger touching the blade is pretty trivial.

Mike

[Another example, not as well known, is SONET. It is exceedingly complex and yet multiple companies produce working (and interworking) products.]

[What may happen is that a semiconductor company (probably in China) will make chips that implement the SawStop safety feature (after the patents expire) and sell those chips to the companies who make table saws. That would make sense because it would only require one company to make the investment to build the "system", rather than every table saw company having to do it. That model is used in WiFi where several companies make WiFi chips and many companies make consumer products with WiFi in them by purchasing the chips.]

[Simon MacGowen]

I agree with this 100%.

I don't think my table saw is anywhere near being the most dangerous tool in my shop. In close to 60 years of working with tools I have had a lot of injuries and the vast majority were from hand tools or handheld power tools. I have never in all that time had a table saw related injury.

Looking back on my injuries, I found that failure to use clamps or a vice or putting hands too close to clamped work pieces accounted for the overwhelming majority of my injuries. When that finally sunk in and I did better at not holding work pieces when using sharp tools my injuries became pretty rare.

Ya know Pat was talking about apples and oranges, don't you?

Just because something else is more fatal or more dangerous does not mean government regulations on better safety is wrong. With that kind of logic, we don't even need any warning labels on ANY products.

Any product that is made safer (due to government regulations or not) is a good thing. If the industry does not act or acts only for its own interest, the government has to step in. Riving knives, like seat belts, smoking hazard label warning etc. are good examples. Why not mandatory finger-saving features when the patents expire?

Simon

Simon

[Simon MacGowen]

In no way would that prevent another company from doing the exact same thing that SawStop does. A patent, however, protects the concept. If someone did the exact same thing, the patent owner could assert against that person or company.

Mike

Bosch already tried that...and we know the outcome.

Festool should come out with a SS bandsaw and mitresaw! (Who knows, may be they are working on them already).

Simon

[Martin Wasner]

Any product that is made safer (due to government regulations or not) is a good thing.

That is subjective to view point. I'm in the camp of there being too many people and seemingly those who should fall prey to Darwinism are far out breeding those who can avoid it on their own.

I say take the labels off for a few decades and see if we're not better off as a specie.

[Simon MacGowen]

That is subjective to view point. I'm in the camp of there being too many people and seemingly those who should fall prey to Darwinism are far out breeding those who can avoid it on their own.

I say take the labels off for a few decades and see if we're not better off as a specie.

Even with warning labels, the rate of incidents, accidents and injuries is not lowering. Why would we think the opposite would make things better?

I understand your point and no, I am not saying everyone needs the extra protection such as the SS feature. The same can be said of airbags, seat belts, smoking etc. I still remember the days of flying in a smoking chamber for over 8 hours and if no laws were passed about forbidding smoking today, I think I would still be flying, but with a portable O2 and/or water tight air filtration mask.

But when the public safety concerns are ignored by certain group -- in this case, the saw making industry -- the government has to do its duty. If, say, a professional group -- doctors or lawyers -- fails to govern itself well, the government will step in and enforce certain measures. Why saw makers should be exempted?

Simon

[Art Mann]

Doctors and lawyers have failed miserably to regulate themselves and the government hasn't done anything about it. Why should the government single out tool manufacturers?

I would prefer that consumers make their own choices. There are thousands of people who wouldn't be able to own a table saw if the purchase price suddenly jumped $300. That is what Gast lobbied for. I used to be one of those people. Every law or regulation has unintended consequences that may be worse than the unhappy outcome the regulation is designed to prevent.



But when the public safety concerns are ignored by certain group -- in this case, the saw making industry -- the government has to do its duty. If, say, a professional group -- doctors or lawyers -- fails to govern itself well, the government will step in and enforce certain measures. Why saw makers should be exempted?
Simon

[Simon MacGowen]

Doctors and lawyers have failed miserably to regulate themselves and the government hasn't done anything about it. Why should the government single out tool manufacturers?

I would prefer that consumers make their own choices. There are thousands of people who wouldn't be able to own a table saw if the purchase price suddenly jumped $300. That is what Gast lobbied for. I used to be one of those people. Every law or regulation has unintended consequences that may be worse than the unhappy outcome the regulation is designed to prevent.

As someone close to people in the medical profession, I disagree with your first statement. Yes, the system has many holes but please don't paint with a super big brush and the changes in the medical society are ongoing with stresses on the practitioners that outsiders cannot feel. Those stresses come from both the governing bodies, governments (state etc). insurers and patient groups. All for the good of everyone, if I may. The point is, like it or not, the government is doing something even not to the extent or speed we consumers (or patients) like it to be. But you are making a good argument that more, not less, government action seems to be needed!

Now, no one is saying better safety has no cost implications. By your reasoning, we should allow cars without airbags, etc. to be sold, at a lower cost ($2,000 less?) so more people can afford them!

Let us put the Gass factor aside (he no longer owns the SS company). If the SS patents have all expired and anyone can produce a saw with such technology, would you still support the notion that every new saw must have the finger-saving technology? Riving knives cost more money for saw makers to make their saws? Would you support that every new cabinet saw should have a riving knife (which has no Gass or patents concerns)?

What about those who want nothing of those features? They can take care of themselves, they say. NO worries, in the next 50 years and more, there will still be endless supply of old saws or old stock without such add-ons. The new regulations I have in mind do not ban using or reselling them; I am talking about designing and manufacturing new saws.

If Festool came up with a finger-saving bandsaw and mitre saw etc. that doesn't infringe on the SS patents, would you support that every new bandsaw, mitres saw etc, be sold with such safety feature? Again, there is no Gass factor here.

I know there are people who even think we can live peacefully and constructively without ANY government. Can we?

Simon

[Pat Barry]

As someone close to people in the medical profession, I disagree with your first statement. Yes, the system has many holes but please don't paint with a super big brush and the changes in the medical society are ongoing with stresses on the practitioners that outsiders cannot feel. Those stresses come from both the governing bodies, governments (state etc). insurers and patient groups. All for the good of everyone, if I may. The point is, like it or not, the government is doing something even not to the extent or speed we consumers (or patients) like it to be. But you are making a good argument that more, not less, government action seems to be needed!

Now, no one is saying better safety has no cost implications. By your reasoning, we should allow cars without airbags, etc. to be sold, at a lower cost ($2,000 less?) so more people can afford them!

Let us put the Gass factor aside (he no longer owns the SS company). If the SS patents have all expired and anyone can produce a saw with such technology, would you still support the notion that every new saw must have the finger-saving technology? Riving knives cost more money for saw makers to make their saws? Would you support that every new cabinet saw should have a riving knife (which has no Gass or patents concerns)?

What about those who want nothing of those features? They can take care of themselves, they say. NO worries, in the next 50 years and more, there will still be endless supply of old saws or old stock without such add-ons. The new regulations I have in mind do not ban using or reselling them; I am talking about designing and manufacturing new saws.

If Festool came up with a finger-saving bandsaw and mitre saw etc. that doesn't infringe on the SS patents, would you support that every new bandsaw, mitres saw etc, be sold with such safety feature? Again, there is no Gass factor here.

I know there are people who even think we can live peacefully and constructively without ANY government. Can we?

Simon
Lets not make this about government per se, but about what it is - some people are just smarter than others and they want to make sure everyone else knows it and that everyone complies with their super smart wishes.

This happens everywhere - not just table saws. Take seat belts for example - its idiotic that there are laws mandating use of seat belts. Without the law, dumb people will not use seat belts and might get hurt. Who cares? You care, because at some level this might cost you, the faithful seatbelt user and law abider, in your pocketbook. Otherwise, why worry about what those dumb people do?

Same thing for smoking.

Another example - backyard mechanics get hurt working on their cars, probably more get hurt and some far worse than with table saws. Wouldn't you just love it if there was a hood sensor that kept the motor from running if the hood was open, then only give the keys to the sensor to the 'real' mechanics.

[Peter Christensen]

SawStop did in the beginning have a bandsaw with a blade break. It was on their website.

[Edwin Santos]

Lets not make this about government per se, but about what it is - some people are just smarter than others and they want to make sure everyone else knows it and that everyone complies with their super smart wishes.

This happens everywhere - not just table saws. Take seat belts for example - its idiotic that there are laws mandating use of seat belts. Without the law, dumb people will not use seat belts and might get hurt. Who cares? You care, because at some level this might cost you, the faithful seatbelt user and law abider, in your pocketbook. Otherwise, why worry about what those dumb people do?

Same thing for smoking.

Another example - backyard mechanics get hurt working on their cars, probably more get hurt and some far worse than with table saws. Wouldn't you just love it if there was a hood sensor that kept the motor from running if the hood was open, then only give the keys to the sensor to the 'real' mechanics.

Pat - one of the things that ties in to what you're saying is the attitudes that are characteristic of certain groups. I'd say woodworkers as a group tend to be not-so-receptive to being told what to do by the government no matter how benevolent the mandate may be. This does not surprise me because most woodworkers are do-it-yourself types that are used to being self-reliant and self-accountable. Usually people wired that way see less need for the government to save them from harm, instead they place that responsibility upon themselves. I think it's more an issue of human nature of the demographic than legal or political. And I'm not saying it's right or wrong.

This may also be why SawStop in general is such a polarizing subject among woodworkers. On the one hand you have the story where Mr. Gass, the well intended inventor, was simply trying to make the world a safer place and the greedy, powerful tool corporations snubbed him, forcing the poor fellow to valiantly manufacture his own table saw and defend himself when large companies were trying to squash him. David and Goliath.

On the other hand you have the alternative story that says once Mr. Gass, the opportunistic patent attorney, secured his web of patents, he used that influence and the threat of liability to shake down the tool companies and when they balked at his license and royalty demands, he then went and petitioned the Feds to mandate HIS technology in a shrewd attempt to create a legal monopoly, one that would be imposed upon all of us, which attempt failed. And then when one company (Bosch) tried to come to market with a safety device that they hoped was different enough to safely exist as an alternative to SawStop, Mr. Gass, the patent attorney successfully detonated his patent landmines and that was the end of that.

Which story is more correct? I think you'd have to have been directly involved to know for sure, and I wasn't so I really don't. But unsurprisingly the latter story, which was widely spread, did not play well with a good many woodworkers, as good as the SawStop saw itself may be. It's a very interesting situation and I wonder how it might change with Festool as the new owner.

For an interesting story in contrasts, look up the story of inventor/woodworker/boatbuilder Bill Biesemeyer and the Biesemeyer fence. His story played very well with woodworkers.


Edwin

[Peter Christensen]

Keep in mind that Mr. Bosch like the other companies wanted nothing to do with blade brakes until they were sued and lost because a worker on a job site using one of their saws without guards sustained severe hand injuries. Mr. Bosch was put in a position of having to make saws with a brake or be seen as negligent when the next accident with their saws happened and they had done nothing knowing the saws could be dangerous. They were just forced into covering their behinds. They are sold here in Canada for a couple hundred more than the same SawStop sized one, unchallenged by SawStop, but that could be due to the much smaller market here or perhaps because our laws are different.

[Simon MacGowen]

They are sold here in Canada for a couple hundred more than the same SawStop sized one, unchallenged by SawStop, but that could be due to the much smaller market here or perhaps because our laws are different.

The new owner may choose to continue to ignore that situation even though its muscles are much larger and stronger than SS. If the patents are actually running out in 6 to 10 years as rumored (no one outside the old or new ownership knows for sure), a Canadian battle may not be worth a fight at all. Better put the resources into expanding the SS feature to other Festool machines.

Simon

[Mike Henderson]

Keep in mind that Mr. Bosch like the other companies wanted nothing to do with blade brakes until they were sued and lost because a worker on a job site using one of their saws without guards sustained severe hand injuries. Mr. Bosch was put in a position of having to make saws with a brake or be seen as negligent when the next accident with their saws happened and they had done nothing knowing the saws could be dangerous. They were just forced into covering their behinds. They are sold here in Canada for a couple hundred more than the same SawStop sized one, unchallenged by SawStop, but that could be due to the much smaller market here or perhaps because our laws are different.

Patents can only be asserted in the country of their issue. That is, if you want protection in Canada, you have to get a Canadian patent. Same with every other country - I don't know how the EU works now, maybe you can get an EU patent and it will cover all the EU countries. When I was working, we would only get a patent in a limited number of countries because of the cost of each patent. So, USA for sure. Maybe England, Germany and France for a valuable patent. Most of the time we would not get a Canadian patent - too small of a market.

SawStop may not have Canadian patents.

Mike

[Simon MacGowen]

Patents can only be asserted in the country of their issue. That is, if you want protection in Canada, you have to get a Canadian patent. Same with every other country - I don't know how the EU works now, maybe you can get an EU patent and it will cover all the EU countries. When I was working, we would only get a patent in a limited number of countries because of the cost of each patent. So, USA for sure. Maybe England, Germany and France for a valuable patent. Most of the time we would not get a Canadian patent - too small of a market.

SawStop may not have Canadian patents.

Mike

Is it expensive to get a patent?

I don't know how big or small the Canadian market is, but if we use the two countries' populations as a guide, the Canadian market would be 1/10 of the US ballpark. That's 10% of the sales...shouldn't that potential revenue be able to more than cover any one time additional costs incurred on getting the necessary Canadian patents?

Simon

[Glen Gunderson]

Is it expensive to get a patent?

I don't know how big or small the Canadian market is, but if we use the two countries' populations as a guide, the Canadian market would be 1/10 of the US ballpark. That's 10% of the sales...shouldn't that potential revenue be able to more than cover any one time additional costs incurred on getting the necessary Canadian patents?

Simon

But they can still sell (and do sell) in Canada without a patent, so they're not foregoing the revenue. The only risk is if someone copies it just for the Canadian market which is probably not economical for anyone to do.

[Mike Henderson]

Is it expensive to get a patent?

I don't know how big or small the Canadian market is, but if we use the two countries' populations as a guide, the Canadian market would be 1/10 of the US ballpark. That's 10% of the sales...shouldn't that potential revenue be able to more than cover any one time additional costs incurred on getting the necessary Canadian patents?

Simon

The company I worked for filed a lot of patents every year so they had a deal with a patent law firm where the law firm did the patents for a fixed fee each. But if you do a one-off, I expect it could run up to about $10,000. That's in the US. I expect that the cost would be similar in every country you filed in.

We only filed in countries where the market for the product was reasonably large.

Also, if you stopped someone else from selling in the US, the European Union and China, they wouldn't have much market left to sell into. And as Glen pointed out above, you would be selling in all those countries, also, just without patent protection. So not only would a competitor have a limited market to sell into, they would be competing with you. It just wouldn't be profitable for someone else to compete with you under those conditions.

Mike

[Simon MacGowen]

Just found out from the SS manual (2012) that in addition to U.S. patents, Aust, Canada, Japan, etc. patents are listed.

Simon

[Kevin Smira]

I didn't read every post, so if this has been discussed, I apologize...But, with Festool now being the owner, will we see the price of Sawstops increase every year in March...just like Festool (said somewhat tongue-in-cheek)...

[Andrew Hughes]

So it begins robot furniture.:o https://www.engadget.com/2018/02/28/mit-autosaw-custom-furniture/

[John Sanford]

[SIZE=3] Let's say that the SawStop patents expired.

Will the SawStop technology fit into existing table saw design? Or, will table saw design require changes to accommodate the SawStop technology?
Yes, changes are required. If they weren't, then Gass could have made a lot more money selling conversions to existing saws than selling new saws. The main consideration for contractor and cabinet table saws is the trunnions have to be stouter to handle the braking. Even though the aluminum chunka is taking the force, there's still a lot of force over a very, very short period of time that the trunnions have to absorb. Additionally, there are matters of clearance, of how to mount the tech, etc. I'm thinking that even retrofitting to an existing saw would have required precision machining, which would have driven the cost up higher than simply buying a new saw with the tech already installed.


If the SawStop technology requires a design change, will the consumer see the anticipated price breaks as the costs for redesign, retooling, etc., are reflected in the selling price and are passed on to the consumer.
No, the consumer won't see it, not in the short run. We already saw what happened with the Bosch tech. From a specification standpoint, the Bosch saw was essentially identical to the non-safety equipped 4100 (I think that's the model number) that Bosch had on the market for several years. It cost twice as much. This from a company who's R&D budget is larger than the rest of the entire power tool industry's total annual sales.



In all the discussions/arguments/rants over SawStop, I cannot recall this issue of SawStop compatibility will current design discussed. Does anyone know?? Not compatible. It was discussed, wayyyyy back when. Fortunately, between SawStop and Bosch, the mechanical aspects have been worked out. The place where the real action is going to be is applying the technology to other stationary power tools.

[John Sanford]

Maybe Bosch will wait until then and re-release their blade stop flesh sensing saw. Even though their application was different than the SS version, the courts were swayed by the SS owners to force Bosch to cease marketing their own machine.

Did Bosch pull it from the rest of the world?

[John Sanford]

...
Any product that is made safer (due to government regulations or not) is a good thing.
...
Simon
Can't agree with you there Simon without caveats. Any product that is made safer, yet unaffordable, is not a good thing. Any product that is made safer, yet less effective, is not a good thing. Safety is simply part of the total value of a product. It's an important part to be sure, but not the only value. If a product can be made safer for the same cost, with the same effectiveness, then that is most certainly a good thing. Otherwise, we need to determine is the cost (in dollars, effectiveness, durability, etc) worth it? It may be, but it certainly isn't automatically a good thing. A pretty clear, albeit extreme example, would be this:

Speed limit ALL cars, trucks and motorcycles to 10mph in the interest of safety. They can't go faster than that, and it would be very cheap to do. Would that be a good thing?

[John Sanford]

If the patents are actually running out in 6 to 10 years as rumored (no one outside the old or new ownership knows for sure), a Canadian battle may not be worth a fight at all.
Simon
Actually, when the patents run out is public knowledge, or more accurately, in the public domain. Identify the patent #s. Got the Patent Office, ask. (Likely searchable on their website.) It's all publicly available info. Or at least the American patents, don't know about any other countries.


Better put the resources into expanding the SS feature to other Festool machines.
Agreed. And/or working with one/several of the large Euro machine companies on incorporating the tech. 'Cause that's what I want. A Euro slider with the tech. Bestest of both worlds.

[Edwin Santos]

A pretty clear, albeit extreme example, would be this:

Speed limit ALL cars, trucks and motorcycles to 10mph in the interest of safety. They can't go faster than that, and it would be very cheap to do. Would that be a good thing?

Well it would allow people a lot more time for texting.

Seriously though, there's a thesis that might have been mentioned in this thread that says an environment of increased safety can reach a point of the person paying less attention and subconsciously going to sleep at the switch which can negate the safety precautions.
I realize your example is exaggerated to make a point but let's think about it. A person that would have been disposed to texting while driving under normal conditions, would most likely do so a lot more if they were forced to go that slow, and in doing so, they would at least partly erode the safety benefits. It's the old false sense of security argument. I'm not saying I agree with this thesis, I'm only saying it exists.

I said so earlier in the thread, I happen to think most woodworkers are very self-accountable and thereby less enthusiastic than others to have the government mandate their safety.

[Simon MacGowen]

Can't agree with you there Simon without caveats. Any product that is made safer, yet unaffordable, is not a good thing. Any product that is made safer, yet less effective, is not a good thing. Safety is simply part of the total value of a product. It's an important part to be sure, but not the only value. If a product can be made safer for the same cost, with the same effectiveness, then that is most certainly a good thing. Otherwise, we need to determine is the cost (in dollars, effectiveness, durability, etc) worth it? It may be, but it certainly isn't automatically a good thing. A pretty clear, albeit extreme example, would be this:

Speed limit ALL cars, trucks and motorcycles to 10mph in the interest of safety. They can't go faster than that, and it would be very cheap to do. Would that be a good thing?

The caveats are implicit in my statement since I wasn't making it for the purposes of submitting it to a peer review panel. My statement should be read in the context of this thread. Otherwise, everything said needs to be subject to some fine print and that certainly isn't the intention of everyone.

The safest woodworking tool, if considered without context, is one that you don't ever get close to, touch, own or even see. I don't think that is the direction we want to go to when we discuss shop safety.

But everything being equal, the safer a tool is made (by regulation or not), the better. That is my belief when it comes to consumer goods. Are they gonna be more expensive? That's another consideration.

Simon

[Simon MacGowen]

Actually, when the patents run out is public knowledge, or more accurately, in the public domain. Identify the patent #s. Got the Patent Office, ask. (Likely searchable on their website.) It's all publicly available info. Or at least the American patents, don't know about any other countries.


Agreed. And/or working with one/several of the large Euro machine companies on incorporating the tech. 'Cause that's what I want. A Euro slider with the tech. Bestest of both worlds.

SS seems to have patents registered in Japan, Canada, China, etc.

Someone told me you can see a SS bandsaw prototype (?) on the SS website. And a Euro sliding saw with the SS-like feature has been on youtube.

Simon

[Ray Newman]

John Sanford: thanks for the information 'bout the required design changes. Always thought that was the case, but never certain.

[Curt Harms]

Maybe Bosch will wait until then and re-release their blade stop flesh sensing saw. Even though their application was different than the SS version, the courts were swayed by the SS owners to force Bosch to cease marketing their own machine.

I don't have an insider insight but have read that the Bosch saw was not an especially good saw though the safety mechanism was not an issue. I wonder if that's why Bosch didn't contest the court ruling. Why spend a lot of lawyer $$ to be able to sell a mediocre product?

[Simon MacGowen]

I don't have an insider insight but have read that the Bosch saw was not an especially good saw though the safety mechanism was not an issue. I wonder if that's why Bosch didn't contest the court ruling. Why spend a lot of lawyer $$ to be able to sell a mediocre product?

https://www.protoolreviews.com/tools/power/corded/saws/bosch-reaxx-1041a-vs-sawstop-jss-mca/14982/

As far as I have read, Bosch has exhausted all its legal options and the only "remedy" left was for the President to override the final ruling. That of course did not happen and Bosch could only sell its saws outside the US. SawStop has held patents in other countries including Canada but whether it chooses to go after Bosch in such smaller market is SawStop's decision.The cabinet saws are SS's bread and butter product, not the jobsite model.

Simon