• Solemn@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Their patents were allowed to be too broad. The creater for SawStop tried to get this tech mandated by law in the US, which is fine, but was also trying to make sure it would all have to be HIS patented tech.

    I’d honestly be fine with OSHA or something mandating this in commercial applications, but it can’t be locked down to a single technology. Iirc Bosch made a better technology within a few years, but was forced to abandon it due to the SawStop patents, which is exactly what patents aren’t supposed to do.

    • Avid Amoeba
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Are you sure this isn’t what patents are supposed to do?

    • Snapz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I know Bosch had A version, didn’t know it was perceived as better though - do you recall why it was better?

      • Solemn@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Didn’t destroy the blade. Iirc, instead of using the blade’s momentum to retract, it used a couple of blanks. This let you replace the cartridge but keep the undamaged blade.