Sheril stops sidewinder

White Oak Willie

There is astory on Tree Climbers International - Home about how Sherill is forcing some body to stop making a device called the sidewinder because it is an enfringement on the Bigshot. They are calling for a boycott of Sherill products. I saw it this morning on the computer at the office.

Tree Machine

Tree Climbers International - Re:Sherrill squashes Sidewinder - TCI Message Board

Sherrill paid a lot of money to preserve their rights to exclusively and sell the product they developed. The development and refinement of a product takes a lot of time and effort. Manufacturing and bringing it to market also costs money. Then you hope to sell enough to cover those upstart costs, after which time, each one sold offers a margin of profit. Welcome to capitalism.

Inventors and developers patent their ideas so some (well-intentioned, not necessarily criminal) person won't look at it and say, "Hey, I can build that for cheaper and sell it for less."

I can't imagine this well-intentioned, not necessarily criminal person felt he independently invented, developed and manufactured some new product. More likely he felt he could enter the slingshot market and scoop some business from some who might otherwise buy the Sherrill product.

There are laws to protect innovators from knock-off artists.

If you want to use someones good idea, the least you can do is contact that person and offer them a win-win opportunity. You don't just take someone else's invention and run your own direction with it. That's parasitic. That's stealing.

Tree Machine

I know very little about the case, but if I were to guess, there was some design difference that made the well-intentioned not necessarily criminal person to think that it no longer looked enough like a bigshot to be called a bigshot.

But ya know what? Its not about the looks, it's about what is the intent of the functional use for the product. If the products look a bit different, but essentially do the same thing, the same way for the same intended outcome, there is intellectual property infringement. You can paint a pig blue, but he's still a pig.

rbtree

Seems a crock of baloney to me. How is the Big Shot that different from any old slingshot? Instead of a handle, be it simple, or like the now discontinued Wrist Rocket (I forget the name, Mike Oxman and Scott Altenhoff have them.) it uses a pole saw pole........

For that matter, I think Tobe got the idea from Blake Thomas, who made a huge slingshot long before the BS....(Blake once held the ITCC footlock record.) It used dual surgical tubing, a trigger, and would throw a 20 ounce pouch with the big 3 mm slickline of that era well over 120 feet.

I think Tobe's gotten too big for his britches....

Eric Frei

Can we see a picture of a Sidewinder compared to a Bigshot because right now, outside of the USA a sidewinder is a tree injection system and big shot a throw bag launching device.

__________________

TreeCo

The sidewinder folds up and fits in a backpack! That doesn't sound like a bigshot to me.


Sherrill will probably steal the idea and have it for sale soon!

__________________
Grow more vegetables!

Tree Machine

What is the 'intended purpose' of the sidewinder. What you've just described is the blue paint on the pig.

In its intended purpose. A wristrocket isn't a bigshot, even when you compare the similarities.

I agree with RB, others were working on this device before it came to market, myself included. in 1998 (give or take a year) the Tree Care Industry Association (then known as the National Arborist Association) had their annual tree care Expo in my home town. I packed my saddle and home-fabricated dual ascenders and shotline reel and slingshot and other devices in a big duffle and humped it around the Expo floor sharing what I thought were benefits that a manufacturer could help me develop. At the Sherrill booth, face-to-face with Tobe Sherrill, opened up my kit, showed him my not-so-big-anymore-shot, looked his over, and handed him my credit card. I bought two.

Now I could have screamed infringement, but instead offered the respect that his work and dedication got this thing to market before me (or the other guys mentioned and likely, dozens of others not mentioned)). As well, Tobe spent the money to protect his intellectual rights and company from people like me who can always look at a piece of gear and see ways to improve it.

I'm free to improve the concept, just not to go manufacturing that improved product and cut into his intended demographic to sell a similar product designed to provide the same intended purpose.

This sort of thing has been going on since the beginning of time, but only in recent times have there been laws instilled to differentiate between the emotional "he-said, she-said" arguments and give a legal foundation to these issues.

Tree Machine

Doubtful. I shared my shotline reel idea with him 5 years ago at a former Tree Care Industry Association Expo (then known as Tree Care Industry or TCI). This was a former Milwaukee show. He could have 'stolen' the idea and run with it, but has chosen not to. He's not that kind of cutthroat sort of guy. He's been rather amazing at keeping his finger on the pulse of the industry and bringing to all of us cutting-edge tools at a competitive price.

They've also gone to great lengths to instruct us in methods and how to use the tools within their catalogs. The information is free. The catalogs are free. In return we buy gear from them.

This is an honorable exchange that creates a win-win. That's what good business is about.

For someone trying to create a better BigShot, maybe they should have proposed their idea to Tobe through a certified letter from their attorney. If Tobe likes their idea, they negotiate a deal. That's an honorable exchange to create a win-win.

The sidewinder guy just wants a cut into the BigShot market. There's nothing honorable in that. That's just another guy trying to make a buck, an innovator-not-necessarily-a-criminal who forged ahead ignorant to what he was doing, or intentful of what he was doing. He can say his market was the recreational climbing community, not necessarily the commercial arborist community. To that, I would have to say, I can fit my bigshot into a backpack.

TreeBot

Tree Machine: When Jonsered invented the gas powered chainsaw they didn't stop other people from designing internal combustion engines for the "intended purpose" of chopping up trees.

I get where you are coming from in terms of all of the effort spent developing products, but to me, without knowing any further details, this really feels as though Toby is taking things way to far. I love the big shot. It is a great product, and I rely on it, but it just is not that unique.

__________________
www.KansasTreeCare.com Lawrence Kansas certified arborist, tree trimming, tree removal, stump grinding

"Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?" George Carlin.

Tree Machine

I don't have any real details from source, either. I'm not necessary siding with Tobe, and I don't know how far it is being taken because all I've heard so far is second-person information, which is just a tweak above heresay.

You don't just 'sue' someone in an infringement quarrel. Bringing suit is a process. You let someone know their actions are an offense. They can say I'm sorry, I'll quit, or they can snub their nose and say kiss-off. It's usually some form of one or the other of those.

If the 'offender' backs down it ends there. This is the beginnings of ANY infringement case.

TreeCo

I just don't see how a foldable large slingshot in any way infringes on the patent on the Bigshot. Is it the fact that it uses rubber to propell the projectile? Is it because it's designed to propell a throw bag into a tree?

It's hard to imagine a patent that would be so broad.

It seems far more likely that imtimidation and the threat of a law suit from big bucks is enough to shut down the innovator. You do not have to be right to win. If you read the thread at tci you will see that the thread starter talked to Tobe......and has not had a change of heart. What does that say?

__________________
Grow more vegetables!

rbtree

Off topic, but Andreas Stihl invented the first in 1926, followed by Dolmar a year later, with the first mass produced saw.

Therrin

I thought the patent applied specifically to the design parameters, not to cover entirely its intended use.

Otherwise everything that we buy would only be manufactured by one company. One type of apple peeler, one type of lemon zester, one company that makes rope for lifelines, one company that makes climbing spikes, etc...

to say that because you designed something for a specific use (using a basic platform of another thing that has been around for centuries) and that you hold the sole patent on the "idea" and its entire range of uses.... its a load of crap.



If anyone copies my arbor harpoon I'll ka-thunk them in the head from a distance!

TreeBot

I stand corrected. I was still using the crosscut saw, axe, and steam mule until the late 30's

__________________
www.KansasTreeCare.com Lawrence Kansas certified arborist, tree trimming, tree removal, stump grinding

"Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?" George Carlin.

spartek

Arbor Harpoon??? Thanks Therrin , that gives me an idea , Im off to the workshop. I'll take my chances on getting thunked in the head from a disatnce. I hope Ohio is within range ,

Therrin

Well I'm in Tx at the moment, so just you watch it mister!

Whered those links go....

12 guage Line Launcher

Arbor Harpoon


Aparently....someone else already made...something...similar. I dont beleive it was intended for tree-use, but it was some kind of a line-launching system using a shotgun.

I've actually used the Arbor Harpoon at client's places for placing lines. I dont have $300 to shell out on an oversized slingshot

spartek

I'm getting a mental picture of you runnin around with the santa hat and the arbor harpoon "LOOK OUT YA' LL , WE HAVE A LIVE ONE"

Urban Treecare NZ

What about the other product that sherill copied for their own??? Any one remember the Harrison Rocket Copy??? Seems a bit hipicritical

TreeBot

I think that may be for launching pilot lines between ships.

__________________
www.KansasTreeCare.com Lawrence Kansas certified arborist, tree trimming, tree removal, stump grinding

"Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?" George Carlin.

TrevMcRev

As well as a knock off of the Falteimer throwline cube, albeit i dont think there was a US patent on that, so they could do it legally.

I wonder if they will soon come out with their own folding bigshot...

Tree Machine

Some things don't get patented because if the cost of the patent process is going to be more than the potential profit, you'd be throwing money down a rathole from the onset.

I wondered about that, I don't know any details. Nor any between Dolmar and Stihl and the other guys.

I big part of it all is what you've done done to protect the intellectual property (that is, the idea & the product arising from it).

PTC

There are several improvements that can be made to the bigshot

How long will we have to wait, if there is no competition

Therrin

Like I said before.... name a product out there that doesnt have a counterpart of some sort. GRCS and the Hobbs. Stihl and Husky. Why is a bigshot any different? Slingshots have been around forever, it's just a big one.

Eric Frei

I'm sure there's a mob in OZ that just copied the bigshot and sold it as the same name, I got a big shot and it aint the ridgy-didge Sherrill's one!

__________________

Tree Machine

I all boils down to what the innovator put into protecting the 'invention' (and I use that term loosely).

It also usually crosses the line when you go commercial (for profit) and attempt to capture part of the same market.


The BigShot is pretty specific in what it does, what its intended purpose is. If Sidewinder had the same product, but his intended purpose was to shoot goldfish in a pond, or fire golfballs on driving ranges, the 'offense' (also using that term loosely) wouldn't be viewed the same.

I don't know how Stihl and Dolmar and Husky hashed it out. That would be based on the legal arrangements they had in place. If the Harrison were copied (those were manufactured by Weaver, not Sherrill; the bags were private-labeled for them), I don't know if Harrison Rocket had protection in place that would allow them a legal leg to stand on.


We've ALL had good ideas that at some point we saw them 'out there' and said "Hey, I thought of that....." If we take our idea and go somewhere with it, you are left the choice to either spend the money for legal protection (copyright, product patent, process patent, etc), OR you take that same money, market and produce and try to get out there first and capture market attention and become the known name. Without intellectual property protection, you're betting on selling enough to gain user recognition, reach higher margins and lower costs of production and be able to marginalize entrepreneurs entering into the industry.

Before you start basing your future on your new product, you are well-advised to do a patent search, hire an intellectual property attorney, check out the legal ramifications. This is called 'due diligence' , just like if you were going to buy a house, you check out the tax structure of the area, where the schools are, quality of neighborhood, mortgage rates, what other houses are selling for.

If you don't do your homework (due diligence) and gather the required information, you're running uninformed and with blind hope. Well, good luck with that. If you step on someone's toes and cry ignorance, someone's lawyer will say something like, 'you should looked before you crossed the tracks'.

Tree Machine

If you think those improvements are worthy, you have your lawyer copy/paste those proposed improvements into the body of a certified, receipt-requested letter, and send it to the head of the company. Let them know if they wish to use the ideas, what you want out of it. Who knows what will happen.

If, then, the improvements show up in a future model, you can say "Hey, I have a legal, notarized, signed document that was signed for at your end, and the ideas I shared with you are being used. WHassup with that?"

You have something to go on.

Business is a complex place. It doesn't matter if you agree or disagree with how things are done. We will all have different views, perceptions and opinions depending on which side of the court we're standing. That's why the laws have been put in place, so we all have the same opportunities with the same legal protections.

rbtree

Yeah, like the more open pouch that it now has....which is worthless......if you have to shoot from back a ways, the shot sack just fallls out. Even when aiming more straight up, it takes care to keep the weight in place.

Good thing I have 3 BS's, and one replacement with the old style pouch.

They also changed the shape of the arms, which is prolly better.

Tree Machine

I have to agree, the new-style more compact shape head is better. And also that the new, open-style pouch is not better. I also like the piece of tubing on the finger-pull over the bare strap of old.

Attached Thumbnails

 

rbtree

Tobe posted on TCI---a reasonable response.......

Tree Machine

This is a cut/paste, the exact word for word response. I agree, a reasonable response. I'm very glad he came in to address this directly.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Greetings all,

Please hear out my position on this matter.

In 1999 I invested significant time, effort and dollars into protecting an idea I had while picking up a wire raising head built for an extension pole. The Big Shot was a considerable twist on the common slingshot but well suited to launching a heavy projectile vertically in a manner that, perhaps no projectile needed launching before. I knew instantly that the idea was different enough from a common slingshot to possibly be patentable. That difference, for those not clear, is a pole beneath, and running parallel to the sling mechanism that results in zero recoil and maximum thrust of weighty projectiles. Up until that day, there existed no equal product. The risk I took on investing “a lot of money” on patent protection was that it might not return the investment. In the end the US patent office agreed that my idea was patentable (utility patent, not the less significant design patent) and assigned to Sherrill, Inc. our patent number.

If you held the utility patent on, let’s say the tennis racket and someone came out with a square faced version with a folding handle for portability-sake they would still have to pay a licensing fee and costs associated with developing the legal agreement. With legal expenses already exceeding $6,000 in this single matter Jeff elected to pass.

As I told Jeff over a year ago at FDR State Park we have been working on a Big Shot redesign that will be very portable, lightweight and include a trigger. I’m expecting the latest prototype within days. The project has taken much longer than I would have preferred and has quite high associated costs… but it’s looking pretty good.

For anyone not familiar with patent protection, the return on this significant investment is one thing and one thing only, a tool to dissuade or halt infringement. For whatever all of the banter in this thread, especially in “defending the little guy from the corporate giant,” please don’t loose site of the sole reason inventors and corporations make this considerable investment, it’s to possess a defense in the case of infringement of a similar product. When Jeff took his product outside of private sales among friends and onto the open market (his and another retailer’s web site), I took the same action I have on numerous other occasions and sought legal review, followed by advise and finally action, a very expensive endeavor every step of the way. In the end I was convinced “by experts” that there was infringement.

This pretty much sums up my defense in the matter. I can honestly say though, that any perceptions of my small business being the cruel, unwieldy and giant corporation we’re being _frame_d as, are without merit. We still operate in the small town I was born in, employ less than 50 people and generate no more revenues than a single, well-run grocery store. In addition, SherrillTree supports every charitable opportunity the company can afford for the tree care industry including TreeFund, ISA, Redwood League, Arborday Foundation, etc., etc. As to operating a relatively successful small business, I harbor no shame or regret, decisions like this one have to be made to protect investments.

And lastly, there is zero truth in SherrillTree having copied the Harrison Rocket design, ZERO. SherrillTree neither requested nor commissioned Weaver Leather to replicate this design, which by the way, is neither patented nor trademarked by Andrew as far as I’m aware. SherrillTree switched to this product only after it was in full production and available through a number of other retailers. We chose a custom color so that we might continue to offer our warranty. Perhaps the writer who leveled their hypocrisy accusation _base_d on false information will take note.

Best to all,

Tobe Sherrill