Copywritten pick designs?

[Squelchtone]

Can anyone tell me if lock pick designs are copyrightten? I’m planning on getting into manufacturing soon, and it doesn’t make sense to reinvent the wheel if I don’t have to.
I don’t want to ruffle any feathers either.
Thanks.

[Squelchtone]

I believe Raimundo or folks who represent his interests may have the term Bogota copywritten or trademarked, which is why companies such as Southord call their triple rake Bogota inspired picks the "Pagoda". If you plan on copying Christina Palmer's designs, as you asked about doing in another thread, do yourself a favor and hire a lawyer first and perhaps reach out to the designer before you cause a major kerfuffle for yourself and our community.

Feathers have been ruffled in the past, and even this forum was accused of being in cahoots with commercial lock pick manufacturers, which I assure you was not the case. The Bogota shape, design, and how to make instructions were all available to any hobbyist who wanted to make it, and sure enough several companies started making picks with that geometry and likeness and when that happened then there was a lot of finger pointing going on as to how could this possibly happen, and who was to blame that an open source thing got commercialized.

I think a lot of pick maker hobbyists on here would probably think that if someone started making picks using their unique profile shape without giving them credit or some sort of monetary kick back, would think that such a person making such picks was a dick for doing so, and I happen to agree with that point of view.

That said, I have no idea which pick profiles or shapes actually have any kind of patent on them or copyright or whatever other legal binding terminology that is used in the design or appearance of a physical tool. I am not a lawyer, and don't want to pretend to be one either.

There have been pick sets made over the years that people looking at them could easily tell you that they were lifted from the shape of an HPC set, or a Southord set just by the geometry of the pick profile, and I don't know if those companies ever went after someone or sent them a letter from their lawyers to stop making a copy of their tools.

That's my 2 cents on this topic.. others may not agree with my opinions or observations, or pose their own.
Squelchtone

[pickmonger]

I am not a lawyer but leaned some stuff in the school of hard knocks

When I first wanted to make lock tools like those proven to be great products my partner and I realised that
1) Some designs are protected by patents.
2) Some techniques or methods are patented.
3) Some names or descriptions are trade marked.
4) Some products use terms or descritions that are copyrighted.

Patents, there are different kinds, trade marks and registered copyrights are al searchable.

Of course the market place has all kinds of knock offs. Some come from countries that don't respect anyones work.

You might produce something where the inventor or company does not wish to chase after you now becuase the expense does not warrent it.
Make a buck from it and just wait for the lawyers to file tort actions and injuctions.

Many people had a great idea and got sued big time.

[Jacob Morgan]

If you write a book on locks you can copyright it.

If you have a brand name or a marketing slogan you can trademark it. Once trademarked, you have to defend it or you lose it.

If you create something with a unique decorative design you can get a design patent.

If you create something with a useful purpose you can get a utility patent, if:
1) it is novel (new),
2) not obvious to someone skilled in the art, and
3) it is useful (basically as described in the parent.)

And to clarify, it can not already be public knowledge. You can not make and sell something, post about it on the internet, etc., and then file for a patent on it later. Even if someone else wrote about it or drew a picture of it online or in a print publication before you filed for a patent, even if you did not know about it, the patent can be thrown out.

Utility patents are what would be of interest. If you look at utility patents, there will be a drawing on the front page and a description that together go over an embodiment of the invention, but that is mainly to justify that the patent should exist. What a patent holder would go to court over would be the claims, and a typical patent may have a dozen or more numbered claims. Each claim is a sort of mini-patent. Violate one claim, and it is a patent violation (unless the patent claim gets tossed out in court). That is why a patent attorney is really needed to do a proper search for existing patents--it is not about the picture on the first page. And also why a good patent attorney might be useful in creating all the claims to go into a patent so other people can not circumvent the patent. It is a trick, if you are doing A, to base the patent on B, but then cover A, B, C, and D in the claims.

It is common for companies to patent things they have no intention of producing--they do not want anyone else producing them. Sometimes instead of going through the cost of a patent, they will instead publish information on something so not one else can patent it later. Patents can get expensive, but the USPTO will cut private individuals some slack. What most ordinary people would do would be to file for a provisional patent for under a couple of hundred dollars, then shop it around and see if a big company will buy it. Then the company would offer to pay for the rights to the patent and pay to complete the patent filing and pay the fees for the patent, which would be in your name. To get and keep a patent otherwise can be expensive, and even more expensive to defend it.

[CovertEntrySD]

Thanks for the replies. I appreciate the insight.