Revolver mode

Revolver is nothing more than programming each full revolution. For instance on the first time around you can program it to only print the white underbase then flash, the second time around it prints the under base again flash then what ever top colors. It requires memory in the programming etc.

Step back is really different because it does not involve two or more times around. It simply prints the color indexes to the flash station then reverse indexes back to reprint the color then so on.

This bugs me, that anyone can patent standard thought process, to patent the process a machine prints when you may manually print the same way, which existed before automatics anyway. It's like saying someone owns the squeegee patent for automatics or the screen clamp patent. All screens are clamped and all screens print with a squeegee, and that was the case before any automatics, likewise people worked out their print sequence and went around and around. Sure there is technology which has true innovation and development and that is worth patenting and every user paying for, but revolver, seriously????? Triloc no, people have used manual grids and pin rego for years especially in graphics printing, no shirt detector no, it's just a proximity sensor. The technology should be revolutionary and new.

Oh god rwb, in simple terms, my head hurts trying to take in all that.

Robert no one asked about patents he asked how does these two programs worked and I explained.

Yes Spot I believe it all has to do memory storage etc.

Yes exactly.

Programming the order of which heads print and flash etc over multiple rotations in one direction, the anatol step back is programming CW and CCW revolutions to use the same screen instead of making another screen or going right around twice. Really if you have to hit a print twice with a flash between it makes little difference to go around the same Cw or CCW and just do another revolution rather than all the back and forwards.....

It doesn't matter that manual printers were doing something similar to this many years before. The fact is that it is a program for an automatic to sequence when to operate the printheads. If the manual printer didn't apply for the patent and have it involving the use of an automatic, then you have no argument. You talk about improvements to the patent, then you talk about prior art, so which one do you want to argue here, you can't have it both ways.

From the research that I have done ... There is plenty of "prior art" from credible sources (nuf said)

We don't run many jobs around more than one revolution, but when we do, I manually do a revolver mode while our press is running and can turn printheads on and off easily. Others I've seen try to do this struggle and can't quite keep up with the correct sequencing and end up printing colors at the wrong time. With all that being said, I think it's still a patent(able) device, it doesn't matter that people were doing it, manually or on an auto, they didn't apply for a patent for the program to control the actions so that's not really going to fly in court. That won't stand up in court as prior art is what I'm trying to say. I've got my cousin looking at this in his spare time, he is a patent attorney so I'll likely have a pretty rock solid opinion on this after I talk to him sometime this week.

I am agreeing with every word and thought and question which promo has raised, and worded so well. I couldn't think better if I tried!

One of the great questions of auto printing lore.

My question is could you then threaten legal action if you were the first one to have a printhead that can be programmed to print multiple times. All machines I know of do it now, it is a basic function and some kind of program has to be formulated to make the machine perform the task.

Is this not the same as the revolver debate. Revolver mode involves the basic function of a machine rotating multiple times and being able to program which heads print or flash on each rotation.

There are numerous similar programable functions on automatics, some of which are probably identical. What makes this different?

Brown Mfg just released there software which allows you to program the machine to print however you want it to. I am not sure how they accomplish it whether it steps back like anatols or goes around a second time

That's the beauty of the Printex Machines <--- M&R compatible :-)

The way I see it we all here are nothing more than arm chair pundits not a bad thing but in the real world what we think means nothing as long as you have lawyers and patent laws to back you up. I do not see how it could be considered bad business to use a patent to help your business be competitive or leading. Are we all not trying to make money. Sure maybe the patent could be fought over but who has the money to do that? It makes sense to create a patent when the opportunity arises this way your business is healthier.

I have several patents and have spent many hours and $$$ researching patents in the past and you can patent a program to perform a specific function. The revolver program was not in existence on any automatic printer when it was patented. M&R wrote a program to automatically perform the same functions that were commonly performed manually.
I have worked for years designing control systems for prisons and we have several patents on door openers and also software that controls the opening of the doors automatically. If you can patent the software to open a door, you can patent the programming software for an automatic printer.
If you want to find out anything about patents, go to the closest major university's library and you can hire college students to do thorough and formal patent searches for you. We have used students at LSU on many occasions.