We've launched the new forums! Read more here

PXG vs TaylorMade: Golf Unfiltered

SuperStroke
JB

JB

Follow @THPGolf on Social Media
Albatross 2024 Club
Staff member
Joined
Oct 8, 2008
Messages
283,896
Reaction score
436,699
Location
THP Experiences
The THP Radio Network is filled with a variety of shows and new to the network is the Golf Unfiltered show with Adam Fonseca. The show brings new and interesting topics and interviews from the world of golf and THP is honored to have it as part of our lineup on The Hackers Paradise Podcast Network.

2560-1-1024x576.jpg


On this episode of the podcast Adam welcomes Mr. Derrick Brent, Attorney at Law, on the show to break down the PXG lawsuit against TaylorMade Golf.

Derrick has over 20 years as an attorney specializing in patent infringement cases, and even helped write the 2011 reform bill on patent law in the Senate. Derrick shares his expert view on what PXG is claiming, how TaylorMade may choose to defend those claims, and educates you on the ins and outs of patent infringement lawsuits. A huge thank you to Derrick for being so generous with his time and for his willingness to share his expertise!

https://www.thehackersparadise.com/pxg-vs-taylormade-golf/
 
Learned so much from Derrick in this interview, some of which wasn't aired. But the possibility that TMaG can file a counterclaim against PXG for patents pre-dating the 0311s is fascinating.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
:flyby:

i understood about 5% of what that genius said, but it was really fascinating. i thought one of the most interesting he points he made is how pxg's message of being different and staying out of traditional distribution channels may bite them in the butt. how could tm sales impact pxg if they aren't traditionally available in the same retail channels?

i'm still not sure i'm 100% on board with a conspiracy theory. my thought now is that parsons has been holding onto this for awhile. and he timed the filing to specifically coincide with the release to hopefully taint the public perception of what seems to be a great product. but i do think he believes there is merit to his case.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
c.a.eleric said:
:flyby:

i understood about 5% of what that genius said, but it was really fascinating. i thought one of the most interesting he points he made is how pxg's message of being different and staying out of traditional distribution channels may bite them in the butt. how could tm sales impact pxg if they aren't traditionally available in the same retail channels?

i'm still not sure i'm 100% on board with a conspiracy theory. my thought now is that parsons has been holding onto this for awhile. and he timed the filing to specifically coincide with the release to hopefully taint the public perception of what seems to be a great product. but i do think he believes there is merit to his case.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I believe you're right about the timing of the lawsuit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
c.a.eleric said:
:flyby:

i understood about 5% of what that genius said, but it was really fascinating. i thought one of the most interesting he points he made is how pxg's message of being different and staying out of traditional distribution channels may bite them in the butt. how could tm sales impact pxg if they aren't traditionally available in the same retail channels?

i'm still not sure i'm 100% on board with a conspiracy theory. my thought now is that parsons has been holding onto this for awhile. and he timed the filing to specifically coincide with the release to hopefully taint the public perception of what seems to be a great product. but i do think he believes there is merit to his case.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The part I found most interesting was how TM can ask the Patent Office to do an administrative review of PXG's patents and PXG could lose its patents. Makes Parson's IP challenge a very risky proposition.
 
Very interesting stuff. Don't understand a lot of it, but where is goes will be fascinating to follow.
 
tequila4kapp said:
The part I found most interesting was how TM can ask the Patent Office to do an administrative review of PXG's patents and PXG could lose its patents. Makes Parson's IP challenge a very risky proposition.
Click to expand...

i don't take bp to be a fool. if he's going to pay that much money to even get it to this point, i'd be shocked if his attorneys didn't perform due diligence to make sure this potentiality would not happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
c.a.eleric said:
i don't take bp to be a fool. if he's going to pay that much money to even get it to this point, i'd be shocked if his attorneys didn't perform due diligence to make sure this potentiality would not happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You would be honestly surprised. His lawyers are paid to do what he wants so it's not unheard of for an executive to bring litigation forward to serve a personal issue even in the absence of solid footing.
 
c.a.eleric said:
i don't take bp to be a fool. if he's going to pay that much money to even get it to this point, i'd be shocked if his attorneys didn't perform due diligence to make sure this potentiality would not happen.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I understand your point but two counterpoints:
1. When you put a decision in the hands of others (judge, jury, administrator) you risk losing even though you are in the right.

2. Self made billionaires sometimes are prone to believe in themselves so much they ignore the advice of attorneys and do what they want even though they are advised of certain risks.
 
c.a.eleric said:
i don't take bp to be a fool. if he's going to pay that much money to even get it to this point, i'd be shocked if his attorneys didn't perform due diligence to make sure this potentiality would not happen.
Click to expand...

Maybe. Or that the goal in marketing dollars is worth what the end result is : )
There is a lot of litigation in the world of golf. Not as much as elsewhere, but IP is protected. This one is definitely being hashed out in the public.
 
JB said:
Maybe. Or that the goal in marketing dollars is worth what the end result is : )
There is a lot of litigation in the world of golf. Not as much as elsewhere, but IP is protected. This one is definitely being hashed out in the public.
Click to expand...

i guess the only way this makes sense is if pxg has planned obsolescence for any patents subject to this particular filing. if pxg was already planning on abandoning a line the courts may force them to abandon if this thing blows up in pxg's face, then maybe i could see this but wouldn't it still serve to weaken the brand? pxg says they do things like no one else, then the court says, "...except you do what someone else has already been doing so now you can't do that anymore" and taylor made gets to yell "first!"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
c.a.eleric said:
i guess the only way this makes sense is if pxg has planned obsolescence for any patents subject to this particular filing. if pxg was already planning on abandoning a line the courts may force them to abandon if this thing blows up in pxg's face, then maybe i could see this but wouldn't it still serve to weaken the brand? pxg says they do things like no one else, then the court says, "...except you do what someone else has already been doing so now you can't do that anymore" and taylor made gets to yell "first!"
Click to expand...

Their main customer, has no idea this is happening...They just want their main customer to not see two irons filled with foam that both say they do the same thing, made of similar materials and one cost half as much.
 
I wasn't even considering the 790s but now I want them out of spite.
 
fupresti said:
I wasn't even considering the 790s but now I want them out of spite.
Click to expand...

This is the main factor I've been considering all along. Parsons may have screwed himself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
golfunfiltered said:
This is the main factor I've been considering all along. Parsons may have screwed himself.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
True, but there's a flip side: if PXG really believes this is a patent violation they have to act to protect the IP otherwise they lose it.
 
tequila4kapp said:
The part I found most interesting was how TM can ask the Patent Office to do an administrative review of PXG's patents and PXG could lose its patents. Makes Parson's IP challenge a very risky proposition.
Click to expand...

Agreed... I too got about 5% of that discussion.
The two things that struck me in the conversation between Adam and Derek was 'different and obvious' does that mean both need apply?

Also, if I understood correctly TM can request that the discover process be suspended during the administrative review process for the patents PXG as alleged infringed, doesn't that favor TM?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Stemmy66 said:
Agreed... I too got about 5% of that discussion.
The two things that struck me in the conversation between Adam and Derek was 'different and obvious' does that mean both need apply?

Also, if I understood correctly TM can request that the discover process be suspended during the administrative review process for the patents PXG as alleged infringed, doesn't that favor TM?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Assuming that TM goes the IPR route, if it is instituted (few month delay post filing), most courts will stay the district court case to allow the IPR to complete. This is based on the standard for IPRs, which is (paraphrasing here slightly) a reasonable likelihood of success on at least one challenged claim. It favors TM only if instituted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
tequila4kapp said:
The part I found most interesting was how TM can ask the Patent Office to do an administrative review of PXG's patents and PXG could lose its patents. Makes Parson's IP challenge a very risky proposition.
Click to expand...

This type of thing is way above my pay grade but after listening I think it would be my fist course of action.
 
tequila4kapp said:
The part I found most interesting was how TM can ask the Patent Office to do an administrative review of PXG's patents and PXG could lose its patents. Makes Parson's IP challenge a very risky proposition.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the thinking is if Taylormade is allowed to continue with the irons then the patents may as well be non-existent if they can be circumvented. In that case at least there's some marketing to be gained.
 
Thanks for the information....had a question(s) that I didn't pick up possibly about the infringement determination.

Q. Do the items have to "look" the same?
I doubt that is necessary in order to determine infringement, but I may be wrong.

Q. If the items perform the same task in the same manner with the same design isn't that infringement?

It appears to me that the following can be found:
1. Both the PXG and TM irons have as follows...
a. Front cavity forged bodies; (no prior TM irons have had that)
b. Thin, flexible faces of hardened steel welded onto that forged body; (no prior TM irons have done that)
c. Material inside that front cavity forged body that does two things; support for the thin face and helps with suppression of the ball sound and vibration; (no prior TM irons have done that with that exclusive purpose)
d. Perimeter weighting that supports the front cavity forged body.

All of the above design parameters are new to the TM irons and were done in the PXG irons and in total are then very similar in design and perform with that design in a exacting fashion.
 
Likely TM had patent counsel look at PXG's patents before launching the new product. My guess is that both products are similar but that TM's product is a design around.
 
This was a great listen and brought me up to speed. Lots of valid points from both sides but that means nothing as legalities come into play. What I did find interesting was the restraining order and the "irreparable damages" that PXG would suffer in a loss of revenue. But I'm pretty certain the person looking at purchasing the P790 is not even thinking about purchasing the 0311 as a comparison. Different target golfer from a price point perspective IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top