AB-1471 May Never Be Implemented (for at least 15 years)

[hoffmang]

There is a lot of quite justified unhappiness with AB-1471 but the sky may not have fallen as badly as everyone here is worried about. Let's look at the actual text of the law:

Here is the full text.

(7) Commencing January 1, 2010, for all semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 12131, it is not designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters that identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol, etched or otherwise imprinted in two or more places on the interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol, and that are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the firearm is fired, provided that the Department of Justice certifies that the technology used to create the imprint is available to more than one manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions. The Attorney General may also approve a method of equal or greater reliability and effectiveness in identifying the specific serial number of a firearm from spent cartridge casings discharged by that firearm than that which is set forth in this paragraph, to be thereafter required as otherwise set forth by this paragraph where the Attorney General certifies that this new method is also unencumbered by any patent restrictions. Approval by the Attorney General shall include notice of that fact via regulations adopted by the Attorney General for purposes of implementing that method for purposes of this paragraph. The microscopic array of characters required by this section shall not be considered the name of the maker, model, manufacturer's number, or other mark of identification, including any distinguishing number or mark assigned by the Department of Justice, within the meaning of Sections 12090 and 12094.

There are lots of things to note. First, note that all guns that are on the safe list up until the earlier of 2010 or the AG certifying some technology are eligible to remain on the safe list indefinitely.

Commencing January 1, 2010, for all semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 12131...

Second, filing off your microstamp or replacing parts that microstamp with parts that don't microstamp is not illegal. That's this section:

The microscopic array of characters required by this section shall not be considered the name of the maker, model, manufacturer's number, or other mark of identification, including any distinguishing number or mark assigned by the Department of Justice, within the meaning of Sections 12090 and 12094.

But here is the most interesting part:

...provided that the Department of Justice certifies that the technology used to create the imprint is available to more than one manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions. The Attorney General may also approve a method of equal or greater reliability and effectiveness in identifying the specific serial number of a firearm from spent cartridge casings discharged by that firearm than that which is set forth in this paragraph, to be thereafter required as otherwise set forth by this paragraph where the Attorney General certifies that this new method is also unencumbered by any patent restrictions. Approval by the Attorney General shall include notice of that fact via regulations adopted by the Attorney General for purposes of implementing that method for purposes of this paragraph.

What that means is that whatever technology gets adopted has to go through an APA (Administrative Procedures Act) compliant process with the OAL - just like the magazine "permanence/capacity to accept" stuff that we so successfully beat in the last couple of years.

Now what is really interesting is the line "provided that the Department of Justice certifies that the technology used to create the imprint is available to more than one manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions." Right now one company (ID Dynamics) claims the patents (7111423 and 6886284 amongst others) to microstamping spent shells in firearms and subsequently reading them. Those patents are valid until about 2023 and I'm quite sure that Mr. Lizotte and Mr. Ohar claim that they are patent that occupy the entire field of firearm microstamping - kind of how NTP claims all of the space of push email against RIM/Blackberry and others. Since the legislature required that the technology be avialable from more than one provider and not encumbered by patent I'm quite confident that DOJ can not complete an OAL rulemaking that conforms with the legislation and Patent Law before the expiration of ID Dynamic's patents in 2023.

I wonder who worked those changes into the law?

-Gene

[Charliegone]

Hehe, very interesting Gene. Thanks.

[jdberger]

time to start making and marketing some microstamping equipment - see if the patent holder sues....


I'm thinking some sort of vaporware might be neat....

[bwiese]

Originally Posted by AB1471

...provided that the Department of Justice certifies that the technology used to create the imprint is available to more than one manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions.

Yep, that's extremely useful phrasing because even if Lizotte & co gave state of California/ DOJ the patent rights thru assignment for zero dollars, it still wouldn't fly.

With this exact wording the 'technology' would have to be patent-free, not just "licensed to/in California for no charge".

As Gene said, if the DOJ BoF were to come up with other schemes, they would run head-on into Lizotte's patents, which appear to "occupy the space".

And given the BoFfers's three tries at just getting a semi-palatable new logo created, do you think anyone on that staff has enough creativity, inventiveness or skill to invent a useful/robust new method - going up against someone else's patent attorneys? Is there a budget assigned for them to contract out this work?

Hell, that's not even a fair battle, from an organization that has quite a bit of well-demonstrated legal-technical incompetence.

Also, other marking styles may well conflict with other patented methods used for marking small parts (electronic components, for example).

[KenpoProfessor]

Originally Posted by bwiese

Yep, that's extremely useful phrasing because even if Lizotte & co gave state of California/ DOJ the patent rights thru assignment for zero dollars, it still wouldn't fly.

With this exact wording the 'technology' would have to be patent-free, not just "licensed to/in California for no charge".

As Gene said, if the DOJ BoF were to come up with other schemes, they would run head-on into Lizotte's patents, which appear to "occupy the space".

And given the BoFfers's three tries at just getting a semi-palatable new logo created, do you think anyone on that staff has enough creativity, inventiveness or skill to invent a useful/robust new method - going up against someone else's patent attorneys? Is there a budget assigned for them to contract out this work?

Hell, that's not even a fair battle, from an organization that has quite a bit of well-demonstrated legal-technical incompetence.

Also, other marking styles may well conflict with other patented methods used for marking small parts (electronic components, for example).

I think you guys are discounting the fact that there are some pretty vicious anti gunners that will come up with better technology to do the MSing to screw with us, and make a ton of money to boot. This could happen a lot sooner as well.

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

[Wizard99]

Couldn't Lizotte & Co just vacate the patent? Is there any process to simply let a patent go public domain prior to the expiration of the patent?

[guns_and_labs]

Originally Posted by Wizard99

Couldn't Lizotte & Co just vacate the patent? Is there any process to simply let a patent go public domain prior to the expiration of the patent?

Yes, they can. They can also provide an unencumbered royalty-free license to any and all. Some of the laserjet patents are an example of that.

On the other hand, although their patent issued, they have some claims that are likely to be challenged, particularly the method patents. The RCA and IBM patents have precedence, and seem pretty darned close, at least in some of the broader claims. Should add some smoke, if the NRA or anyone wants to fund a patent fight.

[hoffmang]

Lizotte actually wants to make money and there are other - non California - applications of his technology. He's not abandoning the patent until its dead or expired.

No Anti is going to be able to fully subsume the patent Clyde. All they would succeed in doing is extending the amount of time that two technologies - neither of which are patent encumbered - do not exist.

-Gene

[hoffmang]

All,

You're missing something. The law says it can't be encumbered - not it might arguably not be encumbered. The CA State Government is not going to fund a patent invalidation suit anytime soon.

-Gene

[CCWFacts]

And this requirement applies to semi-autos only, right? A single-shot can't possibly be considered a semi auto. And it's easy to convert any semi-auto to a single-shot. And it's easy to convert it back again.