Interesting Solaris Info

[Lightsluvr]

Read the patent...

Read the patent...

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14339702#post14339702 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SWSaltwater
http://www.nobispro.com/aquatank/

All you really have to do is prove someone was using an LED on an aquarium prior to the patent and it is bunk...............

Oh, another amateur patent lawyer: The patent is for LED lighting for growth... irrelevant link, dude.

Sounding like another Solaris dealer who is getting nervous...

LL

 

[eme]

Re: Read the patent...

Re: Read the patent...

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14339758#post14339758 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Lightsluvr
Oh, .... patent lawyer: The patent is for LED lighting for growth...

LL

At last .. the real problem emerges. Patent Lawyers backed by their dodgy clients.

 

[roblack]

Lightsluvr, your attitude is sadly amusing and not surprising given what you do. Will leave the amateur law to you.

 

[Philwd]

Re: David vs. David?

Re: David vs. David?

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14339734#post14339734 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Lightsluvr
I don't understand why Orbitec is being characterized as a "big guy" - for crying out loud, they are a U.S.A. company with 70 employees...and they were smart enough to get a patent on an idea. So what's the beef?

Who screwed up here? It doesn't sound like Orbitec made the mistakes...

JMHO.

LL

Agreed. Orbitec's patent was filed 2 years before PFO's and 2 years before Solaris came out. PFO goofed big time.

Don't see how anyone could have such a broad patent.

Not saying it is right but current patent law encourages such patent filings. Now in reality the vast majority of patents have holes that allow other companies to make their specific product. Tulio's AA article in 2003 may be just the prior art the USPTO could have missed. It was not cited in the patent. PFO may have a case. But then their own patent filing would also likely be invalidated.

If you read the actual patent wording about linking to the top of the aquarium and look at the fixture Orbitec is planning on coming out with it really looks to me that they were filing a patent to cover this fixture. A hanging only fixture may circumvent the patent. None of the dependent claims suggest anything other than being linked the the top of the aquarium.

But all the above should be obvious to a good patent attorney so I'm thinking something else is going on here.

 

[Randallino]

This will affect every single company that puts an LED in their light. No more Moon lights on MH units etc.

From Orbitec
"I also encourage you to read the patent (www.uspto.gov), #7,220,018 that is at the heart of this suit, and understand this is not a patent for the use of LEDs over an aquarium, but rather a specific system design with many elements. It is one of many patents pending or granted for LED aquarium lighting. does not cover moonlighting or many, many other types of LED lighting , so we do not see ourselves as a force to stifle good design, however we do take our intellectual property seriously and will stand behind our patent as needed."


This is the response I got from PLANET LLC / ORBITEC

"Thank you so much for your email. Our products will be released under a major aquarium industry partner’s brand later this year, and we are collecting all emails from concerned Solaris owners to offer them some assistance in the future. You can be assured that we are working and testing our systems to ensure the highest quality and reliability. Let me know if you have any questions, and I will save your email address to let you know of their release."


I'm sure glad I got my H4 fixed late last year! So if someone needs parts I might be willing to sell it.....

 

[grigsy]

So, does this also then affect Aqua Illuminations LED fixtures as well? Or just Solaris?

 

[cclough_AI]

Hi All,

To comment on the previous post...

1. What you see and read on-line on Reef Builders, Reef Central, etc is not the complete picture. Orbital is not the big bully they are being portrayed as by PFO and just like a lot of things in life the actual truth in this case lies somewhere in between.

2. We are aware of Orbital and the current situation with PFO. Orbital has not accused AquaIllumination of patent infringement and we understand that they are not trying to use the patent to put people out of business.

And most importantly...

3. AquaIllumination plans to be and believes they will be around for the long haul.

Best regards,
-Chris Clough
President
C2 Development, Inc. (developers of the AquaIllumination product line)

 

[buck50bmg]

I think PFO is in the clear...... this for LED illumination used for growth..... we all know the solaris doesn't grow anything but anger and frustration.

 

[mmounajjed]

Jade

first this is an excellent thread, and bad companys need to be exposed.

most LFS would recommend anything if there is money to be made on a product

 

[dwl]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14343625#post14343625 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by buck50bmg
I think PFO is in the clear...... this for LED illumination used for growth..... we all know the solaris doesn't grow anything but anger and frustration.

:eek1:

 

[patriotsreef]

Hey Aquaillumination CClough, you must be really sure that you'll be around for the long haul to sound off with so much positive news on your fixture. You must already have a deal with Orbitec, Ames Iowa is pretty close to Madison Wisconsin. Why don't you inform the public what other business relations you have with Orbitec, clear the air, its getting thick.

 

[aninjaatemyshoe]

Patriotsreef, Aquaillumination has no obligation to disclose any association it might have (which I doubt it does) with Orbitec. I'm starting to wonder if Orbitec went after PFO because of PFO's attempt to go for a patent themselves.

I guess that Aquaillumination's new method of mounting (using a railing that the modules hang from) could possibly keep it out of the bounds of this patent.

 

[patriotsreef]

Aninjaatemyshoe, Im know that Aqua Illumination has no obligation to disclose any info about their relationships and I hope AI did their homework. AI sounds confident, more than the post above from what I've found and Orbitec sounds pretty confident that they'll come out with a fixture, from Orbitec direct. It just sounds funny that from what you are saying the reason AI is safe is because they hang from a rail. After reviewing the patent, its clear, it must be because of the rail.

 

[itsdarrow]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14343625#post14343625 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by buck50bmg
I think PFO is in the clear...... this for LED illumination used for growth..... we all know the solaris doesn't grow anything but anger and frustration.

The i-5 on my tank also seems to grow wonderful acros, and everytime i see it i grow a smile :].

Never understand people like this aka 'Haters'

 

[patriotsreef]

My I-5 also looks great, Ive had all types of fixtures and this by far looks the best. The problem is on my new tank I need 2 of them, Im not going to buy Solaris so Im stuck. If I buy Aqua Illumination and spend 5K and they go under than Ive got close to 8K in lights that have no warranty. My new 350 will be complete in a few weeks and Ill need lights. If I go with MH than I need to add a chiller to the room. I'd rather go with LED.
Im stuck because of poor research by PFO and from what I take greed from Orbitec.

 

[aninjaatemyshoe]

I'm only guessing that the railing might keep the AI fixture safe. It really is the only major difference between the AI and the Solaris.

 

[jtma508]

I've read the patent after I emailed Orbitec. The patent essentially covers controllable LED lighting with an external DC power supply for marine aquaria that produces light of specific spectra and sufficient intensity to support marine organisms. If anyone has read the patenty and disagrees with this brief synopsis let's hear it.

Given that, the patent IS, as stated earlier, absurdly broad. First, ALL marine aquaria have the same intensity and spectra requirements. Any light that does not meet that requirement cannot be considered a marine aquaria lighting system since the aquaria will fail. So, that leaves us with the controllability aspect. We ALL incorporate some form of control through timers and/or dimmers and varying combinations of fluroescent tubes and/or hallide lamps to achieve the necessary spectra/intensity and aesthetic 'look'.

If these guys had developed some specialized circuitry, optics or system then fine. Patent it. But this is crazy. It would be likke patenting using fluorescent tubes to light a garage. Or more aptly, patenting round tires for a car. As if any other design would work.

 

[teesquare]

I have personally experienced the broad and not well defined patents. And the patent office personnel cannot be experts in everything - so you see some insane patents issued which are hard to imagine that they are valid. But- if it is issued, and there is a number that you can do a search and verify - it is real.
I worked in an industry where a company patented a product- which had long been in existence - for another use. The patent was so broad, that when they had an attorney send me a "cease and desist" letter, I returned it with evidence that I had been using this same product for their patented use - for approx. 12 years prior to their patent. Never heard from them again.
But this is an entirely different time, and industry. Business is tough right now - I don't care what you make or sell.
My wife and I have a medical equipment company, and we are down $120,000.00 for Dec, and now January over last year. And these are necessity items.........
I think you will see some nasty fights over protecting business during our economic slump. My gut says that is what is going on with Orbitec -vs - PFO.
T

 

[0sprey]

I had no idea until recently that anyone was having problems with the Solaris. I've had mine for over two years now... no problems with it.
I have to take it apart every six months or so and blow the dust out, but that's about it...
Maybe it's because my tank is covered, so the moisture can't get in and corrupt the circuitry?

 

[aninjaatemyshoe]

It seems pretty clear that Orbitec is trying to strong-arm its way into cornering the market on LED fixtures for aquaria. IMO, this patent is bunk because it is for an invention that already existed and most certainly didn't come from their own creativity. I'm very certain that PFO could win this fight if they had the wherewithal and funds to take it to court. However, I bet that Orbitec is banking on PFO throwing in the towel. Afterward, I expect that they will bully out any other company that dares try to make an LED fixture for aquariums. So basically, we will be stuck with Orbitec as the only option for a long time...