This is a much simpler issue than many of the respondents have made it.
This is *NOT* a safety issue. Mr Gass has stated several times that "... he just wants to make table saws safer...". This is clearly untrue. Otherwise, he would release the tech to the other manufacturers.
In an open market, the consumer will choose the best product for a purpose. If safety were the primary concern, then Mr. Gass would be the *only* table saw manufacturer in the country. No one would buy any other brand because he has successfully patented all components of the "flesh detect" tech to the point that, currently, no competitor can avoid violating them. (See Cannon vs Xerox 1968)
This is a MONEY issue from BOTH perspectives, producer and consumer. You can tell this is true because Mr. Gass has repeatedly attempted, and now apparently succeeded, in trying to get government/legal authorities to *force* other manufacturers to license his "flesh detect" tech from him.
Since this is rapidly becoming an issue that our government is acting in " the best interest" of both the market and consumers, then perhaps the same action that was taken by the courts to break Xerox's patents should be applied to this situation and truly turn it into a safety issue.
I can't add to the comments regarding the silly nature of this lawsuit. I can only be dismayed by the jury or worse Judge that found the manufacturer liable here.
Worse yet is the inventor's attitude that the manufacturers should be FORCED by legal means to buy his "technology". Of course it's for the greater good and not to line his pockets.
The fact that this man won should probably cause all of us to cringe. I have.
To be fair, this technology should now be deemed in the public domain. This would follow in much the same way that the legal system voided Xerox's technology patents and let Cannon et al. use it as it willed. Gass should get an obligatory tip of the hat as recognition and no licensing.
Otherwise, the consumer chose at the time of his purchase and then again at the time of use to forgo this technology.
Be aware that this could be the great iceberg. If this can be done after a consumer's choice of table saw, what else is open for lawsuit? Automobiles can easily exceed posted speed limits and speed increases the frequency and damage in accidents. This must make all manufacturers liable for all speed related damages?
Cute idea. Way over hyped from my perspective.
This version, like the Kindle is NOT going to replace paper magazines and newspapers.
The multi-function nature of the iPad is not offset by it's price/form factor.
Given that the technology for this to be thinner and lighter in addition to fold-able is not with us yet, it's also impracticable.
The "gadget crazy" will love it.
One of the basic utilities of a magazine or newspaper is the "throw-away" factor. If you leave a copy of Fine Woodworking behind in the coffee shop, you won't be out a $500 item.
Wen this device can be folded up and put in a pocket, then I'll be interested.
Subscribe now and save up to 56%
© 2017 The Taunton Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
Become a member and get instant access to thousands of videos, how-tos, tool reviews, and design features.
Start your subscription today and save up to 56%