Search results

DSS : trying to protect same reminds me of the Wright Bros trying to protect their patent claim on "flying machines" in various parts of the world.

Hugh : what is different with WO appendage often referred to in this thread as a DSS that denies it being a DSS application and therefore not infringing your patent ? .... Asking in very general terms.

Francis : read your post above. In my understanding of patent law within IP, I have great difficulty / reservations (with all that has gone on with Retractable Appendage devices in the realm of fluid dynamics) that Hugh's patent would survive the test of a challenge.

Doug : "solid and defensible" on your assurance !!! Can Hugh quote you on that ?

Doug : the DSS appendage I think would fail if challenged as to the test of "new or novel". I know of other designers / naval architects that have tested similar concepts more than 3 decades before the DSS was put forward as being the subject to current IP.

East Coast Hustle : C is clearly not an all rounder, in short distance racing she will always be at the mercy of WO. C has demonstrated she "parks up" in waves / light - moderate air - issues that are the result of a much greater water-plane / wetted surface by comparison to WO. For WO more...

: there was an obvious speed advantage to Comanche out of the blocks to the first mark, maybe the DSS factor is not the answer : maybe the answer is reduce wave making resistance by increasing Cp even carrying more heel angle - probably will rate lower than deploying the DSS appendage.

The next super maxis will (should) be narrower than WO, 4000+ kg heavier than WO, longitudinal Cp .62+ (depending on stern immersion), 15%+ Sail area up on WO. The Fast IACC boats were all heavier and (way) narrower than their "fat"predecessors, and heeled more. The downwind speed deficiency...

How was the comparison to Team Saab (Foundation 36) ?

Wess : How can a Laser be non Kirby ?

Ed Unless I am incredibly dense, what goals of yours are remotely similar with what Gov' is promoting via the use of the Laser design ?

Gov' I don't think the Laser has left BKs control - if I understand you correctly ? I'm sure refurbishing to what ever level is of no issue to anyone.

Gov' would you obtain Kirby's consent to build your proposed "Laser" ?

IPlore : as you write, why is there no copyright in the construction manual ?

Dutch effort at going retro- contemporary

Where is Protocol Article 16.1 ??? dealt with in the Deed of Gift ? Maybe I am incredibly dense but I think the GGYC is now in a position to be forced to accept a Challenge when one is served upon them...... and Proof of Service will most likely need to be Deed Compliant and Legally...

With HI gone, how long (minutes) untill a 1988 NZ Challenge is issued, or was next Challenge puppet decided before HI pulled the pin.

Does fleet sailing make a boat commercially successful ?

After watching the interview with Mr Oatley and son it is revealed that negotiation is well underway that contradicts the GGYC confirmation of Challenge : clearly the Defender is working in concert with HIYC with a Defender control on potential Challengers (multiple) as outlined in GGYC...