Is a Pro Sport related to a Venom Mach 2?

[Rotherham Owl]

What intellectual property?

The Pro-Sport was an Airsporter underlever grafted onto a modified HW77 in a nice stock, just as the TX was a modified HW77 in a nice stock. Or the Webley Omega is a Webley/Anschutz/FWB hybrid.

Patents are about truly novel design features. Once they expire, you can copy them. Most successful guns are designed that way.

Licensing manufacture is about selling the whole tech package to make a design (heat treat, steel specs, tooling design, tolerances, etc). If you can work out how to make it without those “trade secrets”, and it isn’t patented, no law against it.

Intellectual property (IP) is more about brand names. It is also a bit about looks, which is why no-one makes a direct Glock copy. Glock have money and expensive lawyers. They may also still have patents. That is a potent combination. But that has not stopped the introduction of Glock-like pistols that don’t look exactly like Glocks and don’t say “Glock” on them.

I think the basic IP question in law is would a reasonable person mistake the copy for the original/inspiration? I imagine AA’s lawyers made a compelling case that the TX and PS were different enough from the HW and Venom that they’d win the case.

So AA could not have marketed the Pro-Sport as the AA Venom Mach2 (IP) but nothing stopped them making it as the Pro-Sport. Just like the Chinese can sell a copy of the Diana 34 as long as they don’t call it a Diana or a 34.

By the way, PS came out in 96. Venom joined Webley in 1999 or 2000.

If RustyBuzz was there and saw it with his own eyes who are we to argue?

Back in the day, there was Venom, Airmasters and Ken Turner that tuned guns. RustyBuzz is 1/3 of Airmasters, so I think he knows what he is talking about…

Anyway, all these issues have been all discussed before in topics such as this:

http://www.airgunbbs.com/showthread....h-trigger-unit

Prof51mtw (Professor Mike Wright, spring gun expert who wrote for Airgun World with BTDT, developed HOTS for Whiscombes etc. etc.) sums it up rather nicely in his post #8 here: http://www.airgunbbs.com/showthread....93#post4851193

I was going to make a post basically saying what is covered in the 2 posts.

Great ideas in any industry are "utilised" by other companies to develop products. The phrase "why re-invent the wheel" comes to mind.

Venom/Airmasters/Ken Turner all knew each other well and shared a common interest in developing and bringing to market fantastic rifles. There is no doubt IMO that ideas would be shared. Call it a co-operative of like minded people on a quest.

Air Arms were well positioned to successfully bring to market a rifle such as the PS and offer it to a worldwide market. I'm sure all involved would be very proud to see this be the case.

This has been a very interesting thread and I've edited the PS info on my site to reflect some of the input. Thanks fellas.

https://www.airarmsanorak.co.uk/the-pro-elite (Yep, the tail of the URL is wrong - I'll sort it!)

[Baxterbasics]

Quick quiz-no prizes, just kudos.

Airmasters, Venom,Ken Turner. Trailblazers all-but which of these guru's utilised a moped bearing in one of their super-springers?

Those directly involved-Shhhhhh!

[Hsing-ee]

The HW77 was just a poshed-up version of the PRC's Chinese Lion rifle with a rear-sight mounted on the scope rail to confuse the Communists. All previous sliding-breech rifles were effete side-levers with no more power than a pistol. The Lion was a Revolution by the proletariate that has been exploited by top-hatted Western capitalists, who then have the gall to complain that the B40 is somehow a copy of an original British rifle!

Astonishing, the cultural appropriation that goes on.

[look no hands]

The HW77 was just a poshed-up version of the PRC's Chinese Lion rifle with a rear-sight mounted on the scope rail to confuse the Communists. All previous sliding-breech rifles were effete side-levers with no more power than a pistol. The Lion was a Revolution by the proletariate that has been exploited by top-hatted Western capitalists, who then have the gall to complain that the B40 is somehow a copy of an original British rifle!

Astonishing, the cultural appropriation that goes on.

I did wonder when you where going to ram this spanner of a reply into the proceedings

Pete

[TonyL]

The HW77 was just a poshed-up version of the PRC's Chinese Lion rifle with a rear-sight mounted on the scope rail to confuse the Communists. All previous sliding-breech rifles were effete side-levers with no more power than a pistol. The Lion was a Revolution by the proletariate that has been exploited by top-hatted Western capitalists, who then have the gall to complain that the B40 is somehow a copy of an original British rifle!

Astonishing, the cultural appropriation that goes on.

Most entertaining, as ever, Al.

[Hsing-ee]

Is there no further development of the ProSport?

[Geezer]

Wow. Necropost.

I still like my post from 2 years ago.

[Hsing-ee]

Wow. Necropost.

I still like my post from 2 years ago.

It’s more of a classic post involving technical discussion, unwritten verbal history, eye-witness reports and debate. I’d say it was one of the best of 2018.

But in the end it really says that springer development stopped in 1992.