SawStop vs Bosch ruling

[Kelby Van Patten]

It sure helps SS. I think you may be underestimating the bad blood between the litigants as well as the PTI, if they were going to negotiate it would have likely been prior to spending money on R&D to get around the patents. I just don't see Bosch and Gass sitting at a table and and coming to a meeting of the minds. Litigants in law suits, even corporations, are like parties to a divorce in that if they feel screwed or feel that the other party attempted to screw them they will usually be willing to cut off their finger to spite their had in a slightly more apropos phrase. My point was simply if I was going to buy a site saw tomorrow (which would now be today) I would buy a SS given from what I have seen their re similar in quality and I am much more sure that SS will be selling parts and cartridges next spring. Currently, it seems clear that the Bosch is a more risky bet but if someone feels their risk vs reward view of the situation leads them to the Bosch instead that is certainly fine as well but I would expect them to stock up on cartridges given their might indeed be a long cold winter in store. In the beginning I felt Bosch has about a 2 to 1 chance of prevailing, currently I would place it more like 5 to 3 in SS favor.

I agree that SawStop makes some great saws. I have a slider, but if I were buying anything other than a slider, I would buy a SawStop.

As for bad blood, that can happen in some cases, even with corporations. But ultimately, in-house attorneys are accountable for what they spend, and they have to be able to justify it economically. I think Bosch may have misfired strategically by developing their own version of the technology. By doing so, and by putting it on a saw, they have demonstrated that it is commercially feasible to put finger-saving technology on their saws. The next time someone buys a Bosch saw and cuts off their finger, and then sues Bosch for not having that tech on the saw, it will be very awkward for Bosch to try to explain to a jury that it could have built its own tech or SS's tech into the saw, but it didn't want to have to pay SS's 8% royalty. That may be a tough sell to a jury (especially given that one jury already hit Ryobi for the same thing).

Legally speaking, I think Bosch has put itself in a very difficult position, and it has to get some kind of protection on its saws to avoid getting hit on product liability claims. They will keep fighting for a while, but if they can't win in the next year or two, I think we'll start seeing an avalanche of companies licensing SS technology.

[Van Huskey]

I agree that SawStop makes some great saws. I have a slider, but if I were buying anything other than a slider, I would buy a SawStop.

As for bad blood, that can happen in some cases, even with corporations. But ultimately, in-house attorneys are accountable for what they spend, and they have to be able to justify it economically. I think Bosch may have misfired strategically by developing their own version of the technology. By doing so, and by putting it on a saw, they have demonstrated that it is commercially feasible to put finger-saving technology on their saws. The next time someone buys a Bosch saw and cuts off their finger, and then sues Bosch for not having that tech on the saw, it will be very awkward for Bosch to try to explain to a jury that it could have built its own tech or SS's tech into the saw, but it didn't want to have to pay SS's 8% royalty. That may be a tough sell to a jury (especially given that one jury already hit Ryobi for the same thing).

Legally speaking, I think Bosch has put itself in a very difficult position, and it has to get some kind of protection on its saws to avoid getting hit on product liability claims. They will keep fighting for a while, but if they can't win in the next year or two, I think we'll start seeing an avalanche of companies licensing SS technology.

Not sure Bosch has misfired at all. The Osario case was somewhat scary but once it went through remittitur it appeared more economically feasible to defend these cases. Techtronic scored a win in Wisconsin in 2014 where a jury sided with the saw manufacturer and also a slight victory and last year where a man was only able to recover $80k. The plaintiffs cases are already somewhat uphill based on whether the state has contributory, modified comparative or pure comparative negligence. In each litigated case the user (plaintiff) has been found to be some percentage at fault which in some states completely bars recovery. While these cases continue to be filed they have yet to become a gold mine for the plaintiffs.

The bad blood only has to last about 5 more years when the patents run out, assuming Bosch does not prevail. Plus I think you may under estimate the vitriol the industry has for Gass, the corporate guys I have talked to remain quite peeved, and since Gass has become the star, go to, expert witness in the cases against them he continues to stoke the flames.

In any event I think the Reaxx was strategically introduced to bleed SS of resources ahead of the original patents ending.

[Dave Sabo]

I could use a clarification on the royalty cost. It looks to me like the original cost was 3% . It's my understanding that the "outrageous" 8% only kicked in when and if the tech was adopted industry wide.

That doesn't seem very likely to happen, so we're talking about a 3% surcharge right ? Do any of you professional managers and marketers think your sales would be significantly impacted by a 3% cost increase (that the customer is going to pay ) ? We see 3% price increases on many tools and that increase just goes to the co. for additional profit , marketing, expansion, raw material cost ect... and not significant improvement in function.

I also wonder if the 3% included the brake mechanism or is that simply the fee being allowed to design your own brake or buy SS version ? If it is just a fee, then how much would the mechanisms themselves cost me to bolt on my saws ?

I'm with Van on this one. Looks like a playground spat and SS's line in the sand has just been scratched out by Bosch and they're willing to see Gass has a big enough stick to run them off. Doubtful , as Bosch is heavyweight and can take several beatings - and has their own stick with which to swing back. I also think this is only the outer layer of the onion. Bosch didn't roll out this saw without market research and legal advice , and you can bet they have a complete long term strategy which anticipated challenges and setbacks in the near term. They also didn't bring the reaxx to market for vanity or solely to stick it to Gass -that's just a bonus.

As someone also alluded Bosch is prob. thinking global in terms of marketing these saws - something I'm guessing SS is not equipped to handle either in terms of marketing , meeting production if the market were developed, or mounting a sustained multi front legal challenge in those countries in which it has zero presence.

I think their best course long term is to make a better product and market the heck out of it. Their cabinet saw is a really nice saw even without the brake tech. Personally, I think guys make too big a deal out of this break tech anyway. Sure it's great, but four or five generations of tablesaw users here and in Europe have managed to learn and use the tool safely without incident because of skill. There will always be accidents, no matter the safety devices installed on any equipment. And the day is coming when the SS and Reaxx mechanisms fails to perform because of the weather, or Father Time, or the offshore supplier used a cheaper supplier for the stopping charge, or whatever - and then we can all discuss the ensuing legal case that brings.

[Jerome Stanek]

I could use a clarification on the royalty cost. It looks to me like the original cost was 3% . It's my understanding that the "outrageous" 8% only kicked in when and if the tech was adopted industry wide.

That doesn't seem very likely to happen, so we're talking about a 3% surcharge right ? Do any of you professional managers and marketers think your sales would be significantly impacted by a 3% cost increase (that the customer is going to pay ) ? We see 3% price increases on many tools and that increase just goes to the co. for additional profit , marketing, expansion, raw material cost ect... and not significant improvement in function.

I also wonder if the 3% included the brake mechanism or is that simply the fee being allowed to design your own brake or buy SS version ? If it is just a fee, then how much would the mechanisms themselves cost me to bolt on my saws ?

I'm with Van on this one. Looks like a playground spat and SS's line in the sand has just been scratched out by Bosch and they're willing to see Gass has a big enough stick to run them off. Doubtful , as Bosch is heavyweight and can take several beatings - and has their own stick with which to swing back. I also think this is only the outer layer of the onion. Bosch didn't roll out this saw without market research and legal advice , and you can bet they have a complete long term strategy which anticipated challenges and setbacks in the near term. They also didn't bring the reaxx to market for vanity or solely to stick it to Gass -that's just a bonus.

As someone also alluded Bosch is prob. thinking global in terms of marketing these saws - something I'm guessing SS is not equipped to handle either in terms of marketing , meeting production if the market were developed, or mounting a sustained multi front legal challenge in those countries in which it has zero presence.

I think their best course long term is to make a better product and market the heck out of it. Their cabinet saw is a really nice saw even without the brake tech. Personally, I think guys make too big a deal out of this break tech anyway. Sure it's great, but four or five generations of tablesaw users here and in Europe have managed to learn and use the tool safely without incident because of skill. There will always be accidents, no matter the safety devices installed on any equipment. And the day is coming when the SS and Reaxx mechanisms fails to perform because of the weather, or Father Time, or the offshore supplier used a cheaper supplier for the stopping charge, or whatever - and then we can all discuss the ensuing legal case that brings.

I don't think it is just a bolt on unit the saw would have to be designed from the ground up. If the 3% is just a fee that would add a lot to the cost of the saw. Even 8% on a $3,000 saw would be pushing it to get a slider instead

[David Kumm]

We also need to remember that 10" saws are primarily hobby or small shop machines and the technology doesn't seem to adapt well to larger blades which are the norm in a commercial setting. Companies would need to redesign all saws and buyers would need to accept the limitations of the smaller blade. Would machines with electronic rise, fall, or tilt be able to cope with the shock of the arbor assembly suddenly stopping and retracting and would the scoring blade also need that capability? As the spinning mass increases, and the amount and speed of the drop increases, the stress on the parts does too.

I'm not advocating stepping back in time, but we need to be realistic that adapting the technology to many saws will cost way more than 3%, or even 8%. Dave

[Rich Riddle]

In any event I think the Reaxx was strategically introduced to bleed SS of resources ahead of the original patents ending.

The REAXX bled some of my resources from SawStop. I read some of the patents Gass used and to a layman they seemed intentionally vague. They said any flesh sensing technology on any type of tool, not just a table saw. You'd better believe when the patents expire that more tools will have the technology. It's possible that the "skin sensing" technology exists for other power tools but other inventors won't market their tools at the present time and offer SawStop the ability to reverse engineer their ideas while simultaneously profiting from others' work.

[Jerome Stanek]

Skin sensing technology has been around for a long time I had a lamp way back in the 70s that used it so I don't see how Gass can claim he developed it.

[Mike Henderson]

Skin sensing technology has been around for a long time I had a lamp way back in the 70s that used it so I don't see how Gass can claim he developed it.

I don't think flesh sensing is the patented technology - it's how the sensing is done and then what happens after the sensing occurs. Back when we were young, there was a capacitance technology that could sense when you touched something (or actually just got very close) and it would (for example) turn a light on or off. That technology could not be patented for a number of reasons.

Mike

[Kelby Van Patten]

Not sure Bosch has misfired at all. The Osario case was somewhat scary but once it went through remittitur it appeared more economically feasible to defend these cases.

What remittitur? Last I checked, the appellate opinion upheld a $1.5M judgment, which was the full amount of the jury's award. And even though the jury found Osario 35% negligent, that did not reduce the damages award at all.

[Curt Harms]

Yeah, you could print the manual out in color on your home or business printer and give one to every employee. A professional printed manual will have nice glossy pages but is that worth $50? Not to me.

Mike

Whadda concept!! And if you wanted to cover your legal backside, have each employee sign for having received one. About the missing guards though .............

[Kirk Simmons]

I own a SS PCS 3HP. I could care less about Glass, legal debates, whatever.

I bought it in 2007 (I think, it's been a while), and for me the comparison at the time was the SS vs a Delta Uni. At that time the price differential was ~$250, and for $250 the flesh sensing technology won my money. The saw is amazingly well constructed and has served me well. I'll note I have no idea how the stock fence is, I bought mine without one and transferred the 8' Incra TS/LS from my previous saw.

[Joe Bradshaw]

Interesting discussion. For a long time I, was in the hate SS camp because of the bullying tactics that Glass used; until I ran my finger across he blade. My SO told me to get rid of the Uni-saw and replace it with the Sawstop. The fit and finish on the SS is quite good, but I am always worried about firing the cartridge pre-maturely. I still don't like steve glass and his methods, but, I am comfortable with my SS.
Joe

[Mike Henderson]

Interesting discussion. For a long time I, was in the hate SS camp because of the bullying tactics that Glass used; until I ran my finger across he blade. My SO told me to get rid of the Uni-saw and replace it with the Sawstop. The fit and finish on the SS is quite good, but I am always worried about firing the cartridge pre-maturely. I still don't like steve glass and his methods, but, I am comfortable with my SS.
Joe

I hope your injury wasn't bad, Joe, and you healed quickly and fully. No matter how experienced you are, people make mistakes.

Mike

[Jim Dwight]

I will be surprised if Bosch licenses technology from Gass. I think they will either litigate and see if they can win, buy Gass's patents outright, or just leave the U. S. market to Gass and set themselves as the patent holder in other markets thereby limiting him to the U. S. (if they haven't already). They can afford to leave the U. S. market to Gass if that's their highest profit move. I really doubt it's emotional for them other than possibly a dislike for Gass and his tactics. Bosch's product line only overlaps SS at the bottom of SS's line and essentially the top of Bosch's. Bosch competes with Festool more than SS.

[Ronald Blue]

I suspect that regardless of how this patent infringement fight turns out that Bosch entered this for the long haul and their deep pockets will prevail in the end. They may well be seeing a potentially huge market and not just table saws. I also think that they are probably already working with the other saw manufacturers on getting saws ready to bring to market with their system. Gass at best will delay this a few years and if he loses will probably be buried. The Bosch technology could be adapted to large blade commercial saws with out a great deal of trouble as well. While maybe not practical there method of stopping the blade could be adapted to other machines. Instead of clamping the blade it could be a disc just as in a disc brake system. Coincidentally they are a key player in anti-lock brake systems as well. Both automotive and large truck. They have made a great deal of money over the years by supplying their technology to other manufacturers or issuing licenses for them to use it. Unless your vehicle(s) are pre 1980 then you almost certainly have at least a small part of their technology in use.