V-Flyer

Should points out that IP and other legal are a strong way of protecting an innovative idea. Prefect time for the sue too when you think about it. [:p]

Link: Airlines in the hot seat over Virgin’s Upper Class patents

Oh, that patent in question is US Patent No.: 7,185,849 and PCT No.: PCT/GB02/03672. Virgin Atlantic owes the patent. (Could a VFer post that over at Airliner.net?)

Just highlights how much of an issue IP has become in recent years. TBH I would imagine that this will get settled out of court.

Title isn't correct really as VS aren't suing the airlines they are only suing the court manufacturer- wise move really although VS would be in its right to sue the airlines as well.

Cool - VS hasn't done the court battle thing for a while[8D]

45.

Ok - I guessing here that Contour are still the only company who manufacture the UCS for VS and DL, CX, AC and Jet?

VS are putting themselves in a slightly compromised position by sueing the only manufacturer of UCS when they come round to request further supply for either a new aircraft or a re-fit.

G-VSUN is needing UCS next year - Have VS decided by sueing that they will be looking elsewhere for a new design or a new manufacturer of UCS...[:?]

I cannot see Contour wishing to help while legal proceedings are underway unless they are contracted to do so..

Contour still has to make the seat for ANZ so they may as well keep supplying VS. After all, profit is profit.

One wouldn't want a little thing like principle to get in the way of business;)

45.

Here's a link to the patent for all you legal experts out there. I was too lazy to read it.

Originally posted by tallprawn


VS are putting themselves in a slightly compromised position by sueing the only manufacturer of UCS when they come round to request further supply for either a new aircraft or a re-fit.

Well yes and maybe no - if VS own the IP they can switch the manufacture to wherever ... then there's the small issue of plant!

Here's a link to the patent for all you legal experts out there. I was too lazy to read it.

Will...

45.

Originally posted by slinky09

Originally posted by tallprawn


VS are putting themselves in a slightly compromised position by sueing the only manufacturer of UCS when they come round to request further supply for either a new aircraft or a re-fit.

Well yes and maybe no - if VS own the IP they can switch the manufacture to wherever ... then there's the small issue of plant!

Exactly- I would imagine what will happen is this will be settled out of court and VS will then move seat manufacturer. I cant quite believe that Contour have allowed this to happen to themselves- I would imagine that there is more to this than meets the eye. The media in the UK aren't the best at reporting legal matters in the correct context.

VS045

Ha! Will have a gander although could be fairly boring. W

Originally posted by VS-EWR
According to one of my professors Electrical Engineers make the best patent lawyers.

Sorta; Electrical Engineers can bill at higher rates than other patent lawyers.

Without the background to this, it's hard to make any sort of informed comment. Who knows what's been said between VS and Contour? How many ways are there, really, of putting seats into an aircraft?

All I can think of is one word: "desperation".

This looks like a desperate move by VS, if their relationship with Contour is so badly broken. Or, it's all just a load of bullish bluster.

I personally think the seats fitted in the AC aircraft are somewhat better than the original UCS.

For example, it's missing several of the design flaws that exist in the UCS, such as the pathetic reading lights, the cocktail table that digs in your arm (and isn't obvious to the crew when you need a refill), and the useless micro-armrest for people with arms coming out of their lower backs (a la A340 config), the tempremental table, oh, and the ludicrously over-sensitive adjustment buttons.

Ah, progress.

Mike