Solomon Technologies Will Win Versus Toyota In my opinion, the Toyota Prius planetary gear train is a very obvious and blatant infringement on the patents owned by Solomon Technologies Incorporated (STI). Before the Solomon patents, the outer gear (ring gear) was always held fixed in any planetary gear system, once the ring is allowed to rotate -- all kinds of fun things happen. This is basically the first Solomon patent –- allowing the ring to rotate. This first patent is truly profound -- a real technical breakthrough, a major paradigm shift. If you do a little homework, you will agree with me and see that Toyota's infringement is very obvious. The Prius gear train is the first Solomon patent. To learn about the Prius planetary gear train, put "power split device" into a Google search. This will take you to some really good models and explanations. Next go to www.solomontechnologies.com then to the “News†section and then to “Magazine Articles†and watch the Discovery Beyond 2000 video and read the last three articles: “Design News†– January 1993, “Popular Mechanics†– December 1994 and the “Wall Street Journal†– May 24, 1994. To track the legal developments in Solomon’s lawsuit go to: "ragingbull.lycos.com" and put in "SOLM". This message board is run by "lawfighter", a lawyer who is tracking all the legal activity. Solomon’s first patent IS the Prius gear train – it’s a no brainer! Stay tuned. SalesGuy
Welcome to Priuschat, member number 10500... You must work for Solomon. I think Toyota will very easily show prior art for this. Next.
According to The Prius That Shook the World, Toyota looked at quite a number of prior art alternatives. It is interesting that Solomon waited so long to make this claim. I guess they wanted to see if the idea was $ucce$$ful first.
I don't think you can sell that here, SalesGuy. FWIW, PriusChat usually tolerates trolls, for a while. If you have something positive to contribute, please do so. Otherwise, begone!
Don't mean to cast aspersions here but the original post smacks of the typical situation where someone with an ownership interest in a company (employee, shareholder, or both) is trying to do nothing other than "talk up" a company's stock. This company, however, appears to have some real financial problems as indicated in their latest 10Q, a part of which is reproduced below: We have incurred significant operating losses and used cash in our operating activities for several consecutive years. As of September 30, 2005 we have deficiencies in both working capital and net assets. These conditions raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. In the past we have been able to obtain financing to fund our losses. Our ability to continue is dependent on obtaining additional long-term financing and ultimately achieving profitable operating results. To date we have not been able to establish acceptable sales levels. We are currently seeking additional financing to fund operations to achieve acceptable sales levels. Note the sentence, "To date we have not been able to establish acceptable sales levels." I have to say that statement is painfully accurate based on the following (from the same 10Q): ...For the three months ended September 30, 2005 we generated revenues of $3,674... Geez! I would imagine Toyota will consider this nothing other than a nuisance and settle the thing for what they would consider pocket change. But, of course, since the company suing them has a market cap of under $2 million, it might just be more expeditious for Toyota to buy the company outright.
Dont be silly, toyota will win because the power split device is self supporting and isn't contained in a box.
Also, there was recently a Supreme Court ruling which completely changed the nature of patent lawsuits. In particular, one cannot sue for patent infringement unless they show that they went to market with a product, and the competitor trounced them by using their innovation, and killed the other guy's market. Basically, you can no longer invent something, sit on it, and wait for somebody else to invent it as well who goes to market successfully, then sue them. You must actually try to market and sell your invention, something it seems Solomon has not even attempted. Nate
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(naterprius @ Aug 15 2006, 09:10 AM) [snapback]303538[/snapback]</div> Because, apparently, their 'salesguy' is busy playing on the internet rather than contacting potential customers who would be interested in their product.
I think its funny that the only thing Solomon is trying to "sell" is the idea that Toyota's PSD and their boat thing are the same. The guy doesn't even make an attempt to sound like a real person, the post itself sounds like a cheesy radio ad or "opening argument." salesguy, read it back to yourself in the mirror and take note of how you sound like a total tool. You will find that most people on this board are smarter than you are (hey, we bought Prii, didn't we?) and see right through you trolling. Nate
