Why are gunmakers allowed to copy designs?

Factual Questions
1

This thread on why revolver cylinders rotate in different directions got me thinking about how many firearms out there are blatant copies (or “improved/modernised versions”) of other existing guns.

The Colt M1911 is one of the best examples of this. Originally designed by John Browning and manufactured by Colt (and later, the US Government), there are now countless gunmakers out there offering their own versions of the M1911 pistol which are physically and functionally identical to the Colt M1911 handgun.

Besides all the gunmakers in the US producing M1911 clones, Para-Ordnance in Canada, and Norinco in China also make M1911 handguns.

I know the M1911 design is a century old, but the original manufacturer (Colt) is still in business, and making the gun, so I’ve never really understood how so many other people can get away with making identical pistols (in function and appearance) without getting sued for… something, at least.

The same is true of the Colt Single Action Army- again, introduced by Colt in 1873 and still manufactured by them (more or less continuously) up to the present. And copied by countless handgun makers, not least of all Ruger, Armi San Marco, and the US Fire Arms Manufacturing Company… all competing with the gun offered by Colt, the original (and still extant) manufacturer.

Various Winchester rifles and shotguns have been copied by firms like Rossi, Uberti, Taurus, and Norinco- and that’s not counting the Marlin lever-action rifles, which look similar but are at least mechanically different in some way. Again, Winchester are still in business (sort of), yet there are still other people making their gun designs, or guns that are near enough so as to make no real difference.

I realise these are older designs, but even so- how is it that modern arms companies can make unlicenced copies (or near-enough-for-all-intents-and-purposes) versions of guns manufactured by other arms-makers that are still in business without running into all sorts of problems?

FTR, I have no problem with the fact that this is happening (choice is, after all, a wonderful thing)- I’m just curious as to how it’s legally possible without someone being sued out of existence for copyright or trademark infringement or something like that.

2

Well, in the case of the 1911, I believe it’s because the patent expired quite a while ago. They’re good for something like 20 or 50 years is all, so there’s no protection on an old design.

Of course, I’m not a patent lawyer.

3

I believe the patent expired on the M1911, but IANAL, so I can’t quote specifics.
As for guns that are knockoffs of Glocks (Glock-offs, for the lazy of us) like the Springfield XD, they’re functionally equal in that they fire rounds, however they’re internally quite different, as any gun smith will tell and show you.

4

I didn’t see them at the gun show. Beat up 1914As were going for $1800.00
I didn’t buy one. :slight_smile:

5

Not always, though. Glock won a lawsuit against Smith and Wesson over the Sigma.

6

I stand corrected.

Typically they’re different enough in internal design, I shall amend. (Or would, if I could.)

7

A patent typically runs 20 years and it was less than that a long time ago, mid-nineteenth century.

8

To flesh out this answer. In the US patents used to run 17 years from date of issue. Now they run 20 years from date of filing. Currently patents seem to be taking about 3 to 6 years to wind their way through the system from initial filing to issue.

9

This was primarily on the basis of the trigger safety mechanism and the sear engagement chain, which functioned similarly between the two pistols. The suit was resolved by S&W agreeing to a slight (probably cosmetic) modification to the Sigma, a one-time payment of an undisclosed sum to Glock GmbH, and an agreement not to compete with Glock through the same dealers (i.e. if a dealer wanted to carry the Glock he would have to cancel any contractual agreement with S&W).

As has been previously pointed out, patents expire. It is common to make a slight functional modification to continue the effectiveness of the patent, but this is often suspect and difficult to enforce; it is typically easier to either license the design to another manufacturer as Fabrique Nationale de Herstal did with the P-35 ‘Hi-Power’ or Colt did with the 1911 during WWII (more 1911s were actually manufactured by Remington Rand than Colt). Notable copies or clones made under license have occurred with the CZ-75, Beretta Brigadier and Model 92, Walther PP/PPK, Armalite AR-15, and most Russian-designed firearms have been manufactured by license or patent theft in China.

In addition, many firearm designs have been cloned or at least liberally copied without repercussion simply because the design is too common to properly patent. The cammed Browning style lockup used in the majority of recoil operated tilting barrel pistols, for instance, is so common that even though the Astra A80 is functionally and mechanically similar to the Sig P220, there are no features on the latter that were so clearly patented so as to result in an intellectual property infringement by the former.

However, it is relatively rare that a copied design is superior in features and quality to the original; it is only rarely the case (and often in response to popular demand for aftermarket modification, as with the 1911) that the popularity of a design from a maker different from that which originally produced it has superseded the original production model. Most clones are clearly that; knock-offs, or designs that were stolen without the same quality control as the original. Which is not to say that many features have not been successfully copied and improved upon, and indeed, the most popular firearms in use today are typically a collection of features and design concepts borrowed from and improved upon from preceding designs. The Glock itself owes design nods back to the Hi-Power, the HK VP70, and several other novel design features borrowed from earlier weapons.

Stranger

10

As someone who knows zilch about guns, I have to ask - how old are most gun designs? From what you’ve said here, it sounds like there are a lot of really old - turn of the century old - guns still being produced. Are these just produced as collector’s items, or is it just that there hasn’t been much change in gun design in the last century? I mean, I’d assume there’s a cutting edge for military guns and such, but are the mainstays really just that old? The M1911 looks familiar enough that it seems like that might be the case, but I really just don’t know.

11

Patents have an expiration date by design. They are granted by the state so those who create something new will benefit from their creativity, but the expire so that everyone will benefit and the “useful arts and sciences” will generally advance. Copyright has been extended and twisted to insanity so the copyright on Mickey Mouse will never expire, but there has never been any serious drive to extend patent protection in the same way. Mainly, I suppose, because engineers are rational enough to realize that they benefit more from being able to use expired patents than they lose from their own patents expiring.

12

Bolding mine. I think that’s what the OP has a problem with.

The fact that the company that filled the patent is still in business and still producing the gun (or any other product) doesn’t matter. All that matter is whether or not the patent has expired. If it has expired, anybody can use the design.

13

Semi-related thread:

14

Some designs are just good. I have several revolvers that are based on the Smith & Wesson Military and Police design of 1899. They are extremely reliable, although revolvers are somewhat out of fashion today.

http://gunblast.com/Cumpston_SW-MP.htm

15

That depends on the specific gun.

The M1911 is a gun that was designed in 1911, however as time goes on it gets improved upon. The majority of the reason that it’s still in use today (In my opinion) is sentimental value and the fact that competition shooting caters heavily to them.

The Glock Pistol (base design) finished development in 1980. It has since stayed pretty much the same, and is probably one of the most ‘advanced’ of Duty Pistols, not that there aren’t guns developed more recently, but it’s without question one of the most reliable and dependable guns on the market.

The CZ-75 finished development in 1975, it’s also considered a very modern and advanced gun design, and is very reliable. The only gun that consistently rivals the Glock in user-driven ratings and occasionally surpasses it (for duty pistols).

16

That’s what I find interesting. I understand that patents expire (and I think that’s a good thing, FTR), but I was wondering how, even with the technical patent (eg the Browning design on which almost all semi-auto pistols are based) expired, how a gun that still looked the same as a gun currently being produced by the original manufacturer isn’t infringing on something.

I can see how things like the various Cap & Ball revolvers would be fair game (They were all long out of production until Cowboy Action Shooting became popular in the 1980s), but I’m still not entirely sure how come, when the Springfield XD looks a lot like a Glock, as does the S&W Sigma (already mentioned by Stranger On A Train, yet the Sigma was the subject of a patent infringement suit when it doesn’t scream “Glock Knock Off” to me, whilst the Springfield XD (Which looks exactly like something Glock might design and make) hasn’t caused any problems.

As has been pointed out, a lot of the Russian designs have been copied in China on the “What are you going to do about it?” theory (that and the Soviet Union no longer exists, further complicating the patent/copyright situation).

Basically, the answer seems to be “Because they can”…

17

Because it’s not looks that count.

It’s the mechanics.

18

I understand that. What I’m asking is why the the looks don’t count as well?

I mean, if someone started manufacturing a car that looked exactly like an Holden Kingswood HQ, but had an MP3-CD-Radio in the dashboard, air conditioning, cruise control, and had a modern fuel-efficient EFI engine in it, they could expect Holden to bury their company with “Cease & Desist” letters. Why are firearms different?

19

I guess the same reason canoes are different?

I walk into a sporting goods store and I’ll be damned if all the Canoes don’t look exactly the same… with the exception of color.

To an educated gun owner, they look vastly different. To the general public, anything with a polymer grip is a “glock.” However, amongst those of us who do shoot, they look nothing alike. It’s night and day for those who are exposed often.

Also, they don’t feel anything alike, in regards to their trigger pulls.

20

The Springfield XD looks more than a little like a Glock, IMHO. In fact, the first time I saw someone using one at the shooting range, I thought that Glock had brought out a new handgun with a different grip and thought “About time!” I was very surprised to discover it was a Springfield handgun and not a Glock, to be honest.