Kahr Arms’ presser informs us four years after the fact (in Internet time) that a jury in Florida found Diamondback Firearms guilty of patent infringement. “The lawsuit filed in 2011, states that Diamondback Firearms infringed upon the patent by using Kahr’s exclusive cocking cam trigger system into their own firearms. Currently, Kahr holds seven U.S. patents for their exclusive locking, firing, and extraction systems. The cocking cam trigger system employs a patented cam to both unlock the passive safety and complete cocking and releasing of the firing pin. The system provides a “safe cam action” and a smooth double action only trigger stroke [if they don’t say so themselves]. The cocking cam trigger system patent was granted to Kahr Arms founder Justin [the son also rises] Moon on April 2, 1996. This design is found on all Kahr firearms.” Including the five-star MK9.

Recommended For You

17 Responses to Jury: Diamondback Infringed on Kahr’s Trigger Patent

  1. Diamondback pistols, the outside is a carbon copy of Glock, The trigger a copy of Kahr. Originality is obviously NOT their forte, well maybe the cheesy colors they make available are-lavender, orange, and baby blue.

  2. Off Topic…but the box of Monarch ammo in the pic brings back memories of being able to go to the Academy down the street during lunch and picking up ammo to shoot for the wkend.

    I guess those were the “Good Ole Days” 🙁

  3. With Taurus’ recent aquisition of Diamondback, I wonder how much this will affect them. Of course, Taurus has there own safety system they could potentially use.

  4. I like Kahr pistols. I just don’t like their price tag enough to go out and buy one. For the same price equal or better can be found (especially for their polymer versions).

    This article reminds me of the Canon vs Kodak cameras. Kodak has been around forever, but recently they are so busy trying to suck money out of patent infringements that they forgot about making quality, innovative products. Meanwhile, Canon (basically ignoring patent infringements) is taking all the market and the money by consistently constructing a superior product year after year.

    • FYI, Canon is not ignoring patents. They own thousands and are constantly filing more. Owning a solid patent portfolio is the only way to protect yourself from patent infringement suits. (If you don’t own any patents, you can’t hit back.)

      I don’t know about Kodak in particular, but many companies that resort to a patent licensing strategy as their core business do it because they are unable to compete in their core business…

  5. Only thing I don’t like about my Kahr PM9 is the trigger. It feels like it takes a mile of travel to pull it and a mile to reset. I wish it was more like my Glock.

  6. If they’d filed this in the Eastern District of Texas (ground zero for plaintiff-friendly patent litigation) they could have had their victory in 2012. Well north of 90% of plaintiffs win their patent lawsuits in the Eastern District.

    This is all by way of saying that sometimes the complaints are clear-cut, like the theft of a patented physical mechanism, but in general intellectual property law in the US is all kinds of screwed up.

    • This is not “intellectual property” like software. This is an actual designed and patented device. And patents are defined in the US Constitution in Article 1, Section 8, paragraph 8.

      The concept that patents somehow deprive the consumer is a false argument made by those who have no respect for the process of inventing something truly new and useful.

      Diamondback blatantly copied Kahr’s design with zero regard for the patents and law.

    • Patents expire in seven years so the inventer can realize a profit from his work.But if he chooses he can give license to others for reprodution or improvement of his invention.

  7. Intellectual property is real and no joke. The US Patent Office has become a joke… as they barely know what’s patentable and what’s not any more. They will often simply grant a patent and let those who disagree just fight it out in court… something the Patent Office is supposed to prevent.

    Don’t even get me started on Taurus and/or Kodak. Ask Beretta about Taurus and ask Polaroid about Kodak.

    Something that everyone in invention, design, and manufacturing should know about; The International Industrial Trade Espionage Act of 1996. Good stuff! One of the few things that Pres Bill Clinton did that was good… i must admit. Basically what it says is that if you can’t prove that you invented something you are making and selling, you are guilty of stealing it from the one who did invent it. This includes processes for manufacturing. So, for instance, if you worked for a company, then take what you learned from that companies “proprietary processes”, patented or not, and try to profit from them, you can get busted, convicted, and punished severely… and rightfully so.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *