Shufflers

[AlienBoy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Have you made sure your invention does not violate any existing patents?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yup....and continue to do so. I have probably looked at every patent with the word "shuffler" in it. However, even with a paid patent search, I could never guarantee that I am not infringing somewhere.....in fact, there are cases of people who received patents for their work, to later have someone sue them for infringement and have their patent revoked because the patent examiner missed something. The world of invention is far from perfect.

I'm kinda leaning towards electronic as well. The benefits far exceed the additional cost. In addition, it would then open the casino market to me....WoooHoooo! I am gonna be rich!

[/ QUOTE ]


Hello,

I'm an inventor with some experience in patents and such.

The patent that covers the "DeckMate" used in casinos is: 6,651,982

US PATENT

And also 6,651,981, 6,068,258; 6,139,014; 6,325,373; and 6,655,684 (relating to other shuffle master machines).

There are many others of course - however most have expired. You cannot infringe on an expired patent of course, and the fact is that all a patent does is grant the hold the right to sue in CIVIL court for infringement, and then they can only be awarded actual damages, which in a limited market like this may be insignificant in relation to the total cost of bringing such litigation.

And what is protected is what is enumerated in the "claims" - the main claim for the DeckMate is:

[ QUOTE ]

1. A device for forming a random set of playing cards comprising:

a top surface and a bottom surface of said device;

a card receiving area for receiving an initial set of playing cards;

a randomizing system for randomizing the order of an initial set of playing cards;

a collection surface in a card collection area for receiving randomized playing cards, the collection surface receiving cards so that all cards are received below the top surface of the device;

an elevator for raising the collection surface so that at least some randomized cards are elevated at least to the top surface of the device; and

an automatically moveable cover over the elevator.

[/ QUOTE ]


Removing any one of these elements would then *not* infringe the claim.

For instance, not having an "automatically moveable cover over the elevator" would not infringe even if the other elements were identical.

(In short, I think this is a badly worded claim - full of holes and easily designed around)


A microcontroller controlled electronic home shuffler probably has a decent market if it can be done at a reasonable price point - good luck!


On another note, even the DeckMate is a bit tough on cards - I notice damage on the back after about a couple hours of play in a casino.


AB

[kodonnell]

Thanks for the post.

My shuffler is pretty far removed from this patent. However, the patent is pretty vague, and *any* shuffling device would infringe on the first 4 claims..even the "cheap" shufflers infringe on the first 4. The only claims unique are the elevator and the elevator door. ShuffleMaster, inc is notorius for aggressively defending their patents, and have the money to do it...I really don't want to be on the ugly end of that.

Anyways, here is an update to my shuffler:

I am almost finished with the mechanical portion of outfitting it electronically. Basically placing servos and linkages to them. I have been using TrueSpace to build it and animate it...that was a big help. Truespace is a great 3d program that you can get for free. It really sped up the process. I still have my original prototype model that can shuffle the cards and has all the basic mechanical stuff down. I've had to make a few minor changes to accomodate the servos and linkages, but I think I can keep the size down. I am going to guesstimate the footprint will be about 6" x 9" and about 3" tall, wedge shaped.

Thanks for all the support, it really helps.

[AlienBoy]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the post.

My shuffler is pretty far removed from this patent. However, the patent is pretty vague, and *any* shuffling device would infringe on the first 4 claims..even the "cheap" shufflers infringe on the first 4. The only claims unique are the elevator and the elevator door. ShuffleMaster, inc is notorius for aggressively defending their patents, and have the money to do it...I really don't want to be on the ugly end of that.

[/ QUOTE ]


What I quoted was a SINGLE claim - the several sentences together form only one claim - and if you delete any ONE sentence, you are not infringing on the claim, as claims are the only portion of a patent that can be "infringed" upon, reduce the complexity of a device is a valid way to avoid infringement.

Yea, patents are complicated...


At anyrate, I can't wait to see what you've developed - keep us posted!


AB

[meccaNES]

I'll be first in line...good luck finishing it...