Zaxcom patent infringement question

paulears said:
EDIT
Ah - found it. The protected feature is the recording of audio to an SD card while simultaneously transmitting it. How on earth did they get a patent on something like this when both devices already exist, and they just patented putting both in one box? Surely connecting any small audio recorder in the line to the transmitter can't be considered an infringement of a copyright when people have done it for years? I've clearly missed all the fuss this must have caused.
Click to expand...

Yes and that's why you cannot buy a Tascam DR-10CS SD card recorder with its mic loop through to TX in the States but you can buy it in Europe or Aussie with no difficulties. I believe you can only buy the Tascam DR-10L in the States. No loop through to feed into a TX. All down to Zaxcom's restrictive patent... crazy.

Chris Young

https://www.videoguys.com.au/Shop/p...rder-for-sennheiser-wireless-tas-dr-10cs.html
 
The US Patent Office is generally held in low regard globally. Particularly in the high tech world. I have been involved in research on patents in this area. Due to that it is not unusual for there to be a global version and a US version.

As noted above most devices of this type will me made to the same physical specs and will (should) pass all the transmission/emc regs globally as they are usually 95% the same. Normally it is only the channels/bands that differ for radio mics. Wi-fi and blue tooth are the same everywhere.

I suspect that a firmware change is all that is needed. However... for Zoom to make an upgrade from US to global version Officially available for the US version would not be a good move. I can see a aw suite starting. The pre-update check by the firmware loader will probably look for an appropriate version signature. So you will need some one who can be trusted to hack the firmware signatures.

There is little point in Zoom assisting in any way as anyone who really wants the international version can usually get one from Canada, Mexico or friends in Europe. Also as noted they whole thing is continually denting Zaxcom's reputation and ongoing sales in the USA. So it is doing Zaxcom more harm than good and not hurting Zoom.
 
Last edited:
So I contacted Trew Audio in Toronto and Studio Economik in Montreal, both pro level dealers. No answer from Studio Economik and Trew called on Friday saying that despite several attempts by them to contact Zoom they still did not have an answer to the question: Is the Canadian version of the Zoom product an international or the same as the USA version (disabled output for recording) but they will continue to try to contact zoom and I will report back when I get news.
 
BrianMurphy said:
So I contacted Trew Audio in Toronto and Studio Economik in Montreal, both pro level dealers. No answer from Studio Economik and Trew called on Friday saying that despite several attempts by them to contact Zoom they still did not have an answer to the question: Is the Canadian version of the Zoom product an international or the same as the USA version (disabled output for recording) but they will continue to try to contact zoom and I will report back when I get news.
Click to expand...

Drive over the border to Canada. Set up an accommodation address buy a Lot of the normal units, drive south and sell them to Americans.
Much like smuggling banned goods in to the USSR. :)
 
Don't have to drive to Canada, I am Canadian, live in Montreal. Our border is currently closed due to Covid in anycase. Personally I have no interest in breaking the law or profiting from this patent restriction, I just don't want to be disadvantaged as a result of an American issue.
 
BrianMurphy said:
So I contacted Trew Audio in Toronto and Studio Economik in Montreal, both pro level dealers. No answer from Studio Economik and Trew called on Friday saying that despite several attempts by them to contact Zoom they still did not have an answer to the question: Is the Canadian version of the Zoom product an international or the same as the USA version (disabled output for recording) but they will continue to try to contact zoom and I will report back when I get news.
Click to expand...

Also being in Canada, I contacted the AVshop in Toronto. They have the US version. Initially thinking you were talking about the Tascam DR-10C, which also has an out to wireless but not 32 bit, I did a search for "Tascam DR-10C Canada" and came up with this: https://www.neqtiq.ca/products/tasc...W40Pp36z-UF8TU95gpfzIocnfPkEWkLgaAqvhEALw_wcB

Despite having .ca address they are located in the UK. They don't seem to carry the 32 bit version.
 
paulears said:
I've done a bit of Googling but I'm left confused? What is this Zaxcom patent and what does it prevent other manufacturers doing? Passing audio through? Passing audio through what? Could somebody give a bit of context - I'm happy googling but can't quite find the correct search terms?

EDIT
Ah - found it. The protected feature is the recording of audio to an SD card while simultaneously transmitting it. How on earth did they get a patent on something like this when both devices already exist, and they just patented putting both in one box? Surely connecting any small audio recorder in the line to the transmitter can't be considered an infringement of a copyright when people have done it for years? I've clearly missed all the fuss this must have caused.
Click to expand...

In my personal opinion (IANAL), Zaxcom should never have got a patent for this.

But the problem is that Zaxcom serves an extremely small small niche of a sub niche of a market.

Thus nobody wants to truly try hard to bring this patent down by throwing tonnes of money and armies of lawyers at it.

Thus the patent stands, and we have to put up with these ridiculous restrictions on what we can do on set if we're not part of the Zaxcom ecosystem.

Paul F said:
Ahh, the patent business; something close to my heart. The idea of a patent being 'novel' is long gone. I don't know the history of how this came to be, but let's just assume corporate patent lawyers had a lot more time and money than the patent office. I used to have a job where I actually was assigned a quota to have my group submit a certain number of patent applications every year. I have patents on the most absurd things you can imagine; all in the name of patenting as much stuff as possible so that if any other company came at us with a patent suit, we could compare patents and negotiate a settlement. It's madness.
Click to expand...

This is the big problem, even if you're anti-patent-madness yourself, and you understand the big problems for society that harsh IP laws create, you still have to play the game and be proactively filing for as many patents as you can! So you've got an armoury to defend yourself for when the opponent's lawyers coming knocking.

Rick R said:
Though I wonder how many future Zax buyers feel alienated, and will choose another manufacturer when that time comes.
Click to expand...

Zaxcom is the RED of the Sound Department world, in more ways than one.

Paul F said:
The F2 is not a wireless transmitter. The transmitter some people may attach to it will be FCC certified. Sure, the F2 is a radiator like any electronic device, but I doubt the international version is any different from the FCC certified version with the exception that some firmware shuts off the output jack. On set, with all the other radiators, the F2 will likely be a tiny blip of no consequence and legal, but with no FCC gibberish on the outside.
Click to expand...

He might be referring to the non-USA version of the Audio Ltd A10 transmitters.
 
Last edited:
IronFilm said:
In my personal opinion (IANAL), Zaxcom should never have got a patent for this.
But the problem is that Zaxcom serves an extremely small small niche of a sub niche of a market.
Thus nobody wants to truly try hard to bring this patent down by throwing tonnes of money and armies of lawyers at it.
Thus the patent stands, and we have to put up with these ridiculous restrictions on what we can do on set if we're not part of the Zaxcom ecosystem.
.
Click to expand...

The US patent system is well known internationally for granting almost anything a patent (for a US firm) even if there is something similar elsewhere the world. As with this case it is designed to protect US companies against foreign competition rather than protecting anything novel. The US are not alone in this other countries such as China simply ignore foreign patents as several US companies have discovered.

As noted Zaxcom serves a small niche of a niche market where anyone in the US who wants to get round it just gets a friend to order one in Europe or Canada. So there is no point in anyone challenging the patent. That costs money, probably more than the market is worth. However why spend money on challenging Zaxcom when the patent causes threads like this one that dent Zaxcom's standing (free of charge)?

Due to the internet crossing borders without seeing them, anyone looking for this sot of device will find not only the competition to Zaxcom but many threads like this one discussing the situation. Is suspect the current, well documented, situation gains Zoom more sales, for free, than would be the case if they challenged and won the case against Zaxcom.
 
JAMedia said:
The US patent system is well known internationally for granting almost anything a patent (for a US firm) even if there is something similar elsewhere the world. As with this case it is designed to protect US companies against foreign competition rather than protecting anything novel. The US are not alone in this other countries such as China simply ignore foreign patents as several US companies have discovered.

As noted Zaxcom serves a small niche of a niche market where anyone in the US who wants to get round it just gets a friend to order one in Europe or Canada. So there is no point in anyone challenging the patent. That costs money, probably more than the market is worth. However why spend money on challenging Zaxcom when the patent causes threads like this one that dent Zaxcom's standing (free of charge)?

Due to the internet crossing borders without seeing them, anyone looking for this sot of device will find not only the competition to Zaxcom but many threads like this one discussing the situation. Is suspect the current, well documented, situation gains Zoom more sales, for free, than would be the case if they challenged and won the case against Zaxcom.
Click to expand...

Here I'll fix this for you. The thing you're missing is that its costing more of my money to get around the patent here in the U.S., and when I want another product that comes out in the future that infringes I''l have to pay more to get around it and so on and so on. Thats what Zaxcom is doing to US buyers. The majority of buyers of track Es , Zooms, Tascams, would never even consider buying Zaxcom because of their high end pricing so Zacom is not losing any business from those buyers.
 
mico said:
Here I'll fix this for you. The thing you're missing is that its costing more of my money to get around the patent here in the U.S., and when I want another product that comes out in the future that infringes I''l have to pay more to get around it and so on and so on. Thats what Zaxcom is doing to US buyers. The majority of buyers of track Es , Zooms, Tascams, would never even consider buying Zaxcom because of their high end pricing so Zacom is not losing any business from those buyers.
Click to expand...

Understood. Maybe not loosing [that m]any customers but certainly not gaining any.

Though does it cost any more to buy the "international Zoom or Tascam from Canada than the hobbled one from the US?
 
JAMedia said:
Understood. Maybe not loosing [that m]any customers but certainly not gaining any.

Though does it cost any more to buy the "international Zoom or Tascam from Canada than the hobbled one from the US?
Click to expand...

My 3 track E's from England $1224 US. Three from B&H $1047 + tax = $1109. And lets not forget the warranty issues that might come up for me if the recorders have any problems within the 2 year overseas warranty.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand the "rules" because I see in other areas 3rd party Chinese companies only too happy to step in and sell almost the identical product. Take for example Aperture sells the wildly popular Light Storm monolight and the Light Dome parabolic soft box. In no time you have knock offs with similar design. At first you had to insert rods and then they went built in rods like an umbrella. With each innovation the knock offs quickly followed suit. Then consumers have the choice to buy Aperture or lower quality copy. You even see it in cameras. Canon came out with the flip out screen in their DSLRs and gradually all the other manufactures have copied that feature. Look at gimbals, they all have copied dji, they all offer very similar design and functionality.
 
Last edited:
mico said:
Here I'll fix this for you. The thing you're missing is that its costing more of my money to get around the patent here in the U.S., and when I want another product that comes out in the future that infringes I''l have to pay more to get around it and so on and so on. Thats what Zaxcom is doing to US buyers. The majority of buyers of track Es , Zooms, Tascams, would never even consider buying Zaxcom because of their high end pricing so Zacom is not losing any business from those buyers.
Click to expand...

I more or less agree with you. But what they are doing is ticking-off/screwing people like me off, who are in that high/higher end demographic that they serve. I'm entrenched heavily in Lectrosonics to the tune of many, many tens of thousands of dollars and I'm not making a wholesale change to Zaxcom for what is a secondary(maybe tertiary) level feature.

And again, as has been said many times, it's not just them stopping other manufacturers from making one-piece, self-contained transmitter/recorders, BUT that they have somehow managed to con the US Patent office into blocking even output and pass-through features on STAND-ALONE transmitters and recorders from other manufacturers sold here in the US.

I don't have any numbers to back this up, just my observations over the years working in this business and across the country. Lectrosonics probably outsells them, conservatively, 2:1, but probably really 3:1 or 4:1 and Sound Devices is probably in the same range. And while I'll never wish ill-will on anyone, I hope it stays like that.
 
Run&Gun said:
I more or less agree with you. But what they are doing is ticking-off/screwing people like me off, who are in that high/higher end demographic that they serve. I'm entrenched heavily in Lectrosonics to the tune of many, many tens of thousands of dollars and I'm not making a wholesale change to Zaxcom for what is a secondary(maybe tertiary) level feature.

And again, as has been said many times, it's not just them stopping other manufacturers from making one-piece, self-contained transmitter/recorders, BUT that they have somehow managed to con the US Patent office into blocking even output and pass-through features on STAND-ALONE transmitters and recorders from other manufacturers sold here in the US.

I don't have any numbers to back this up, just my observations over the years working in this business and across the country. Lectrosonics probably outsells them, conservatively, 2:1, but probably really 3:1 or 4:1 and Sound Devices is probably in the same range. And while I'll never wish ill-will on anyone, I hope it stays like that.
Click to expand...

My feeling is the patent is Zaxcon specifically directing their position against Lectrosonics and no one else. The rest of us not in that battle have to also pay a price unfortunately.
 
mico said:
My feeling is the patent is Zaxcon specifically directing their position against Lectrosonics and no one else. The rest of us not in that battle have to also pay a price unfortunately.
Click to expand...

Yes, it hurts everyone that is not Zaxcom or a Zaxcom customer.

I'm all for competition and protecting your hard work and original ideas. But this is NOT an original idea and they are stifling competition and advancements in the field.
 
Last edited:
I stumbled across that article several months ago. In relation to the industry at large, this guy is clueless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top