Jerry Harvey Granted Dual High Frequency Canalphone Patent
Dec 15, 2014 at 3:32 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 121

jaimeharvey

New Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Posts
6
Likes
10
As of November 25, 2014, Jerry Harvey Audio is pleased to announce that Jerry Harvey has been granted US Patent 8,897,463 for his invention of the Dual High Frequency Canalphone System. This Patent covers JHAudio products with Dual and Quad high drivers: JH13Pro, JH16Pro, Roxanne, with more to come!  Additionally, Jerry has received Notice of Allowance on the Freqphase Wave|Guide Technology Patent, which applies to the same products in the JHAudio line.
 
We are extremely pleased to receive this Patent news, as it reinforces Jerry Harvey's place as the Inventor of the most cutting edge IEM designs and Jerry Harvey Audio as the destination for the most innovative In-Ear products in the world.
 
 
For more information visit: http://1.usa.gov/1waRT54
 
Dec 15, 2014 at 5:34 PM Post #3 of 121
Patents don't define an inventor... I'll have to look and see what all the patent covers. Being granted a monopoly on an idea has never seemed okay to me.
 
Dec 15, 2014 at 5:51 PM Post #5 of 121
Heh, first time I read that I thought it said Dual High Frequency Cantalope System, but that just didn't make sense.
confused_face_2.gif
blink.gif
biggrin.gif

 
Congrats to Jerry for the patent.
  Does this mean that no other CIEM manufacturer will be able to use more than one driver for highs?


There's a lot more to it than that, it looks pretty specific on the way the drivers are positioned and tuned etc.  It means the competition needs to do their homework to not infringe on the set-up or find "prior art", good luck there, though.
 
Dec 15, 2014 at 5:54 PM Post #6 of 121
Is there anything more technical than simply using multiple high frequency drivers? I hope so, since patenting a fundamental design to limit your competition is kinda scummy IMO (I'm not saying JH is doing this, I'm asking for clarification).
 
EDIT:
 
 
There's a lot more to it than that, it looks pretty specific on the way the drivers are positioned and tuned etc.  It means the competition needs to do their homework to not infringe on the set-up or find "prior art", good luck there, though.
 

 
Okay, I'm hoping it's pretty specific and related to more than just using multiple HF drivers. Patents have gotten ridiculous, especially recently. (Patenting the word "Candy", and patenting a square-shaped smartphone).
 
Dec 15, 2014 at 6:07 PM Post #7 of 121
The funny thing is that all companies represented on this site I'm sure have patents... so while we might disagree on the legitimacy of intellectual property, it just seems strange that this patent would be advertised... which makes me wonder what's in it even more!
 
Dec 15, 2014 at 6:19 PM Post #8 of 121
  Wow, it's not "scummy" to protect your intellectual property, way off base there man....
eek.gif

 
Read the patent before you start throwing stones,...


+1
 
Patenting an idea is the most basic right for an inventor - otherwise the real "scummy" types, steal it and often with larger bankrolls attempt to bury the originator with superior numbers.
 
This is why I will never own an Xiaomi Piston. They are the worst kind of thieves - copying designs exactly and mass producing them - often fooling buyers into thinking they are the real thing (phones, tablets, etc...) Sales of Xiaomi products have been banned in India recently as the counterfeiting was so blatant, no amount of bribery could keep the products on the shelves. This will severely hamper their expansion - they haven't really planned expanding into the USA or EU due to stiffer laws regarding forgery - but India is a huge market and they thought they could sell millions of products. Congratulations to my Indian neighbors for doing the right thing.
 
Dec 15, 2014 at 6:30 PM Post #10 of 121
who did  Xaiomi steal their design for the Pistons from? LOL 
 
Dec 15, 2014 at 6:30 PM Post #11 of 121
some of you are so funny
 
Dec 15, 2014 at 6:39 PM Post #12 of 121
 
+1
 
Patenting an idea is the most basic right for an inventor - otherwise the real "scummy" types, steal it and often with larger bankrolls attempt to bury the originator with superior numbers.
 
This is why I will never own an Xiaomi Piston. They are the worst kind of thieves - copying designs exactly and mass producing them - often fooling buyers into thinking they are the real thing (phones, tablets, etc...) Sales of Xiaomi products have been banned in India recently as the counterfeiting was so blatant, no amount of bribery could keep the products on the shelves. This will severely hamper their expansion - they haven't really planned expanding into the USA or EU due to stiffer laws regarding forgery - but India is a huge market and they thought they could sell millions of products. Congratulations to my Indian neighbors for doing the right thing.

Back when I worked at Honeywell (H&BC, fire alert systems, strobes, sounders, smoke detectors, and water flow devices for fire sprinkler systems) we routinely got product in to review, that outwardly looked exactly like ours. But the guts were no where near.  Like a PC board replaced by a mechanical system that did not, obviously, do what it need to.
One housing I worked on for a fire system strobe had a scratch in the mold that showed up on the inside of the part ('b' side surface so no need to fix it). The copies, from China, had the scratch perfectly duplicated.  The housing was so thin though that you could see through plastic. Kinda disturbing knowing that the products are out there and can put someone's life at risk.
 
The patent on the products is what was used to get them off the market in the US at least.
 
Dec 15, 2014 at 6:39 PM Post #13 of 121
Patents are often complicated, and while they are very necessary can often be abused pretty badly. I'm hoping the purpose of this patent is to protect a very specific technique rather than to explicitly limit the competition from using designs fundamental to many CIEMs.
 
Dec 15, 2014 at 6:55 PM Post #15 of 121
Calm down guys, unless of course you own shares in competing firms.

We don't even have all the details yet and I would love to see Jerry explain it in plain English for the rest of us to understand.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top