Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light performance

[Karl_K]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

Makes protecting someones truly innovative IP into a mockery not to mention the $$$ spent!

Yep, that is my feelings about it also.
It is not unique to the "cut gemstone" patents either.
I see the same thing in the electronics world.
A recent example is the Apple Ipad shape patents they are tying to use against everyone else who produces a tablet. They should have never been granted both because of prior art and being obvious.
The entire system is badly broken.

 

[Serg]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

re:You or I could destroy this patent in 10 seconds in any court of law on several grounds.

This patent is garbage patent but you have to spend years and may be around 50k-100K $ to Proof it in Court.
Patent system had been optimized by lawyers for Lawyer Business.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

Good point Serg- but who would initiate the suit?
Cutters who are already cutting Princess Cuts to just as high a standard already- or the company that got the patent?
Karl- is the Octavia Patented?

 

[Karl_K]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

re:You or I could destroy this patent in 10 seconds in any court of law on several grounds.

This patent is garbage patent but you have to spend years and may be around 50k-100K $ to Proof it in Court.
Patent system had been optimized by lawyers for Lawyer Business.

Yes it would cost that much to get to that point if not more for both sides.

 

[Karl_K]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

Good point Serg- but who would initiate the suit?
Cutters who are already cutting Princess Cuts to just as high a standard already- or the company that got the patent?
Karl- is the Octavia Patented?

If they tried to enforce it they would likely lose, even in East Texas.

Nope the basic structure is Asscher which was patented and expired.
I could add a facet or 2 and get a stupid patent like this one but what is the point other than advertising and throwing away $25000?

 

[oldminer]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

I think the point of creating a "patent" for a diamond cut is for marketing. Marketing an aspect or two which serves to differentiate the patented product from others which don't have that element to advertise. Does it matter? It does when the patented item is a large success and it surely is a waste of money when it fails to attract an audience.

One does not pursue patent infringement until there might be monetary damages of sufficient size to make a lawsuit financially practical. If the petented item is a huges succes, another firm copies it and also enjoys a huge success at the expense of the original patent holder's success, then it is a possibility to go to court. An infringement where there is little to no gain by the infringer and where there is little to no loss to the patent holder is a waste of time and money.

The marketing game is something of greater interest than the patent itself.

 

[Karl_K]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

I think the point of creating a "patent" for a diamond cut is for marketing. Marketing an aspect or two which serves to differentiate the patented product from others which don't have that element to advertise. Does it matter? It does when the patented item is a large success and it surely is a waste of money when it fails to attract an audience.

One does not pursue patent infringement until there might be monetary damages of sufficient size to make a lawsuit financially practical. If the petented item is a huges succes, another firm copies it and also enjoys a huge success at the expense of the original patent holder's success, then it is a possibility to go to court. An infringement where there is little to no gain by the infringer and where there is little to no loss to the patent holder is a waste of time and money.

The marketing game is something of greater interest than the patent itself.

Well said Dave.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

So we're all agreed that patents for diamond cuts are merely an attempt to add leverage to advertising. And as I've already shown, sometimes these claims do not jibe with the truth.

This is why I feel very strongly that the claims made by the people using these patents should be examined by professionals advising consumers with total skepticism on behalf of consumers.
In this case, they're really hoisted themselves on their own petard with this claim.

Due to the total depth being less than typically cut princess cut diamonds they state as a feature of this cut, “A FireMark® diamond will appear about 10% larger than a typical Princess Cut of the same carat weight.”

The parameters stated (68-70.9%) are NOT more shallow than many other well cut, as well as other stones not cut as well.
Add in taller crown height and the likelihood is that these stones will not appear larger than many other well cut or not well cut princess cuts on the market.
Therefore, it's my strongly held belief that the professionals posting have a responsibility not re-iterate dubious claims- in a perfect world the pro's would shine a harsh light on claims that appear to be misleading. Which is what I am attempting to do here.

Karl, despite the similarity to an Asscher, I do believe the Octavia something different enough and is certainly worthy of a patent- although I can easily understand why you don't go down that path.

 

[diagem]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

The parameters stated (68-70.9%) are NOT more shallow than many other well cut, as well as other stones not cut as well.
Add in taller crown height and the likelihood is that these stones will not appear larger than many other well cut or not well cut princess cuts on the market.

David, I think they are comparing to AGS 0 Princess Cuts which are well above 70%td most of the time.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

Hi Yoram, the term they're using is "typical" princess cuts. AGS0 cut grade stones are NOT "typical" princess cuts by any means.

 

[diagem]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

Hi Yoram, the term they're using is "typical" princess cuts. AGS0 cut grade stones are NOT "typical" princess cuts by any means.

Ok, but still, I believe most Princesses are cut to >70% TD.
But dont worry, I think this patent is an insult to the cause!

The stone could be gorgeous, that's not my beef, I have a problem with locking prior art in such a shameless way.

Tomorrow if H&S wish, they can sue other cutters who cut "GENERIC" Princess Cuts just because they are within this patent ridiculus numbers.

That is a pity

 

[Rockdiamond]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

Thanks Yoram- I'll bet the stones are amazing- but as you said, that's not the point.

You're probably right about a total average in terms of depth of all princes cuts on the market being above 70%.
However I see enough stones below 70 to indicate that it's not an insignificant percentage.

 

[diagem]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

Thanks Yoram- I'll bet the stones are amazing- but as you said, that's not the point.

You're probably right about a total average in terms of depth of all princes cuts on the market being above 70%.
However I see enough stones below 70 to indicate that it's not an insignificant percentage.

True, we also know there are plenty of beautiful Princess cuts in the low to mid 60%'s range.
The issue with branding IMO is consistency, and nothing in those patent claims are near consistency and if they are cut consistently than why lock up such a wide range of numbers where practically all prior art Princess Cuts fit in.

Like I said, it's a pity the USPTO is low grading themselves. If this continues, there will be no reason to apply in the US.

 

[desimishu]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

Hey all after so much looking around, I am actually purchasing a 2 Carat firemark!!!

 

[oldminer]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

I surely would love to take a direct measurement of the light performance on your diamond. I will be away until 8/17 at the NAJA conference, but if the stone could be examined in advance of it being set, I'd have it sent directly to Imagem and have them do the work and return it directly to you. No cost on your part at all provided you publish the results or allow me to do the same for you. I think many Pricescopers would like to know what the truth of the matter is in an objective way. Myself included. All dealers know that Patents on particular parameters of cut are rather weak, but I am forever optimistic until proven otherwise.

We can arrange a shipping label for you with sufficient insurance and get the work done very rapidly and the stone back to you or to whoever is going to set it for you.

 

[desimishu]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

I will definitely be happy to provide you the stone to check ASAP! **edited by moderator. please do not post personal contact information on the site per our policies**. I will need the stone back before October 3rd though!

 

[Rockdiamond]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

Dave if you could also show proof about the additional size claim, that would be great.
"Due to the total depth being less than typically cut princess cut diamonds they state as a feature of this cut, “A FireMark® diamond will appear about 10% larger than a typical Princess Cut of the same carat weight.”

Light performance measurements are subjective- however physical dimensions are conclusive, yes?
Of course we' still need to agree what "typical" is- but maybe that's their "escape valve" for the claim.
Or, we can use parameters of similar weight stones off the PS DB to determine an average size for a given weight ......

 

[GirlyGirl]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

I would love to see an ASET too!

 

[Rockdiamond]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

Oops- forgot to add earlier- CONGRATULATIONS!!
Sounds like a great rock.

 

[desimishu]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

By the way enjoy this amateur video of my diamond shot by myself! ^_^

**edited by moderator. please read our policies**

 

[ChedWick]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

This is interesting. During my diamond hunt over the past year I stopped in a local jeweler who tried to show me their "branded" diamond. I wasn't familiar with it and while it looked great next to some other random stone they pulled out of their vault, it appeared no more impressive than some of the other stones I had seen during that time.

Looking into it now, it was actually a firemark stone. Very interesting indeed. Once WF is done with my ring, I may have to take it there for a comparison. Even if it looks a little better, I doubt I'll feel the markup is worth it. If I recall correctly, it was almost 1500 more than what I was looking at elsewhere.

 

[TC1987]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

HI Dave,
How is this NOT an ad for a branded diamond you seem to cross promote with your charts?

Also- manufacturer's claims of "my diamond is 100% brighter, looks bigger, etc" are generally hype. Certainly so in this case. A professional purported to be impartial repeating these false claims is bad form IMO.
Many well cut princess cuts will look larger than the ones you're promoting here.

Who cares.

Thanks for the post, Dave. I bookmarked this thread so I can find it later.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

I think the point of creating a "patent" for a diamond cut is for marketing. Marketing an aspect or two which serves to differentiate the patented product from others which don't have that element to advertise. Does it matter? It does when the patented item is a large success and it surely is a waste of money when it fails to attract an audience.

One does not pursue patent infringement until there might be monetary damages of sufficient size to make a lawsuit financially practical. If the petented item is a huges succes, another firm copies it and also enjoys a huge success at the expense of the original patent holder's success, then it is a possibility to go to court. An infringement where there is little to no gain by the infringer and where there is little to no loss to the patent holder is a waste of time and money.

The marketing game is something of greater interest than the patent itself.

Well said Dave.

I agree. As so often he does, Dave boils the issue down to its essence and keeps it real.

And count me as one who saw the original post as introducing something of relevance to the community, as opposed to self promotion. It is entirely understandable that Dave would take a little pride in what appears to be some modern validation of his work in paramentrics, especially considering he carried out that work carried with old school methods. And after all, until the relatively recent development of computer modeling the only objective tools consumers had were parameters. Clearly consumers should be encouraged to trust their own taste and the recommendations of knowlegeable and ethical experts, but people have always sought out objective information, especially for large purchases. You have to look no further than the HCA tool to see the continuing role of parametrics in the selection process.

Regarding the patent, it is surprising that a variation of the princess, albeit an improvement over the "typical" princess cut, would rise to the level of patentability. The basis of the "innovation" seems somewhat unclear and the parameters a little broad in some ways. The "typical" princess is a pretty low standard to use for patent purposes I would think. It would be interesting to see how this brand fares in terms of LP grading in the AGS system.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Re: Newly Patented Princess Cut with very high light perform

For those that are interested, this was the story I heard detailing what's so horribly wrong with the patent system today
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/496/when-patents-attack-part-two

The basic idea behind why we needs patents is part of the fabric of our county- but it's being abused horribly at this point in time.
I don't believe that what the founding fathers had in mind was "patent extortion"

As far as my posts of a year ago- I regret that the tone was harsh- I do feel that claims made about increased brilliance, and size are misplaced when it comes to many "branded diamonds"- but I respect David Atlas- and the work he's done. I agree there was no self promotion involved
Good lesson- if one is angry abut something- step away from the keyboard!