Setec Astronomy
Well-known member
- Aug 31, 2010
- 16,897
- 1,208
Since there has been some talk about this in other threads, I decided to refresh my memory on the patents involving clay. A Clay Magic box states “Covered by one or more of the following US Patents: 5,716,259; 5,476,416; 5,727,993; 5,676,714; 5,928,064; 6,241,579; and 6,547,643”. That’s seven patents. (anyone can view these at uspto.gov; you may need a browser plugin to view the illustrations).
The break down into two groups, 3 patents from Tadao Kodate of Japan, the apparent inventor of clay. His first patent (5,476,416) sets out the basic claims for detailing clay, and expires July 28, 2013. His second patent (5,727,993) is assigned to Joybond Co., Inc. a Japanese manufacturer of car products. This patent has 86 claims for various clay formulations and application techniques, and expires Nov. 9, 2015. His third patent (5,676,714) expires 12/22/2015 and relates to a globular clay additive—I’m not sure this has ever been reduced to practice.
The other group of patents has as the sole or primary inventor Paul Miller. His first patent (5,716,259) builds upon Kodate’s patents and primarily introduces the concept of the “baggie test” to find the protrusions that are then removed with clay. It also shows some novel potential shapes for the clay bar, which don’t seem to have caught on. Auto Wax’s Clay Magic and Joybond products are specifically mentioned along with some other Japanese mfrs. This patent expires 11/1/2015.
The remaining 3 of Miller’s patents are assigned to Auto Wax Company of Dallas, TX. 6,241,579 introduces the concept of various applicators to hold the clay, and has 392 claims. This patent expires 1/10/2017. The third patent (5,928,064) seems to repeat the claims of 6,241,579, but without the clay holders—it is therefore much shorter, and appears to me to have been filed because the review process of the 392 claims was taking too long (it took over 4 years for that patent to be granted, while 064 took a little over a year). 5,928,064 expires 2/9/2018. The last of Miller’s patents, 6,547,643, rehashes some of the earlier claims and introduces the clay holder for attachment to a polisher like a PC, and expires 1/9/2018.
I’m not a patent attorney (although I’ve played one on TV), but I think our hopes of more/different clay becoming available in the US in 2013, when the first patent expires, are going to be dashed. I think the earliest is when the patent assigned to Joybond expires near the end of 2015. I can’t really figure out if the Miller/Auto Wax patents are tied to the baggie/clay holder ideas, which would mean that they aren’t significant, or whether their incorporation of the “prior art”(general use of clay, formulations, etc.) actually provides further patent protection possibly out into 2018. My guess is the magic date is Nov. 9, 2015, but that Auto Wax (now part of ITW) will fight to hold onto the patent rights until 2018, based on their incorporation of the clay as part of the later patents.
On another note, in one of the other threads there was some discussion about who manufactures the clay sold here, that it “all comes from the same place”. I have a lot of different clays, and I have noted at least 2 different types (other than the old Erazer/Opti-Clay/etc.). There is the extruded “brick” type that is cut on the short edge, with the opposite short edge being rounded. These come in a crinkly wrapper, and always say “made in Japan” somewhere. The other type is what I call the “ball” shape, and includes Griot’s, Top of the Line, and other low-priced clays. These come in a non-crinkly wrapper, and none of them say where they are made. The old Erazer-type clays seem to be extruded but cut on the long edge, and have a very defined sharp cut edge.
My conclusion is that there are at least two manufacturers of clay sold here, one in Japan which is probably Joybond, since they are the assignee of the main patent, and another here making the “ball” clay under license. Since I haven’t seen any Erazer-type clays since Kucala lost the lawsuit, perhaps someone who has seen the Riccardo clays can comment on what it looks like.
The break down into two groups, 3 patents from Tadao Kodate of Japan, the apparent inventor of clay. His first patent (5,476,416) sets out the basic claims for detailing clay, and expires July 28, 2013. His second patent (5,727,993) is assigned to Joybond Co., Inc. a Japanese manufacturer of car products. This patent has 86 claims for various clay formulations and application techniques, and expires Nov. 9, 2015. His third patent (5,676,714) expires 12/22/2015 and relates to a globular clay additive—I’m not sure this has ever been reduced to practice.
The other group of patents has as the sole or primary inventor Paul Miller. His first patent (5,716,259) builds upon Kodate’s patents and primarily introduces the concept of the “baggie test” to find the protrusions that are then removed with clay. It also shows some novel potential shapes for the clay bar, which don’t seem to have caught on. Auto Wax’s Clay Magic and Joybond products are specifically mentioned along with some other Japanese mfrs. This patent expires 11/1/2015.
The remaining 3 of Miller’s patents are assigned to Auto Wax Company of Dallas, TX. 6,241,579 introduces the concept of various applicators to hold the clay, and has 392 claims. This patent expires 1/10/2017. The third patent (5,928,064) seems to repeat the claims of 6,241,579, but without the clay holders—it is therefore much shorter, and appears to me to have been filed because the review process of the 392 claims was taking too long (it took over 4 years for that patent to be granted, while 064 took a little over a year). 5,928,064 expires 2/9/2018. The last of Miller’s patents, 6,547,643, rehashes some of the earlier claims and introduces the clay holder for attachment to a polisher like a PC, and expires 1/9/2018.
I’m not a patent attorney (although I’ve played one on TV), but I think our hopes of more/different clay becoming available in the US in 2013, when the first patent expires, are going to be dashed. I think the earliest is when the patent assigned to Joybond expires near the end of 2015. I can’t really figure out if the Miller/Auto Wax patents are tied to the baggie/clay holder ideas, which would mean that they aren’t significant, or whether their incorporation of the “prior art”(general use of clay, formulations, etc.) actually provides further patent protection possibly out into 2018. My guess is the magic date is Nov. 9, 2015, but that Auto Wax (now part of ITW) will fight to hold onto the patent rights until 2018, based on their incorporation of the clay as part of the later patents.
On another note, in one of the other threads there was some discussion about who manufactures the clay sold here, that it “all comes from the same place”. I have a lot of different clays, and I have noted at least 2 different types (other than the old Erazer/Opti-Clay/etc.). There is the extruded “brick” type that is cut on the short edge, with the opposite short edge being rounded. These come in a crinkly wrapper, and always say “made in Japan” somewhere. The other type is what I call the “ball” shape, and includes Griot’s, Top of the Line, and other low-priced clays. These come in a non-crinkly wrapper, and none of them say where they are made. The old Erazer-type clays seem to be extruded but cut on the long edge, and have a very defined sharp cut edge.
My conclusion is that there are at least two manufacturers of clay sold here, one in Japan which is probably Joybond, since they are the assignee of the main patent, and another here making the “ball” clay under license. Since I haven’t seen any Erazer-type clays since Kucala lost the lawsuit, perhaps someone who has seen the Riccardo clays can comment on what it looks like.
rops:
