Ruger Suing Thompson Center over .22 Rifle

Status
Not open for further replies.
This reminds me of the Always Sunny in Philadelphia episode...

... Sorry pal, that's politics.


The way I see it, this is just one big game that is part of business. Not personal, not necessarily even that serious for those involved. Just... The politics/business game.
 
Just because they're suing doesn't mean they think they can win.

What Ruger wants is a "cease production" order from a court while matters go through litigation. Hopefully, the costs of litigation and cease production order will destroy the market for the product. Who wants to buy a product they may not be able to buy parts for?
The difference between today and yesteryear is in today's world patents are business weapons.
 
For my part I purchased a Remington 597M .22 MAG as it is close to the same but worked.;) A much better rifle all around although it did not have nearly the aftermarket support/options. Got my semi auto .22 MAG with a dependable rotary magazine and all weather synthetic stock. All for $100 less than the comparable Ruger at the time. Would have liked to get ahold of one of the 17HMR versions that were recalled and put a heavy .22 MAG barrel on it.
Sorry for the thread drift.:oops:
 
Lo and behold, the big names in the industry lobbied legislators to re-instate IPR to appearance, even when designs are several decades old and the designer has passed away long time ago. This enabled them to start legal action against manufacturers of products that were far closer to original design, hand made, of extremely high quality and even cheaper than their "original" ones, that only had an artificial license going for them.

Patents provide Government enforced monopolies, and they have been horribly abused to the determent of the consumer. Rent seeking is pervasive and universal and I think it is about time to get rid of patents. As can be seen in this example, the larger Company will simply sue the smaller into bankruptcy, and strengthen its monopoly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hq
Patents provide Government enforced monopolies, and they have been horribly abused to the determent of the consumer. Rent seeking is pervasive and universal and I think it is about time to get rid of patents. As can be seen in this example, the larger Company will simply sue the smaller into bankruptcy, and strengthen its monopoly.
First, American Outdoors and Strum Ruger are about the same size corporate entity, worth about 500 to 750 million each.

Second, patents are not enforced by the Government, patent infringement suits are brought to court at the expense of the patent holder. If the patent holder wins, he/she can recoup their legal expenses, however if they loose their just out.

Patents are very useful in that they promote the invention of new ideas. If you are clever enough (or willing to spend the money in research) to come up with something truly novel, then you deserve to profit from it. To fail to see that patents actually create new wealth, means you see intellectual property the same way socialist see monetary property - it is to be shared by all regardless of who actually created it, or you are lazy and think you deserve to benefit from someone else (mental) work.
 
Ruger has done this before, to AMT in the 1980s over trademark rights, not patents. AMT stopped making their 10/22 copy (the 25/22) as a result. So it makes perfect sense that they would continue that tradition today. It would be a surprise only to those ignorant of the history.
Same with the AMT Lightning pistol, the clone of the Ruger Mark series pistols.
 
To fail to see that patents actually create new wealth, means you see intellectual property the same way socialist see monetary property
Patents and other IPR have their place and time, but extended anywhere beyond reason, they become a form of socialism. Corporatism. The end results is the same, at some point they start hindering all technological development instead of just granting a business opportunity to the inventor. In this regard Coca Cola and WD40 have played it smart, never patenting their formulas but keeping them as business secrets, which is how we operate with some, select technologies. We're small enough to be steamrolled by any major corporation, ie. not large enough to patent everything and rely on litigation, so keeping them guessing is the way to go.

IPR is a double-edged sword, which also requires serious financial muscle to wield. Those who have it seem too willing to swing it for fun, which IMO sucks big time.
 
I sold my Ruger 10/22 takedown to buy the Thompson Center TCR-22. It was one of the best decisions I have made.

The TCR is an exceptionally phenomenal rifle, and it what the Ruger 10/22 should have been.

I wanted the TCR because because of the bull (threaded) barrel, integrated pic rail milled into the receiver, the sights (the sights are miles above the standard Ruger 10/22), the Magpul designed stock, the bolt hold open mags (they are ridiculously overpriced though), and parts/magazine commonality with the Ruger 10/22.

I knew as soon as I heard of the TCR 22 I knew it was going to be a good rifle, and I sold my Ruger to finance the purchase of the TCR immediately. The nice thing was for the amount that I got from my Ruger, I was able to buy the TCR kit that came with a sling, padded carrying case, and red dot sight.

My ONLY complaint with the TCR is that the comb height is just a tad too high for me to comfortably use the iron sights. However, after I zeroed them, I put a scope on it.

It is an absolute home run, and I hope Ruger loses the lawsuit. Even though I really like Ruger, and they're probably my favorite gun manufacturer, Thompson Center deserves to be able to keep selling the TCR as is, it's not their fault Ruger didn't come up with the idea first...
 

Attachments

  • 20191122_183729.jpg
    20191122_183729.jpg
    86.5 KB · Views: 18
Last edited:
Seems as old as the 10/22 is and as many of them that Ruger has sold, what's the big deal? All of the modern semi-auto .22s look alike.
 
I like my 10/22 and my PC9 but I hope Ruger does not win.
I see it like Coke and Pepsi, two things that are the same but different.
 
All you have to do is shop for aftermarket 10/22 parts to know that there is a demand for a better product. I can go out and build a '10/22' and not include a single part made by Ruger. Ruger has just failed to adapt to market demand and changes. And if they won't meet market demand someone else will. Welcome to business 101.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hq
A while back, the same thing happened with Armscor and their 10/22 clone. Except, it was pretty much exact. Same wooden stock, barrel band, everything. Armscor lost, and I personally don't think that was unreasonable.

TC's, though, is different. Ruger doesn't offer a configuration particularly like TC's, so I'm hoping that's good enough to keep them out of trouble.
 
is it being Shanghied if they charge more and make it better? It’s not like TC made a junk copy and charged $99. Its $399.

FWIW, I wouldn’t buy a 10/22 for $99. So there’s my obvious bias.

Everyone makes a better version of the 10/22 than Ruger does, maybe that’s the real problem.

All entry-level semi-auto .22 rifles are basic blow-back actions with aluminum receivers and minimal hardening of parts, because the round doesn't require it. All of them use plastic everywhere they can. NONE of them are made much better out of the box than the Mossberg Plinkster, which retails for about $110. The only thing the Ruger has that is worth paying extra for is a wooden stock and flush magazine.

Anyone who pays $399 for the T/C gun is a fool.
 
All entry-level semi-auto .22 rifles are basic blow-back actions with aluminum receivers and minimal hardening of parts, because the round doesn't require it. All of them use plastic everywhere they can. NONE of them are made much better out of the box than the Mossberg Plinkster, which retails for about $110. The only thing the Ruger has that is worth paying extra for is a wooden stock and flush magazine.

Anyone who pays $399 for the T/C gun is a fool.

Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, uh, your opinion, man.
 
Good grief. Pot, meet kettle. As though I needed another reason to dislike the company.

The timing of this couldn't be more ironic, since ruger literally just ripped off SilencerCo's Osprey Micro design.

Ruger is one gunmaker I wouldn't mind seeing disappear from the landscape.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top