Novax fanned frets vs regular fanned frets...

[JanVanHove]

Just a little issue...

Sice Novax holds the patent/copyright/legal-mumbo-jumbo for the Novax fanned fret system, and that Dingwall has (as far as I know) a licence from Novax to be able to sell their fanned frets instruments...

Now, I've seen a few fanned fret instruments built by individual luthiers, from smaller operations like the people on this forum who build them for themselves, to bigger operations like Ken Lawrence... Do all of these guys have to get a licence from Novax?

Ah, well, I guess I just answered my own question... I digged on Novax's website and found this:

Do I need to pay a licensing fee to build a Fanned-Fret instrument?

No

So I hope that this information will be useful to someone...
It will be to me...

Cheers

[eleonn]

As posted before on other threads, Novax rights over the patent are over.

[T-Bird]

Hi.

Everyone and anyone can build anything that's patented for their own use, as long as the product itself, or making it, doesn't violate any other laws.

The problems may arise if You try to sell the products or mass-produce them, even for Your "own" use.

If the patent has expired like eleonn said, and in cases like this it's more than likely, it's a free game.

Regards
Sam

[Taylor Livingston]

Not only did the rights expire, but they only covered a non-working method of doing fanned frets, so you could probably have done it even when Novax held the rights, without paying for a license, as long as you didn't follow the method in the patent, which wouldn't work anyway.

[Bocete]

Originally Posted by conical johnson

Not only did the rights expire, but they only covered a non-working method of doing fanned frets, so you could probably have done it even when Novax held the rights, without paying for a license, as long as you didn't follow the method in the patent, which wouldn't work anyway.

What do you mean by not working?

[Dirk Diggler]

The patent was siting using some imaginary point in space as the reference point or something like that. I just mapped out my longest and shortest scales and connected the points.
Dirk

[Bocete]

Originally Posted by Dirk Diggler

The patent was siting using some imaginary point in space as the reference point or something like that. I just mapped out my longest and shortest scales and connected the points.
Dirk

I see. The imaginary point where all the frets intersect is not the correct way to make fanned frets. I can hardly believe mr. Novax had patented that, but it's not impossible

[jworrellbass]

My understanding is that fanned frets started back in the 1600's, It wasn't really frets but string wrapped around the neck. It must have been a really old patent.

[WarriorJoe7]

the novax patent expired a few years ago... either 18 or 20 years after issued. I have never seen the patent but i could find it.

It is possible that all the frets do point to one point but more likely that it's not true.

[scottyd]

I'd love to see the patent, seems hyped up, far from the simple reality that fan frets truely are.

[pilotjones]

As others have said, plus a few more points:

• the Novak patent is expired, 2007
• the Novak patent was for a method to produce a fanned fretboard, not for fanned frets themselves
• the Novak patent was good only in the trivial case where the strings are parallel; in all other (normal) cases, the patented method would lead to a bad fretboard. This has been confirmed by myself and by two other luthiers I know of who have engineering backgrounds, and proved it using CAD.
• Edgren patented fanned frets in 1904. He forgot to include the angled bridge, which is IMO most likely why Novak was granted a patent
• fanned fret instruments were produced in the 1600's
• Novak owns a trademark on the term "Fanned-Fret(TM)". He may still license this, along with and accompanying graphical trademark, if you want it.
• Scotty, if you search the TB LC for my username, "edgren," and "novak" you should turn up reference to the original patent #s. I haven't got them at work right now.
• Booker has a new, inforce, patent on two other methods to produce a fanned fretboard. This patent incidentally states that the Novak patent was in error.
• The "lay out two scales and then connect the dots" method is not covered by any patent. It was mentioned, but not claimed as part of the invention, by Novak and then Booker. It produces a correct fanned fretboard. It is what everyone does, and is in fact what Novak used to instruct you to do, rather than to follow the method to which he held patent rights.

[JanVanHove]

Thanks Jones, that certainly is very informative!

Being on the verge of embarking on a fanned-fret project myself, I just wanted to cover all that needs to be covered...

[jworrellbass]

So then what's the best way to lay out a fanned fret? Any links?

[Mike Shevlin]

Here is my LeCompte 36"-34" ~ never asked Bud if it was 'licenced'. I don't care, it's great & I never pass on an opportunity to show it off.

[JanVanHove]

My reference:

http://www.fretfind.ekips.org/2d/nonparallel.php

[jworrellbass]

Originally Posted by JanVanHove

My reference:

http://www.fretfind.ekips.org/2d/nonparallel.php

I'm going to be scratching my head for awhile trying to figure that out. But thanks for the link

[SGD Lutherie]

Originally Posted by pilotjones

The "lay out two scales and then connect the dots" method is not covered by any patent. It was mentioned, but not claimed as part of the invention, by Novak and then Booker. It produces a correct fanned fretboard. It is what everyone does, and is in fact what Novak used to instruct you to do, rather than to follow the method to which he held patent rights.

Gee, I figured that was the only correct way to do it! I remember following the discussion on the Novak error at MIMF, and since I figured it was done by laying out two scales, which is what the whole idea is about, so I never understood the error problem, except that the string angles over the fret slightly, which is true of any instrument with non parallel strings.

[jworrellbass]

Originally Posted by SGD Lutherie

Gee, I figured that was the only correct way to do it! I remember following the discussion on the Novak error at MIMF, and since I figured it was done by laying out two scales, which is what the whole idea is about, so I never understood the error problem, except that the string angles over the fret slightly, which is true of any instrument with non parallel strings.

So does connecting the dots work? I laid out a 36"/32" scale 6 string with the 7th parallel, the inner strings seemed off a bit. Should I proceed and adjust with the bridge.

[vbasscustom]

Originally Posted by pilotjones

As others have said, plus a few more points:

• the Novak patent is expired, 2007
• the Novak patent was for a method to produce a fanned fretboard, not for fanned frets themselves
• the Novak patent was good only in the trivial case where the strings are parallel; in all other (normal) cases, the patented method would lead to a bad fretboard. This has been confirmed by myself and by two other luthiers I know of who have engineering backgrounds, and proved it using CAD.
• Edgren patented fanned frets in 1904. He forgot to include the angled bridge, which is IMO most likely why Novak was granted a patent
• fanned fret instruments were produced in the 1600's
• Novak owns a trademark on the term "Fanned-Fret(TM)". He may still license this, along with and accompanying graphical trademark, if you want it.
• Scotty, if you search the TB LC for my username, "edgren," and "novak" you should turn up reference to the original patent #s. I haven't got them at work right now.
• Booker has a new, inforce, patent on two other methods to produce a fanned fretboard. This patent incidentally states that the Novak patent was in error.
• The "lay out two scales and then connect the dots" method is not covered by any patent. It was mentioned, but not claimed as part of the invention, by Novak and then Booker. It produces a correct fanned fretboard. It is what everyone does, and is in fact what Novak used to instruct you to do, rather than to follow the method to which he held patent rights.

when the strings are parallel? so no neck taper? im not quite gettin something.

[eleonn]

I remember a threat going on sometime ago where Pilot and other few guys gave a lot of info about this subject, show the added the patents to the threat and put some of the draws of the whats going on witht he novax patent.