Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Hornady's sour grapes with WSM

Here is a copy of a response from Hornady from a while back that many of you may have already seen regarding the WSM that someone else received when asking if Hornady would produce any ammo for the 300 WSM...

"Thank you for your inquiry. Sorry we don't and won't. A royalty is required. You might note WSM's are being chambered by fewer gun company's because of inherent feeding problems, increased manufacturing costs, and royalty.

Thank you again for your inquiry."

Pair this with their spiteful description of the 300 WSM in the 9th edition manual and the apparent (to me anyway) lack of widespread interest in their RCM offerings and you have what I see as a child's reaction to losing. It laughable considering the RCM and RSAUM would at least as likely (maybe even more so) to have feeding issues based on the criteria that are commonly used to explain any possible feeding issues with the WSM.

I have a 270 WSM and 300 WSM and neither has a problem feeding. The 270 WSM is in an X-bolt and the 300 WSM is in a new M70. The M70 needed some slight surface polishing to make it feed a little more smoothly, but no more so than any other caliber I've had in that model.

I'm not anti-Hornady or RCM... I shoot their bullets, use their dies and even bought a 6.5 Creedmoor recently. I just felt a need to vent a little about their childish behavior. I don't expect anyone else to agree, just my opinion.

That's their prerogative I guess. I got rid of all of my wsm's. Hopefully no one crys about that..

Never realized they had to pay a royalty to make ammo.

I had actually considered dumping the WSMs myself because of brass cost/availability, but I just really like them and have enough brass to last me for a couple years at least. I have a 300 Win Mag and regular 270 Winchester as well, so I have all my bases covered.

That's interesting. I've owned a .300 WSM Mdl 70 EW for a few years. Never had a feeding problem with it and I've shot it a lot. It's one of my favorite cartridges. I handload, so don't care if Hornady doesn't want to produce ammo for it.

You like the cartridge and they don't. It happens. I am not a fan, so I guess I would be in Hornady's camp, but for different reasons. The 300 and 270 WSM will probably have choices in ammo for awhile, but everything else is dead. I always liked the 6mm Remington over the 243, but the 243 is king. Oh well. Roll you own ammo and enjoy it.

They once sent me a similar response to an inquiry about the 260Rem. They claimed that no American in their right mind wanted a 6.5, the popularity was dwindling, and it offered no inherent advantages over more popular cartridges.

Then they issued the Creedmoor about 2 years later.

They like to blow smoke.

It is not for making the ammo...the originator of the cartridge design is in question.

I remember reading this shortly after the WSM came out. There was an issue with the WSM (short and fat) and a proprietary line of custom cartridge design. Seems like the WSM was too close to that design. Seems there was a legal challenge. Winchester might have lost, and settlement was made in the form of royalties to the proprietary cartridge designer.

My memory may not be completely accurate. However, I remember going to the website and seeing the short and fat cartridges before Winchester announced the WSM.

Remington must believe it. What has Remington done to promote the 260 Remington...the 280 Remington... If a manufacture will not promote or limit the clambering of cartridges of their own design, why fault ammo manufactures for not making the ammo.

Remington could produce all the ammo and components (minus powder) to meet the need...if there was one.

This is what I remember.

https://casetext.com/case/jamison-v-olin-corporation-winchester-division-3

I don't think you'd be able to talk GM in to building you a hemi either just the way it is. But yeah their excuses are pretty effin lame. So on the wsm thing this is how messed up I am I'm finally going to get one after all this time that they've been out. Got a 7wsm on order guess I've got a thing for orphans or some deal I dunno...

I'm wondering if you could quote that part of Hornady's description that is "spiteful"? I just read it and it seems pretty straight forward. The only line I can see that might come close to even disparaging the round is saying that "the Winchester cartridge can hold more powder than the Remington (300 SAUM), but the Remington makes up for this in efficiency, turning in top velocities that are usually less than 100 fps slower with the same bullet weight." Was that the spiteful remark? Earlier in the description they mention that the 300 WSM "has a bit more case capacity and can produce slightly higher velocities", which is true. I've seen very similar remarks comparing the 6mm Remington against a .243, a .30-06 vs. the .308 or various other rounds of slightly different case capacities.


I don't see loading for the WSM's as being any more of a chore than someone loading for a .250 Savage, .350 Remington Magnum, 6mm Remington or any of a number of other chamberings. Cases are available, dies are available, bullets are certainly available and current production rifles are still being made.

Prolly just a little slow to act.

I don't think they load .250 Savage ammo, either.

I'm a huge fan of the .250 Savage. I shoot a BUNCH of .250 Savage cartridges out of my old c.1985 Ruger M77RL Ultralight. But I don't need Hornady to load the cartridges for me and probably wouldn't use them if they did make them. I've got along fine for three decades without fretting over the existence or lack thereof of .250 Savage factory ammo. I handload everything centerfire that I shoot, anyhow, whether common or not.

I just buy every bag of .250 Savage brass I come across, whether I think I need it or not. You never know... It might be scarce, someday...

I'd feel sorry for the OP, but I suspect he's got an easier time finding brass for his .300WSM than I have finding 7mm Bench Rest Remington brass for the XP-100 pistol in my gun room..,.

Maybe I should start a letter-writing campaign to see if I can get someone to crank up production on 7mm BR brass......

I'd probably get about as far as the OP got with convincing Hornady to load .300WSM ammo.

My two cents, I never liked the WSM/RCM rounds.
They just did not get my attention...kind of like women.
I don't like the 'short and fat' ones.
I stick with the classic 'tried & true' rounds, just my opinion.

I don't care for Hornady ammo or bullets so it doesn't matter to me what they do or do not make.

Seems they wasted a lot of time and effort with developing the Ruger compact cartridges that never were popular.

The issue has nothing to do with how they feed...Hornady doesn't make rifles.

The real issue is the royalty load on WSMs...it cuts into their profit margin. Why make something knowing you're going to be running at a lower profit out of the starting gate when you can make something else for more. It's not a smart business decision.

Not just that, but they resent the legal blackmail feeling about the whole issue. That's why many manufacturers dropped them, and why Ruger came out with the RCMs. Every WSM sold on the market has a $50 premium or thereabouts attached to it. That's not a big deal for a serious buyer, but it does affect market share, and tends to lower sales numbers...as we have seen.

Winchester is hanging in there because their name is on them, which is why they "adopted" the design in the first place, never realizing that someone had a patent.

The cartridge case is a gas seal. There has likely been billions of dollars spent changing the size,shape,capacity and headstamp on these things since the beginning. It keeps the industry moving and I love it. In reality, it's only purpose is to seal the chamber while the payload is burnt. There are some I favor over others. I have favorites. Some I don't give a second look. The objective is to launch a given bullet at a desired velocity. Hopefully without too much trouble. Either to take game,or punch some paper in general. What in the world would we do if it all stopped? I'd sure have a lot more free time,lol. Cartridges come and cartridges go. Trends and the times mold them into something we can transition to. To keep the industry alive,and to give me a reason to live within it. It also gives us a reason to reflect on the ones that have stood the test of time and appreciate the "Old days". Gotta love it don't ya?

I don't blame Hornady for not wanting so support a parasite via royalties.

Well said. Most seem to think that Winchester and Remington started the 'short magnum' thing. They did not. Anybody remember the Lazzeroni line of 'short mags'? As said above, a patent infringement, and royalties awarded as the result of a lawsuit, is the reason behind Hornady's response.

Matters not to me anyway. Never was a fan of short mags for a number of reasons.

Interesting,Hornady loads .243 Win,.300 Win,.270 Win,.308 Win,.458 Win,.338 Win etc.. but they won't load the WSM,s because of Rick Jameison lawsuit,correct?

my understanding from the cheap seats is that Win, Rem, ect do not charge royalties to support their cartridges

If you actually read up on it, Rick Jamison is not a parasite. While he may not have originated the "short, fat" concept, he did invest a lot of time & research into developing them, and actually had a patent on a nearly identical design. More damning to Winchester is the fact that he was actually in contract negotiations with them, and had actually developed the 300 JRW for commercial release, to the point that it was a finished concept, with a scheduled writer's hunt with completed rifles & ammo. Winchester demanded that he give them all rights to the design, for zero remuneration, and threatened to drop the round unless he did so. He refused, so they followed through and dropped it. But, lo and behold, 9 months later, they introduced, all on their own, a nearly identical round called the 300 Winchester Short Magnum. Rick Jamison then took them to court over it, and rightly won.

I did read up on it, including the court documents. IMO parasite is fitting.

So he should have done all the research & development for the cartridge, and not receive anything for it?

it sure seems to me that Jamison's cartridges are 'nearly identical' to the Lazzeroni short mags, which are older by a wide margin.

Winchester (Olin) merely underestimated the resources needed to win the case.

Being as I rarely shoot factory ammo, Hornady's choice is no big deal to me.

I've owned over a dozen rifles chambered for the WSMs. Have had 6.5, 270, 7mm, 300, and 325, among them Browning, Kimbers (Classic and Montana) Nosler, Sako, and Winchester. The only one I ever had feeding issues with was an early Kimber Classic in 300 WSM.

My Nosler Custom Sporter in 325 WSM feeds slicker that owl schitt.



Currently have WSMs in the 6.5 Leopard (6.5-300 WSM), 270 WSM and 325 WSM.

I've laid away enough brass for each to last more than a lifetime at the volume which I shoot.


Turkey meets the Leopard.

Of course your mileage may vary

JAPPF,

GWB

OK, I'll admit that "spiteful" may be a little off, but, to me, I think the point of those descriptions in the manuals is to talk about the merits and peculiarities of each cartridge, just like they do with the other cartridges. I thought the 270 WSM description was decent. With the 300 WSM, I didn't really see a single favorable comment other than the case capacity. And even that couldn't be left alone because the next statement says the RSAUM is slower but more efficient... Another backhand in my opinion. The entire description seems to lead the reader to believe that the 300 WSM is pointless and inferior to the RSAUM. They could have talked about how inferior it was to the RCM, but that would have been too obvious.

I personally don't care if Hornady likes or loads the WSM. I just expect them to be a little more objective, I guess. I don't have anything against ANY cartridge out there. Some I like and some I don't, but I don't consider any of them pointless. Some are possibly redundant, but if we never tried new things, we wouldn't have smokeless powder or ballistic tip bullets.

I only recently heard about the WSM royalty issue. Had I known sooner, I may not have bought any of the WSM calibers. I am on the fence as to whether Jamison deserves anything for a similar design, but I may not have invested in a cartridge with so much baggage. Personally, I'd like to see something like a slightly shorter and slightly fatter case than the 30-06AI, but that would probably be really ridiculous.

Oh, they knew Rick Jamison had a patent--he came to Winchester with the fully developed cartridge. Then they blew him off and started producing Jamison's cartidge as the WSM's. Firearm manufacturers have a long history of doing this. That's why Jamison patented it first.

And Jamison sued and won a settlement for patent infringement. I don't blame Jamison one bit, either.

Casey

Lots of panties in a wad here over a description in a loading manual...

"And Jamison sued and won a settlement for patent infringement. I don't blame Jamison one bit, either"

I hear ya Casey. The wildcaters,benchrest fraternity,and long range shooters do the R&D. Put in the time and money for reamers,barrels & custom dies. To have the fruits of their labor pirated by some board of directors someplace. Good for Rick I say.

No parasite to it... For a private individual to take on a publicly traded company with a bevy of patent attorneys at their disposal over a patent infringement issue, and win, is not very common. Sounds like, for once, the "system" worked the way it is supposed to...

no, parasites suing big companys and winning happens all the time. the cost just gets passed on to you and me.

'good for them' right?

Hornady is being obstinate about not loading the 300WSM, at least. It is the best-selling cartridge introduction in a long time, and will continue to become the "standard" American magnum cartridge as time goes by. They are simply losing out on the opportunity to make some money, royalties due or not. That's called being stubborn, not smart.

I agree that the costs of frivolous lawsuits get passed on to you and me as the end consumer. Been in and out of the corporate world for 30 years. Have seen my share of frivolous law suits get paid a certain amount of "go away" money. However, we are not talking the prototypical "slip and fall" or "Look, there's a cockroach in my food" type of scam artists.

We are discussing blatant theft of intellectual property. To that point, do you have any recent citations for private individuals frequently winning patent infringement lawsuits versus publicly traded companies ? My Google-foo is not so good. However, I could not find ANY reference to private individuals in the first 3 pages of search results. Let alone private individuals prevailing in patent court against publicly traded corporations.

Were there not nearly identical cartridges to the WSMs in wildcat form going back to the 1950s?

No,the above is called delusional.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/rcbs_2012_rifle_die_sales.htm

They don't load for the 260 Rem. that im aware of...

Maybe it is because it has a limited following. Unless something has changed, its parent (Remington) is producing a limited offering in rifles so chambered. This is telling.

A second observation. Hornady announced last year or the year before that they would suspend manufacture of bullets that did not have strong support. They are at maximum manufacturing capacity. This may be frustrating to some, but it is a valid business decision.

Any manufacture has a limited production capacity. Wither large or small, there is a limit.

For sake of argument. Let's say that Hornady, Rem., Winchester, or Federal can produce and sell 100,000 units of 30-06, 100,000 units of 308, 90,000 units of 7mm Rem Mag, and 90,000 units of 300 Win Mag. We'll not even consider the other most popular rounds, the 243, 270, and 30-30--or the amount of PISTOL ammo that is flying out of the doors.

What is the real cost to produce 20,000 units of WSM or 30,000 units of 260 Rem?

The real cost is 200,000 units of 30-06/308 and 180,000 units of 7mmRem/300 Win mag.

Like I stated earlier, Remington could produce all of the 260, and Winchester could produce all of the 300 WSM to meet the need...if there was one.

GB

I guess if you develop a new line of cartridges, someone else basically steals your design and then you go to court to recover damages you are a "parasite"?

That is exactly what happened with Rick Jamison, Winchester and the WSM cartridges. Winchester tried to cheat Jamison, then got taken to court and lost - as they deserved.

it has been a long time since any cartridge was really "new"

LOL! Yeah, what the hell did I start? I wish Jamison would have just taken a lump sum payout and moved on. I can see the possibility that his royalties will eventually kill a great cartridge. By then, he and the round will both be dead and someone will steal the 300 Groeder I invented in my post above! Have to tell my kids to keep an eye out for a round a little shorter and fatter than the '06, but skinnier and longer then the WSMs... :P

While I'm not on the fence about what Jamison deserves - I believe he deserves every penny he can get - I don't own any WSMs. Or SAUMs for that matter. They simply don't offer anything of importance to me and I'm quite content with my 7mm RM and .300WM.

As far as Hornady, I say kudos to them for sticking with a production plan that they believe maximizes their revenue. If that plan doesn't include WSM or SAUM or other cartridges that require royalties, that's OK by me.

"Spiteful" was more than "a little off". If you read the .300 SAUM page they reference the .300 WSM as well, stating that "The 300 SAUM has roughly 15% less case capacity than the 300 Winchester Magnum but velocities generally differ by less than 100fps." I'd call that more efficient. With respect to the .300 WSM, Hornady shows the 300 SAUM to be 100fps slower to 50fps faster than the .300 WSM with the same bullet weights.

I expect my load books to be honest in their cartridge evaluations and load data. If two cartridges are as similar as the SAUM and WSM direct comparisons are welcome - just don't give me marketing fluff and BS. I believe Hornady did a good job in their comparison.

"...slightly shorter and slightly fatter case than the 30-06AI"? You mean like the royalty free .300 RCM, which Hornady produces?

"Spiteful" was more than "a little off".

This is why I usually don't bother to post on any forums any more. Nobody is allowed to have an opinion anymore. I gave an opinion and even said I don't expect anyone to agree, but here you jump in and tell me I'm just wrong. Not giving an opinion, just telling me I'm wrong. I'm out. Life's to short to argue over fly sh*t.

Here's how you ended your original post:

"I just felt a need to vent a little about their childish behavior. I don't expect anyone else to agree, just my opinion."

According to your own post, you gave more than just an opinion. You felt the need to vent. When one vents, expect that others will also. Take a big boy pill...get over it...and come back. You'll be welcome. You're among many who have done the same.

To change the topic slightly. Does anyone know what Jamison is doing these days? Is he completely out of writing? I seldom buy magazines these days so wouldn't know if he still writes anywhere.

Has he been ostracized similar to Zumbo?

With regard to the topic it seems the only thing Jamison did that no one else thought to do was in filing the patents. I'm guessing in future gun companies will be a little quicker on the uptake and start filing their own patents before the little guy does.

Jim

I am sure you know, but for the ones that dont, one of the claims the judge allowed to go forward was the breach of expressed and implied contract.

It was argued that Olin agreed to the arrangement and then attempted to renegotiate. It was less about the intellectual property and more about bad faith dealings.

I developed my short fat seven thirty-one years ago. Should I get some money from someone for that?

Have you tried to get something custom from Hornady lately? They don't need .300 WSM to make money.

Did you patent it, and make a deal with a gun manufacturer up to the point of completed guns, ammo, and product launch, only to have them cancel the deal and reintroduce your short,fat 7 under their own name 9 months later? If so, then why yes, you should.

In my opinion you were wrong about �spiteful�. It seemed more like sour grapes on your part than Hornady�s. Your opinion of their Hornady�s response is deeply colored by your disappointment that Hornady doesn�t have any interest in making a type of ammo that you apparently care a good deal about. You see �spiteful� and �childish behavior� where no one else does.

You are also wrong in stating I didn�t give an opinion. I clearly stated �I believe Hornady did a good job in their comparison.�

Opinions are welcome on the �fire but don�t make the mistake of thinking they won�t go unchallenged if others think they are wrong-headed. Be prepared to support your opinions. We all can learn from honest discussion and shouldn�t take disagreement personally.

Welcome to the �fire.

This photo is of a 7mm Wade Super Seven on the left, 7 WSM in the middle and .300 WSM on the right. The 7mm Wade Super Seven is listed on page 396 of P. O. Ackley's volume 1 of Handbook for Shooters and Reloaders.

A little perspective...

Wildcatting has a long history. It's part of the tradition of handloading. It's not especially expensive for anyone to develop their own. It really comes down to shop drawings, reamers, and forming brass, primers, powder and bullets. It is, however, quite expensive for a factory to offer a new round to the market (I was told by an industry guy around 250K for each new round).

"Winchester" didn't "steal anything from Jamison. Winchester doesn't make ammunition, Olin does.

If anything it would be as appropriate to say Jamison "stole" the short/fats from those before him. I believe the concept started with the Gradle line in the 1950's. There are two local smiths here in my corner of Montana that developed short/fats too. One is an older retired smith that did his with a Weatherby radius shoulder in the 1960's, the other, Dave Gentry, did his on the 404 case in the 1980's. There are others including Wade and HE. So it could be said Jamision profited on others work.

The only thing "unusual" about Jamison's rounds is that he patented "his designs." So while he obviously had a legal standing to sue Olin, he broke with the long tradition of wildcatting in doing so in order to profit from his own and others work.

I have no respect for the man, and think he is symptomatic of our pariah society, but he was apparently within (the sometimes obtuse) body of law that surround US patents.

Jamison took a big ole' chit on handloading tradition... but at least you and I get to pay him every time we buy loaded WSM ammo or brass.

Groeder_300,

Congratulations! You only have 11 posts and already have a flaming thread 6 pages long and counting. My best one was one I started with a question about the merits of belts.

Welcome to the fire.

8mmwapiti

Groeder_300,

If you decide to stay around don't worry about agreeing with everyone. If you stand on one side there will always be someone to jump on the other side sometimes just to be contrary. Most threads which go over 3-4 pages have quickly derailed from the original thread. If it bothers you don't read the rest. If I was you I would keep reading, some of these guys are funny in a tongue in cheek kind of way.

So, I had several responses that I was going to make, but I think it really boils down to this; Opinions are not definitive. They don't use the words "is", "are" or "always" without also including "I think" or "I believe", etc. Since a few of your statements didn't sound like opinions to me, I'll mentally insert those words and assume you are open-minded enough to allow for the possibility that you may be wrong.

I really don't care of Hornady likes or loads for the WSM. What concerns me is that their prejudice carries into their data. With the success or failure of their creation (RCM) being affected, it's hard to believe that they wouldn't try to skew things in their favor. Just read the description of the Creedmoor. Am I giving it more thought than it deserves? Probably.

There, I've taken my "Big boy pill" and will also grow thicker skin.

couldn't agree more Brad.........Jamison came up with nothing really new......just copied from earlier wildcatters

Thanks, guys. I appreciate your thoughts. I do realize that I probably took Coyote Hunter's statements too personally. I was pretty surprised at the "interest" that this thread generated. Goes to show that we all take our hobby/sport/livelihood seriously.

You'll also find that some cartridges have an almost "cult" following.

Glad you're recuperating...and back in action.

All the more reason to have a loading press!!

The 300 WSM has been on the market for only 14-15 years. It has outsold the 270 by a wide margin in its 1st 14 years. In fact the 270 was darn near dropped after 20 years of production because it was so little used. Don't give up on a round too soon. I think that in another generation the 300 WSM will surpass the 300WM in popularity just as the 300 WM surpassed the 300 H&H. And for the same reasons.

Which "270" are you talking about?

So your gripe is that Jameson didn't act with the best interests of the shooting world as a whole (i.e. cheaper products for everyone) when he filed suit????


Make no mistake about it, big corporations will steamroll the little guy any time they get the chance. Looks like that is what they tried to do here. Good for Jameson having the stones to take them on, IMO.

I would not have put the word almost in that statement.

8mmwapiti

one more time



This photo is of a 7mm Wade Super Seven on the left, 7 WSM in the middle and .300 WSM on the right. The 7mm Wade Super Seven is listed on page 396 of P. O. Ackley's volume 1 of Handbook for Shooters and Reloaders. this book was copyrighted in 1962.

so, is the middle cartridge a 'new cartridge' worthy of a patent, or is it just a copy of the cartridge on the left with 'minor changes'? I see minor changes from Wade's earlier cartridge, which, in turn, would mean Jamison is doing to Wade exactly what Olin is accused of doing to Jamison. 'good for him' right?

I've also read some of the court docs and have come to the conclusion that Jamison and Winchester/Olin did indeed have an expressed/implied contract that Winchester/Olin would not sell any "JRW" like cartridges until an agreement was signed with Jamison.

In at least one jurisdiction Winchester/Olin tried to get the case thrown out of court and failed, lost in another and finally settled with Jamison out of court.

As I see it, Winchester/Olin could have continued contesting the issue in court but would have been throwing good money after bad.

That parasite may have won, but the SOB lost his job over it...as he should have. Damn....it wasn't like he invented short/fat....glad they got rid of him and his oversized ego.

Do you ever wonder if Rick Jamison hangs out here on the 'fire? Interesting thought......

Brad;
Good evening to you sir, hopefully this finds you and yours doing well.

While they aren't "short and fat" I know one of the principal developers of the Canadian Imperial Magnum line quite well.





As I'm given to understand events, no less than Remington had a close look at these before bringing out their RUM line.

Anyway, all that being said, if any company chooses to make or not make any reloading component I'm OK with either decision. Goodness knows its tough enough for any of us to guess the markets and keep a few folks working these days.

All the best to you and yours Brad.

Dwayne

Funny you would see this as part of a pariah society and support a woman that killed her son by failing to follow the very basics of firearm safety with a firearm that would not repeat what she claimed happened.

Jamison had agreements reaching levels the judge decided were contractual and Winchester elected to violate those agreements. Nothing else matters and it has NOTHING to do with primacy, originality, or motivation, period.

The Wade cartridge is too long, even for a Winchester action, BTW...

I'm curious how someone becomes a "parasite" for protecting a contractual right in the face of a breach by the other party to a contract?

How's that work?

I received a similar treatise from Crimson Trace when I inquired whether they would be offering green lasers. They assured that would NEVER happen. Not even 6 months later I began seeing ad's for green lasers by Crimson Trace.

I used to really like Hornady. They offered a fine selection of bullets, particularly the round noses I prefer for short range woods hunting. Then, they just completely lost their minds. They discontinued much of their bullet line, started marketing "Zombie" nonsense, and now have cheapened their reloading equipment and liken their cartridges to hot rods...replete with exhaust pipes with flames coming out of them. Goodbye Hornady.

Only Sierra has remained a quality company with their tried and true bullets remaining unchanged and extremely effective. The rest all have to use anything other than lead, or put colorful tips on their bullets to attract the idiots. The whole sport of hunting/shooting is changing...I see it when I speak to any young hunter, and not for the better.

Let�s change the perspective a bit. You design a house, complete with architectural drawings and a patent some features of the design. You then take the completed design to a major builder who likes the design, plans to build gazillions of them, starts contract negotiations with you to license the design, builds a house according to the plan and schedules an open house for it and invites media writers to attend the open house.

On the day of or late the day before the open house the licensing contract has not been signed and the builder seeks your permission to go ahead with the open house on condition that the builder will not build or sell any houses similar to that design unless or until the license agreement is signed. You consent to that condition and the open house proceeds.

You are expecting that the licensing agreement will include some royalties or other remuneration for your work in creating and documenting the design, for which you have a patent. Then the builder decides , no, they are not interested but about a year later comes out with a nearly identical design, contrary to the previous agreement. Further, the proceed to sell gazillions of the houses, also contrary to the previous agreement.

Granted, people have been building houses for many years and the one you designed built upon previous designs. That fact, however, is not the primary issue � the primary issue is breach of contract, which results in a significant monetary loss to you.

You seek redress for your grievances in court. The builder attempts to get the case tossed out on summary judgment and fails and they lose in another court case. Then, because they see the writing on the wall, they settle out of court.

According to your logic above, you are a �parasite� and an �SOB� with an �oversized ego� for defending your rights in court.

A smart business decision is to meet customer's demands. Assumably, that is the original impetus in any fledgling businesss. When the manufacturers begin making demands on the customers, that's not a smart business decision.

Love the 300 WSM. Wouldn't look twice at the 300 H&H althought they are the same.



Do some serious pouting.

Never trust a man with a pencil thin mustache.

Although I like Hornady, I feel the same way about some of these gimmicks. I realize they're all trying to appeal to a different demographic, but it still makes me roll my eyes every time I see it. If I run across a zombie someday, I'll sure be wishing I had zombie killers instead of my plain old V-Max bullets...;)

Popularity normally shows where the school fish are feeding.

It certainly does not reflect the work-a-day load bearers of the industry.

Those who roll their own know a good cartridge when they see it. Matters not who created it or what the fuss is with the money whores behind the scenes. When the demand becomes apparent there are enough companies that will make the components available, even to the extent of upstarting for that sole purpose. Starline is one example.

The core of the issue is that Jamison received a patent for something that should never have been granted and many of the old school wildcatters feel is swarmy to even apply for. Jamison certainly isn't the first to get away with gaming the patent process, happens on a daily basis in my industry.

David

All the big believers in personal liberty,property rights, and the free enterprise system on here,getting their panties in a wad because someone is making money off their favorite cartridge, is funny to watch.

If Hornady wants to run the 300 WSM, they can. Pay for it.If they don't want to, they don't have to....simple as that.

It's a good cartridge but if market forces killed it I wouldn't miss a moments sleep.

Yep. And they would have been just as quick to file the lawsuit if their positions were the same as Rick Jamison's.

Hilham you got it! LOL!

Amen to that! The line at the courthouse likely would run clear down the stairs and around the corner of the courthouse.

It's amazing how some people can downgrade the efforts of others if they think it all might cost them a bit more for something that they feel that they should get for nothing. True American enterprise at its best.

Yep.

But I'm still going to be mad at Hornady 'cause they won't make me 225 Winchester brass all the while I. instead, have to reform their 17 Hornet brass for my 22 Hornet.

NOT!

Actually, I was just telling a guy who was gazing at the same rows of Red-box bullets at a local store, that I was pretty happy to see the fact that Hornady seemed to have really stayed on their game to get the shelves re-stocked after the initial panic. (As we wondered why St. Marks can't seem to restock anything in pistol flavors�.no 110/296, no 231, etc since when?)

No, the core is that Winchester/Olin breached an expressed/implied contract.

Bob

Not sure if your post was directed at me or not - you replied to me.

I have no liberty/right issued involved here and I can ensure you my panties are smooth and unruffled. The fact remains, the WSM's are evolutionary (at best) and Jamison never should have been granted a patent. The fact that you're rooting so hard for litigation and propping Jamison up as alittle guy that fought the big evil corporations is amusing - what do you do for a living again?

David

Why didn't Jamison sue Remington, Ruger, Lazzeroni for producing nearly identical designs? Arguably they are as close to his original concept as the WSM's. Clearly they were/are an attempt to cash in on the same concept.

David

Kudos to anyone who is willing to try to 'game the process'. Anyone who has ever even entertained the idea of a patent pursuit probably realizes that Las Vegas generally has better odds than what will be found in the depths of the money pit known as the patent process. Big Money is more than happy to take what they can when they can. Jamison was the 'little guy' in that deal. Obviously you don't need a Jintsu knife to slice tomatoes; neither do we need WSM, etc. That shouldn't mean an individual can't try to collect off from specific ideas which they agree to share in some ways.

Brad,

You are right in that most cartridge designers (or Wildcatters if you prefer) don't 'patent' or 'trademark' their cartridges; But many others have had proprietary or trademarked cartridges... e.g. Weatherby's entire line-up, SSK's line-up including the 300 Whisper (now the 300 Blackout), the 17 MachIV (now whatever remington calls it, 17 fireball?) and as noted in the link below the Dakota, Lazzeroni and H&H Cartridges. So I wouldn't say that it is 'unusual'.

What do you guys think Weatherby, for instance, would have done if Winchester or Remington had copied his cartridges and produced rifles and ammunition prior to His patent or trademark expiring? Would you be calling him a 'Parasite'?

Look at what happens to American interests when the Chinese ignore American patents and trademarks!

Jerry


"The term proprietary cartridge is used to describe a cartridge design that is owned by an individual or company under a registered trademark or patent. A patent is an official document granting the exclusive right to make, use, and sell an invention for a limited period. A trademark can be a name or symbol which identifies a product that is officially registered and legally restricted to the use of the owner or manufacturer. Put simply, a proprietary cartridge can only be produced commercially by either the owner of the patent or trademark - or any company that has a licensed agreement with the patent/trademark holder.

Traditionally, proprietary cartridges have always achieved only limited success due to either high cost of ammunition or limited availability of ammunition. A classic example is the .375 Holland & Holland Magnum which did not achieve full acceptance or popularity until its patent expired during the mid 1920�s. Roy Weatherby�s magnums were also proprietary cartridges at one time and like Holland & Holland, Weatherby targeted the wealthy, essentially a money making exercise. Nevertheless the Weatherby cartridges were so effective in performance that they were either emulated in design or later adopted by major manufacturers."

copied from; http://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/Dakota+proprietary+cartridges.html

Canazes no not directed at you.Just commenting in general and you were next in line.

Hey everybody has their opinions on things.

Because they did not breach an expressed/implied contract with Jamison.

I have no argument with your points...probably should have just kept my mouth shut...I just didn't like how Jamison handled the situation.

Jamison didn't sue for breach of contract, he sued for patent infringement. If he had won a case for breach of contract no other manufacturers would have to pay royalties for the wsm's ....

Winchester is a bungling, dieing company that handled the whole affair with Jamison as effectively as they have their other business practices. If Jamison thought he could have won against the others he would have gone after them also.

David