Who owns the patents/manufacturing rights to the AR18? When

>>31886271
Likely expired. In the US if you aren't actively using your patent, it expires. Thus why certain guns like the M1911 have no patent holder.

>>31886861
This patent law is why you sometimes see strange uses of IPs like Sony making a second spider man and fantastic 4 origins movie in less than 10 years to extend their patent.

>>31886861
>>31886883

Ahh, that makes sense. So theoretically any company could probably produce AR18s if they wanted to, it's just that nobody finds it profitable?

File: iac-982-shotgun11.jpg (61KB, 1200x312px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1200x312px

>>31886883
>spooderman
that's more under copyright law than patent law.

Copyright law is also why you'll find a shitload of expired patent gun copies with different names sometimes.

>>31886914

>it's not an armalite model 18
>it's an ...uh AWESOME model 18

>>31886908
AR-180s is attempting to reverse engineer the manufacturing process.
They're basically lost technology at this point; nobody knows how Armalite made them in a cost-effective manner.

>>31886925
I'll take 2

>>31886938
The fact Armalite even managed to produce them despite having such a small shop is really amazing, it's not a surprise they went out of business.

I always figured(and part of why I'm asking) that a cheap AR180 clone that -

>had interchangeable mags with the AR15
>interchangeable furniture
>interchangeable lower parts kits
>and a threaded trunnion for accepting standard AR15 barrels

- would sell like secondhand Hi-Points in Detroit if you got the cost down to about $400. Modifying the design in itself for the increased shared aftermarket would probably shave off a lot of the costs of production considering you can just order dime a dozen AR15 parts from other companies.

>>31887008
This would be so fucking nice

>>31887008
Armalite already tried with the 180B, and it just didn't work out. It would need serious production power to get cost down enough to make it competitive.

New production uppers would be enough for me; it's possible to source a NDS lower and get a lower parts kit from the guys at 180s

>>31886271
14, 17, or 20 years from the date of filing, assuming it's kept current at the patent office. copyrights last for 70 years, so while the design might be available to the public, the ability to use "AR-18" or derivatives might not be.

>>31887120
So you're generally free to produce clones or derivatives of the AR18 as long as it has a different name?

>>31887120
Thus, the new, "Ayy, Our 18 model rifle."

>>31886271
The original tooling for the AR-18 has been lost forever. The Philippines was going to adopt it in 1983 and all the tooling from the Sterling plant was shipped, but Marcos getting deposed in 1986 shot that down. Tooling was most likely destroyed.

Gun can't be made ever again, sadly.

>>31886938
>>31887008
How did they get things from the Costa Mesa plant, they sold all their shit to the Phillippines when Elisco was suppossed to start making AR-18s for the Philipine army.

>>31887347
>>31887335

Wait... then how did Eagle Arms produce the rifle if the tooling was destroyed before then?

>>31887359
The AR-180B isn't an exact copy. Back in '01 I remember they were at some trade show and I brought my Sterling made gun and showed it to them, they were perplexed by it and had no idea how it worked.

So the AR-180B isn't really an AR-18, the lower is more like a heavily modified AR-15s receiver.

File: 326878.jpg (656KB, 2400x1510px) Image search: [Google]

656KB, 2400x1510px

>>31887335
Is the tooling really that significant for a rifle specifically designed to be made in a backwater third world stamping shop?

>>31887008
Also you have to take into account economies of scale. You'd have to design an entirely new factory with new tooling just to produce the AR-18, when you could probably buy the tooling for making AR-15s a lot cheaper. And you'd have to produce a lot of them and sell a lot of them before it would become profitable. You couldn't sell AR-18s as a niche gun and make a profit of it, it would need to sell fast and you'd need to sell a lot. And I don't think a lot of AR-15 guys would be quick to switch over because they already own AR-15s which are all around better quality guns.

I'm not hating on the AR-18, i think it's cool as hell and i would love to own one, i'm speaking strictly from a business standpoint.

>>31887407
Yea, because now all we can do is study some of the few surviving parts, uppers, and lowers that weren't finished to figure out how to reproduce the gun.

Gun lab made an article on how this specialized machine was needed to mill the bolt carrier. Thanks to Gun Lab and AR-180S, owners might be able to get some much needed parts for their guns if they're able to figure out how to reproduce them. Hell, they even might be able figure out how to build new one again someday.

I really need parts for my AR-18, it's what keeps me from shooting in.

>>31887435
Back in the 70's the state department was hesitant to give Singapore a license to produce M16A1s, ArmaLite actually offered to sell Singapore factories dedicated to building AR-18s.

>>31887359
They probably reverse engineered it.

Poland had to do that with the Browning wz.28 after FN promised them the technical specs to produce the BAR but then reneged on it.

Germany had to reverse engineer the G3 after WW2 because the original plans and tooling were lost.

It's possible but it's difficult and time consuming to do.

It wouldn't be hard to make AR180s again, but the problem is cost. Stamping is cheap on large scale, but expensive to setup initially.

With CNC these days, the AR15 can be made with less investment up front especially with its current infrastructure.

Better to buy a newer piston rifle as many are basically AR18s in rails and FDE.

>>31887461
Might it be cost effective to mill AR18 receivers in this day and age?

>>31887470
Nope, it won't work out because it was designed to be produced from stamped sheet metal, tolerances and blue prints wouldn't match up.

>>31886271
>Armalite as a whole was bought by Eagle Arms

errr...

>>31887490
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite

>Armalite had further brushes with success, especially with the AR-18, an improved AR-15 design. These were not enough to keep the company going, and they ceased operations in the early 1980s.[2] The design rights and name were purchased in 1996 by Mark Westrom, who re-launched the company as Armalite, Inc., now located in Geneseo, Illinois.

Mark Westrom is the head of Eagle Arms. He kept the name afloat for the sake of profiting off it's reputation, akin to a car company like Nissan continuing to use the name of a another company they purchased(Datsun).

>>31887470
>milled ar 18 receivers
Are you autistic? The whole point of the AR 18 is to avoid any complex milling operations.

>>31887514
Eagle Arms purchased the name "ArmaLite" and exactly nothing else. The real ArmaLite had been defunct for years.

>>31886861
>>31886883
You're a moron.

Patents for non-pharmaceutical inventions last 20 years.

>>31887526
I think in 1969 Art Miller got a patent for his rifle, so it's probably expired by now.

>>31887461
>>31887470
caugh**scar-l**caugh

really, the only novel thing about the ar18 is the upper.

realistically, a better implementation of the vulcan v18 with 75-90% parts compatibility would be easier to make and market

Why can't everyone just suck it up and buy pre-bans? Bitching about wanting them to come back doesn't help

>>31887545
I agree. It's amazing that such a great concept for a gun was taken on by such a shitty company.

>>31887470
You can buy a quality forged AR15 receiver for $60-$100 today.

It's just impossible for anything to really get near that price range unless it had a huge government contract. Then you have patents before an aftermarket could build up, the company would have to be fun friendly, and all this would take decades.

Just no way that could work due to sales just with civ/leo sales. Even the Mini-14 costs more today than a quality AR15.

>>31887555
Limited numbers, limited spare parts, and in theory it should be cheap to make.

>>31887555
You know where you are, right? This is /k/, home of the Mosin-Nagant, where everyone is a broke-ass hick.

File: AR-180 2.jpg (2MB, 1784x856px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1784x856px

>>31887555

That's what I did.

>>31887133

Yes, just like the AR-15.

It's just that AR-18s would sell like crap. AR-15s are already cheap, so it's not like the 18 would significantly undercut it. The 18 would actually likely be more expensive unless the company making it could get some sort of bulk deal beforehand (like a military deal), which isn't likely. Nobody would pay more for an 18 than a 15 when all you are getting for your money is an uglier rifle that can't be customized as easily. Sure, they could make it more customizable and "tactical" but then it's just an AR-15.

It would only sell to people who want an AR-18 because they are interested in the history of the gun. That's not enough people.

>It's just that AR-18s would sell like crap

They'd be flying off the shelves in Canada, considering AR18's hold a non-restricted status unlike the AR15.

>>31887753
The original AR-18 is banned in Canada. The only reason the RCMP allowed the AR-180B is because it wasn't similar enough to the original design.