NecksGen is no more.

mazmad · Postby **mazmad** » Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:39 pm

"Until further resolution, NecksGen has been instructed by the US District Court in Atlanta to cease production of the standard three sizes of the NecksGen head and neck restraint. In this legal struggle with HANS, and now Simpson Performance Products, NecksGen has never been found guilty of patent infringement. Unfortunately the biggest loser in their ongoing effort to unfairly control the neckbrace market is the racer.

NecksGen has always prided itself as being an innovator of new design and in giving the racers an affordable option in the head and neck protection marketplace while still focusing on quality and versatility. NecksGen thanks its many loyal supports who value the free market and have supported the company by becoming a NecksGen customer.

We will continue to supply parts and support for the three standard models. NecksGen will continue to be innovative in its design and will work tirelessly to continue its philosophy that puts the racers’ needs ahead of the bottom line.

Thank you,
Farin Brady
NecksGen Inc"

toppertee · Postby **toppertee** » Tue Jun 18, 2013 8:18 pm

Bloody HANs can go and get stuffed,

I use a necksgen, I feel it fits me better than the Hans and the FIA test results show it's better in a side impact.

It's like they invented the wheel :roll:

no one else can make them. It's like there bloody microsoft!

mazmad · Postby **mazmad** » Tue Jun 18, 2013 8:22 pm

Yeah means availability and pricing of head and neck safety devices go the wrong way.

Magpie · Postby **Magpie** » Tue Jun 18, 2013 9:07 pm

mazmad wrote:"...NecksGen has never been found guilty of patent infringement..."

However if you settle out if court does that say anything? However DefNder which it is alleged is Necksgen by another name lost against HANS...

Also is Necksgen approved for use in Australia?

Apu · Postby **Apu** » Tue Jun 18, 2013 9:51 pm

Funnily enough, setting up a business in a foreign country which doesn't care much for IP would easily solve this issue.

And lower production cost further.

toppertee · Postby **toppertee** » Tue Jun 18, 2013 10:04 pm

Magpie wrote:
mazmad wrote:"...NecksGen has never been found guilty of patent infringement..."

However if you settle out if court does that say anything? However DefNder which it is alleged is Necksgen by another name lost against HANS...

I would think it just means Hans have better lawyers :wink:

deviant · Postby **deviant** » Tue Jun 18, 2013 10:35 pm

Magpie wrote:
mazmad wrote:"...NecksGen has never been found guilty of patent infringement..."

However if you settle out if court does that say anything? However DefNder which it is alleged is Necksgen by another name lost against HANS...

Also is Necksgen approved for use in Australia?

http://docs.cams.com.au/Manual/GeneralR ... dule_D.pdf

Yes you can use SFI rated HANS devices in Australian motorsport up to national level. International level requires FIA everything.

One reason I went with an 'HANS' brand HANS is that it is FIA approved. The writing is very much on the wall that HANS devices are going to become as standard as wearing a helmet on track at all levels of motorsport and as CAMS regs are all FIA regs I think it is pretty obvious which rating we will need to use. I did not want to be left with an unuseable piece of gear.

mazmad · Postby **mazmad** » Tue Jun 18, 2013 10:48 pm

^^^^ Agreed seems inevitable they are mandatory for race events.

Raises the question though doesn't it, they should be mandated for 'speed events' - even at 'slow' speeds serious neck/ spinal injuries are possible.

But they can't be used with seat belts so they won't become compulsory unless harnesses also do.

Guran · Postby **Guran** » Tue Jun 18, 2013 11:08 pm

Actually I don't think CAMS are in any rush to make HANS devices compulsory. They've done a fair bit in recent years to make entry level CAMS events more accessible for beginners. Compulsory HANS means a harness, raceseat, compatible helmet and the HANS device. You're talking a couple thousand before you're able to give it a try. Make them compulsory and it will be a major factor in discouraging people from getting into the sport. No thanks.

mazmad · Postby **mazmad** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 7:57 am

I agree seems unlikely at all levels. But for race events where those supporting items are required - except for a compatible helmet - it would not be a huge step.

Magpie · Postby **Magpie** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 8:26 am

This debate has been had before with no real resolution. If you do not have a harness then you can use a collar that will provide some help. So it is not that expensive, they need to make allowances in the regs for use of a neck collar if no harness fitted, then just specify when you need a harness etc.

Speaking to the people where I got my HANS from, they sold over 300 in their last group buy so people are thinking about there safety and not choosing to put their wallet before their safety. I'm indifferent to the maker of the HANS device but IP laws exists for a reason and that is to allow a company to develop a market and protect its investment in R&D. It would cost around $30 k for a patent in the states and the same again for Europe, then probably $15 k for other countries as well as ongoing fees. Plus the market is small and the product long living so why would you not want to protect the investment that has been made. How often is a HANS replaced? Play the monopoly card but you are ignoring the other arguments and the rights that go with IP. If they are serious then they can go and have the manufactured where the IP laws are not enforced but then they could loose market support for their actions.

My choice of HANS was based on hefactthat it approved for use I any class and if they become mandatory then I do not have to buy another one.

Out of interest how did the PSCRAC group buy go, did they get many orders?

Apu · Postby **Apu** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 9:22 am

I agree with what you are saying but I think some companies take IP protection to extremes and the only people who gain are the lawyers.

There are sometimes better ways to protect the brand - exclusive type approval/acceptance (eg FIA / CAMS), creating brand pull (much like what Intel did), etc. This allows other brands room to create a competitive product for grassroots level activities.

I know of startups who can't grow as they don't have the money for patents and IP protection / fights - backers aren't prepared to fight the big companies. It's a vicious circle and again, consumers suffer.

Magpie · Postby **Magpie** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:02 am

Apu I agree that the only winners are lawyers and the loosers consumers. All NecksGen needs to do is gain FIA approval and they can compete with others. The question is has the FIA cut a deal so that there testing is geared towards making only one brand pass? It is the FIA that more than likely allowed a monopoly tone created!