G1 TF patents information
Jon Talpur
www.delphion.com - search for "reconfigurable toy") Well, I decided to check
out all of the Transformer-related patents on the site, and found some quite
interesting bits of information.
1. First of all, it seems that the patents only relate to Transformers
released from 1984 to 1988, which is probably only due to the fact that they
have only got this far in terms of placing the patents on the internet.
2. This is where it gets interesting. It seems that in addition to the
Transformers actually released in 1984 and 1985, Hasbro did at the very
least consider releasing the remaining transformable robots from Takara's
Diaclone and Micro Change line of toys. For 1984 this included the 1910
Browning robot gun (actually released as an official Transformer years later
in Japan) and the Smith and Western robot gun. For 1985 this included the
Jet/Helicopter triple changer, the two lock transforming robots, the three
orb bots, the binocular robot.
I can tell they were considered for release in these years simply due to the
fact that the dates indicated on their patents either match or are very
similar to the dates indicated on the patents for Transformers that were
actually released.
3. Interestingly enough, I could find no patents for any of the 1984 mini
Autobots, except Bumplejumper (or Bumper).
4. It should also be noted that for Megatron's patent, it seems that he was
capable of firing plastic bullets (which was, of course, removed when he was
released in 1984 as a Transformer).
5. Some names worthy of note are Hiroyuki Obara, who created Optimus Prime
himself! (well, Battle Convoy in 1980). Also, Takashi Matsuda, who was
responsible for creating the Insecticons, Megatron, Soundwave and both the
Autobot and Decepticon cassettes, and the Duocons. By far the most prolific
inventor was Kouzin Ohno, who developed most of the original Autobot cars
(for the Diaclone line), the Dinobots, the Decepticon jets, the
Constructicons, the Decepticon Triple Changers, Metroplex, Silverbolt, and
Fortress Maximus!
I found it interesting that for the 1985 range of Transformers, Hasbro
turned down the opportunity to release more Takara-originated moulds and
instead opted for a few toys from different companies. However, it was
probably due to the fact that transforming locks, orbs and binoculars would
have been considered a little hard to market in a line that (up to then) was
predominately cars and planes.
Jon Talpur
Saudade
and reading all those interesting details about the creators of the
Transformers, whose names I never heard or learned before.
Saudade
http://clik.to/transformers
Jack Caligari
> Remember those patent documents for some of the G1 Transformers? (located at
> www.delphion.com - search for "reconfigurable toy") Well, I decided to check
> out all of the Transformer-related patents on the site, and found some quite
> interesting bits of information.
>
> 1. First of all, it seems that the patents only relate to Transformers
> released from 1984 to 1988, which is probably only due to the fact that they
> have only got this far in terms of placing the patents on the internet.
Or the companies no longer saw the need in patenting them anymore.
> 2. This is where it gets interesting. It seems that in addition to the
> Transformers actually released in 1984 and 1985, Hasbro did at the very
> least consider releasing the remaining transformable robots from Takara's
> Diaclone and Micro Change line of toys. For 1984 this included the 1910
> Browning robot gun (actually released as an official Transformer years later
> in Japan) and the Smith and Western robot gun. For 1985 this included the
> Jet/Helicopter triple changer, the two lock transforming robots, the three
> orb bots, the binocular robot.
>
> I can tell they were considered for release in these years simply due to the
> fact that the dates indicated on their patents either match or are very
> similar to the dates indicated on the patents for Transformers that were
> actually released.
I'm assuming you also checked that the holder of the patent was Hasbro and not
Takara.
> 3. Interestingly enough, I could find no patents for any of the 1984 mini
> Autobots, except Bumplejumper (or Bumper).
Patents are only for special engineering technics. Once it's been patented once
there's no need to do it again.
> 4. It should also be noted that for Megatron's patent, it seems that he was
> capable of firing plastic bullets (which was, of course, removed when he was
> released in 1984 as a Transformer).
That's possibly because it was done under Takara's name.
--
"The basis behind every religion is fear and ignorance." - Marquis de Sade
Minion Control: http://www3.sympatico.ca/john.postma/minion_control.htm
crazysteve in base mode
> Or the companies no longer saw the need in patenting them anymore.
>
I seriously doubt that Hasbro/Takara hasn't filed for the patent
rights to G2 and beyond. It's probably just under a different
classification or it hasn't been filed in the system yet.
> I'm assuming you also checked that the holder of the patent was
> Hasbro and not Takara.
I wonder why the two entities held patents independent of each other
for the same line of toys. Why Takara would file for patents here in
the states is a bit beyond me. With all of their production facilities
in Asia I doubt they ever meant to machine, assemble, and distribute
the line here in the states. Unless Diakron was supposed to encompass
all of what would have been the TF line, Hasbro should be the one
holding the patent. Or maybe Takara had to file and then license the
production and distribution rights to Hasbro. Or maybe they filed for
much of what would become the original TF line with the intent that it
would be released as Diakron, then changed their mind and let Hasbro
take over. What I want to know is who distributed the Diakron line
here in the US, and were there plans to continue vehicles beyond DK-1,-
2, and -3? Maybe the Transformers would have happened without Hasbro
after all, with Takara doing everything themselves!!
> Patents are only for special engineering technics. Once it's been
> patented once there's no need to do it again.
Yes, but minicars like Gears, Brawn, Huffer, and Windcharger are so
inherently different in design from BJ, Bumblebee, or Cliffjumper that
I'd expect they warrant seperate patents.
Jon Talpur wrote:
> > 4. It should also be noted that for Megatron's patent, it seems
> > that he was capable of firing plastic bullets (which was, of
> > course, removed when he was released in 1984 as a Transformer.
I don't think there's any big mystery here. Neutering Megatron was
probably a matter of Hasbro CEO Stephen Hassenfeld's policy of being
against toys that fired missiles. That and the whole missile firing
Bobba Fett/Battlestar Galactica debacle of the early '80s.
--
missilefiringsteve
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
Jon Talpur
From: Jack Caligari <john....@sympatico.ca>
Newsgroups: alt.toys.transformers
Date: 27 December 2000 08:25
Subject: Re: G1 TF patents information
Jack Caligari wrote
>I'm assuming you also checked that the holder of the patent was Hasbro and
not
>Takara.
I did actually try that, but none of the Transformer-related patents seem to
be listed under, or even cross-reference Hasbro. The only company mentioned
is Takara (even for the post-Diaclone and Micro Change toys).
>> 3. Interestingly enough, I could find no patents for any of the 1984 mini
>> Autobots, except Bumplejumper (or Bumper).
>
>Patents are only for special engineering technics. Once it's been patented
once
>there's no need to do it again.
I think that this is just an omission. The patents for the other mini
Autobots just don't seem to be in the system yet. Actually, to address your
point, the 1985 Decepticon jets all have separate patents (in addition to
the 1984 design of Decepticon jet).
Jon Talpur
Saudade
news:92dpjl$cfc$1...@plutonium.btinternet.com...
> Jack Caligari wrote
> >I'm assuming you also checked that the holder of the patent was Hasbro
and
> >not Takara.
> I did actually try that, but none of the Transformer-related patents seem
to
> be listed under, or even cross-reference Hasbro. The only company
mentioned
> is Takara (even for the post-Diaclone and Micro Change toys).
wondered to see that there was no reference to Hasbro anywhere. Maybe
Hasbro just adquired the licence to make the toys from Takara, who was the
designer of the toy line (and obviously, owner of the patents).
> >> 3. Interestingly enough, I could find no patents for any of the 1984
mini
> >> Autobots, except Bumplejumper (or Bumper).
> >Patents are only for special engineering technics. Once it's been
patented
> >once, there's no need to do it again.
> I think that this is just an omission. The patents for the other mini
> Autobots just don't seem to be in the system yet. Actually, to address
your
> point, the 1985 Decepticon jets all have separate patents (in addition to
> the 1984 design of Decepticon jet).
What I saw is that they seemed to patent the transformations (or
reconfigurations, as they say) that were different from each other. For
example, they made separated patents for each Constructicon, Optimus Prime,
Ravage, Soundwave, Hound, Blitzwind, Jazz, Swindle, Astrotrain and many
others. But they also made patents for more than one toy in each patent.
For example (again), the patents for Rumble/Frenzy,
Starscream/Skywarp/Thundercracker, Sideswipe/Sunstreaker, Laserbeak/Buzzaw,
etc. They even made a sole patent for two different reconfigurations modes,
who belonged to Inferno/Grapple and Prowl/Bluestreak/Smokescreen.
I even found Transformers patents of toys that I have never seen before (or
they never made it to the final toy line). Alas, I haven't found yet the
patent for Megatron. It could be interesting to see how he was originally
designed.
Saudade
http://clik.to/transformers
bob
I'm having trouble navigating the site.
I think its a problem with my browser.
Thanks for your time and response.
Jon Talpur wrote in message <92b47g$v7$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com>...