Ok The "beaver" is not patented, just like the "paca" is not patented. AS A WHOLE BAIT. Certain aspects of the beaver which I believe are the unique ribs. Not the beaver itsself.
Now for guys who think he paca claws are copying a crawfish or something"natural" REALY??????????.
if you laid a paca craw claw next to an actualy claw from a real crawfish you would instantly know they are extremely different.
like I said before there are several different forms of patents and there are copywrites and trademarks. These are all there to protect original ideas and designs. The claws on the paca are original and this is a fact. That fact is proven because they were issued a patent.
Also the myth that you cant patent something from nature is just plain wrong period. You can not patent a real crawfish claw but if you carved out a crawfish claw you could copywrite your original artwork. If somebody made a mold of your carving then you could sue them. If somebody carved there own version of a crawfish claw then its theirs. This example is only referring to copywrites, not patents but copywrites are inforcable just as patents are. Just like 2 people could write very similar articles on the same subject but they have not copied each other.
Now back to the claws. They have a very distinct action and by patenting the differnt qualities of those claws the owner is protecting them as best as he legaly could. The patent system is weak at best. It is easy to get around a patent by changing something 20%. When somebody knowingly copies a patented design they are steeling. They are diliberatly trying to cash in on the hard work of the guy who who designed the original. In the fishing industry this runs rampant and is so common that some consumers dont understand why sombody would sue over something as simple as a claw. The answer is easy. Because the owner designed them and marketed them and put his time and money into it and others come along and try to cash in on it. They are to lazy to do their own work.
Their views are soo distorted that they think the guy that is getting ripped off is being greedy buy trying to recover what is rightfuly his.
If sombody came into your yard and stole your truck that you worked hard for would you want it back? or would just let him have it? Intelectual property is property.
Now before you all jump on me for defending this suit. That is not realy what I am doing. I am defending the process. I am not a patent atorny or judge. I do not know that any of the companies named have infringed. That is for the judge to decide.
One more thing, and I could be wrong but I dont think so. I believe that before you can sue, you have to send a letter of cease and disist. In other words, they are given a warning. If they choose to ignore it AND THEY ARE INFRINGING then they absolutly desrve to get sued.