The article talks about how Traeger has patented cloud based WIFI pellet cooker control (even though GMG has had the feature for years).  This action will affect many of the major brands of cookers as they employ this feature.

I just find it fascinating that no manufacturers (after spending countless hours developing a wifi cloud based control) applied for the patent and left the loophole in place for Traeger to get the patents. 

Here is the link to the article:

https://www.derrickriches.com/traeger-lawsuit/

That's a good reason to not buy a Traeger product.

The article makes me wonder about other internet enabled devices.  For instance, are royalties being paid to somebody for cloud based hvac thermostat, cloud remote auto start, cloud based pool controls, etc.? 

Sounds as ridiculous as Ford Motor Corp. getting a patent for driving on the roads and suing every other manufacturer that has cars being driven on them.

 Kind of takes the fun out of enjoying ones pit thinking the manufacturer is trying to use the law to squeeze out the competition rather than be instrumental in development and marketing strategies.

The article makes me wonder about other internet enabled devices.  For instance, are royalties being paid to somebody for cloud based hvac thermostat, cloud remote auto start, cloud based pool controls, etc.?

Agreed, this is absurd.  IOT (Internet of Things) is not something you can patent and make a monopoly.   And while I have no problem with Traeger receiving a patent for their mobile app, that doesn't mean a competitor could not also have a different mobile app with the same general purpose (and a separate patent if they wanted.) 

DK

It is interesting.  I was contacted by a GMG investigator an subpoena for evidence by GMG council.  Don't have any documents, so I am no help there.  I was able to help guide them to the wayback site and they were able to bring up the Wi-fi review I did on the Daniel Boone in March of 2015.  I wish I could be of more help.  Does seem like a very broad thing to allow a patent on.  I guess they are going after GMG cuz they are taking the biggest bite out of Traegers revenue now.

It makes me change my theory on who bought Pelletheads.com!

This lawsuit makes me wonder about the laws on public domain.  The article says MAK created the first WiFi enabled controller in 2012 (or was it 2013?), but they didn't seek a patent.  GMG, Traeger, FireCraft (RIP), and other got on the bandwagon but Traeger is the one that started trouble.  I seem to remember from my educational pursuit towards my Master's Degree that the laws around intellectual property were discussed in either a cybersecurity or ethics course.  There was also mention of public domain and after a certain amount of time new idea lose their novelty and things like patents expire.  In information technology the pace is change is so rapid that going back 8 or 9 years to protect something as simple as WiFi control of a device seems absurd.  Today, all kinds of things are controlled through apps on your phone.  Seems like enforcement of a patent today for something that in every day use is unfair to all of the companies that have been developing products using this technology.  Oh well, understanding stuff like this is for lawyers and judges, but even though I've never owner a GMG product I wouldn't want to see them go out of business over a patent infringement for an idea that Traeger didn't even conceive.

Well, it is also a way for someone with deep pockets to distract the cash flow and resources of other smaller companies by making them deal with this lawsuit rather than focusing on quality and innovation of their product line.  I've been a part of slightly different scenarios with those with deep pockets letting their ego get in the way and acting like Gordon Gecko (the guy in the Wall St movie) to attempt to drain another company's resources over the most trivial things because they have the money to do it.

I wonder if it is coincidence that this WIFI suit comes out now as I think Pit Boss just started making a WIFI controller for some of their cookers. They have been after Dansons because of Joe Traeger's joining them.

 I also would wonder how that would effect, a company like Smokin It, that makes an electric smoker with WIFi just not pellet fed.

I don't see any way that these patents hold up.  In my opinion Traeger just seems to be trying to bankrupt/bully the little guys in the market.  They may not have the money to fight a protracted lawsuit and may just buckle and not use wifi rather than bother with it.  The Webers of the world I'm sure will have something to say about it though.

I was in a company that was sued by a competitor for something we had and sold for years.  They were recently awarded a patented.  Our attorneys collected all of my lab books, product specifications, and other documentation.  It is a good thing I tend to be a pack rat.  They fought the suit and won based on "prior art".  It seems that applies here. 

Has this suit been settled in some fashion?

If so, what was the outcome?

I see that most manufacturers are offering cloud controlled pits so I suspect that Traeger's patents were cancelled making the lawsuit moot.

Has this suit been settled in some fashion?

If so, what was the outcome?

I see that most manufacturers are offering cloud controlled pits so I suspect that Traeger's patents were cancelled making the lawsuit moot.

 That's a good question Paul.  Too bad Traeger is spending so much time & money on things like this. Ultimately the customer ends up paying.  It would be interesting to know how much these litigations truly add to the cost of a pit..

Not a lawyer so not exactly sure what this actually means. To me it looks like GMG appealed the case and then Traeger just dropped it altogether, costing both companies a lot of money for nothing.

Side note to this,  I read a lot of unhappy GMG customers on the facebook pages, because of the lack of customer service and repair parts availability. Also a lot of issues with the newer produced grills.  This is only what I see from a few of the GMG pages and we know that usually people happy with their purchase rarely praise compared to the unhappy who would like everyone to know how unhappy they are.

https://cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/22-1312.ORDER.10-18-2022_2020463.pdf