Well there's that. I'm still curious why the 42 Tech patent didn't take precedent over the Club (and Star) design unless Club predated it, as suggested as possible by Waits, came after 1955, it or wasn't stamped (?) The weight of the two plates is virtually identical though blade geometry is different mostly by virtue of the cap. If the Club came first then how'd the Tech patent come about?
Club razors most likely predate the Tech and Gillette copied the design by and large. Club / Hospital most likely never considered patenting the design or manufacturing process because they outsourced the it. Prior art applies in that case but not improvements on a step which is where Gillette could block competition if they copied their design.
Hmm. Well what good then was the Gillette patent as the Star DE clearly was a post 42 patent product?
I'd have to see the patents but the case of making a step improvement is patent able on an existing design. Club predates Star far as I know. So using the basic design would allow for prior art same as Gillette.
The patent makes no reference to it being an improvement over existing designs that might include the Club....I ask again then if Star could make their DE in 1946 what was the Gillette patent protecting? The diamond shape? Apologies for the diversion. I think maybe I'll create a separate thread in the morning. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d72nV-epRkUV4-EYOS0VqHE0D87yrLtR/view?usp=drivesdk Addendum: Diamond shape and the further details of the plate are apparently the invention, patent language is pretty specific.
The Star DE is not a Diamond indent if that is what you are referring to. Secondly the design sans the diamond plate is prior art. Making a stamped base plate if no other patent existed is an improvement and patent able regardless of prior art because it is the process that is being patented not the design. They don't have to make a reference to the prior art if it was never patented. You don't want to anyways for other legal reasons. Others could have made a similar design just not stamped and also not with a diamond indent after Gillette's patents went into effect.
Ultimately patents are only as good as your ability to protect them. The real world is not a gentlemanly place when it comes to business except when it is in one's interest to do so.
Isn't the ASR stamped? Yes clearly the diamond shape is key to the invention. To what extent the diamond indent makes the plate more rigid than the Club/ASR design I'll leave to somebody else to test. It certainly isn't immediately obvious.
Shared duty, Cooper (Atlas handle), Fatip Gentile, Old Type cap (Karve handle). The Cooper is quite mild -- more guard span, less exposure-- and pretty finicky about angle but effective within a narrow window. Satisfying shave from both.
Doing some research on the Cooper Monobilt based upon newspaper ads this razor was sold between 37 - 42. Cooper made razors till at least 48 but no Monobilts after 42. Here are ads from 37 to 42 source newspapers.com Papers 08/05/1937 Sedalia Democrat 07/22/1938 Jefferson City Post Tribune 12/21/1939 Emporia Gazette 06/13/1940 News Journal 05/22/1941 Alton Evening Telegraph 12/21/1942 Owensboro Messenger
Readers digest version on the Kant Rust. The blades first appear in 43. What razor was packaged with them when retailers had them in stock between 43 and 45 I don't know. They weren't sold continuously between those dates. 1946 for sure they sold the blades with the adjustable. The non adjustable I am trying to research that out still but figure most likely 46 and date range of 46 - 48. Further checking 51 is the last year you see any ads for Cooper razors or blades. Earliest ads are from 32 nothing shows up earlier. We can say the 32 - 51 is when this razors were sold for sure. If you follow production timelines then 31 to 50 because the 50 ads are close out ones. The 51 ads are probably sell excess discontinued inventory.
Here is just the adjust for new adjustable Kant Rust Cooper. Proves what I have posted was for sure sold by Cooper. @jmudrick your Cooper if I had to guess without knowing for sure was the Kant Rust razor since it was also a razor brand not just blade brand was the ones sold between 43ish or 44 up until the introduction of the adjustable in 46. As far as what style adjustable or non was sold as Kant Rust razors in 47 and 48 I don't know. Source newspapers.com 10/3/1946 The Sedalia Democrat
Based on the ads it looks like the one on the bottom was produced 37 - 39ish and the above is the 39 - 42.
Timeline on Coopers from advert record. 3pc razors open comb 3pc razors 32 - 44/45ish solid bar guard 3pc razors 46 - 51 solid bar guard, shoulders on the cap 45 - 50/51 1pc razors Monobilt 37 - 42, solid knurled handle 37 - 39ish, second style 39 - 42 Kant Rust Razor 44 - 48, adjustable 46 - 48?, non adjustable 44 - 46, 47-48? This all open to revision if better information comes forth.
You established previously that the patent was filed and approved in 1932, odd that Cooper would wait five years to begin producing and selling the MonoBilt. I have third Monobilt now, with the diamond knurling, and on its box I believe the Kant Rust blades are advertised.
Filed and brought to market don't have to be closely related. That is what the public record shows for retailers adverts. Companies might sit on patents for years on end for all sorts of reasons.
Pictures then. The Kant Rust brand name appears in 43, stainless blades prior to 43 but not under that brand name. See the handle we can take a guess if it was on the early or late production side if it is straight knurled or not regardless of knurling style.