I'm glad there is respect for the contribution and investment ColorDMD has made through its invention and support of frame-by-frame colorization for pinball displays. However Joerg (Lucky1) continues to publicly misrepresent the ColorDMD patents (there are two!) and our position.

Not so. The independent claim (which stands alone) makes no mention of LCD or high-resolution displays. The dependent claims are fall-back claims which only serve to broaden and strengthen the independent claim. You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of how patent claims are defined. Checksums and hash tags are "equivalent" within the scope of this invention (see doctrine of equivalents).

Of course not. There are many ways to color a pinball display that would not infringe. However, you've chosen to include a direct implementation of the patent which creates problems.

To date, neither I or ColorDMD have taken legal action against anyone. (Not a single C&D.) Frankly I hope it stays that way (lawyers are expensive), but it's becoming more and more difficult to stand by and watch the intentional misuse and distribution of our IP by the Pin2DMD project founders and suppliers. I tried to discuss this with the Pin2DMD a year ago and was rebuffed with erroneous claims similar to those above.

It's interesting to note that during the last two years, Joerg, Stefan, and Dom, have collectively worked to develop knock-offs of the PinDMD, Run-DMD clock, ColorDMD, and now Pinsound projects. It's truly disappointing. I can only guess at their motivation, but can assure you that this has been disheartening to the original project founders, and only serves to kill off true innovation and weaken our ability to support the community.

Please support the innovators working to push the boundaries of the hobby! The personal investment required to develop and support the community is enormous and your returned support is truly appreciated!

I'm not sure what you're implying with this comment but ColorDMD sought PPS, WMS, and Stern approval before engaging in colorization of any of their games.

I think you underestimate the effort and investment to make sure this was all above board and something we could share with the community. A key feature of the ColorDMD invention -- preservation of original manufacturer IP -- was a factor in securing approval.

And yet you author and financially benefit from a Pin2DMD display sold and used in the United States.

As for the rest, you willfully continued the development and sale of the Pin2DMD with full knowledge of the US patent, even after requests to specifically exclude the ColorDMD implementation before release.

The members of Pin2DMD's copying of other's IP is nothing new. It's well documented on multiple forums and continues today in the current attempt to knock-off Pinsound.

Pin2DMD hardware is sold and shipped to the United States with Pin2DMD firmware preinstalled. From a user/filesharing standpoint, the only files that need be added are a license key and existing color ROM which Pin2DMD actively promotes and advertises. This is no more DIY than ColorDMD.

The issue at hand isn't whether one is better than the other or more fully featured. It's whether Pin2DMD is unfairly competing by infringing ColorDMD's patents. I think the answer to this is fairly obvious but it's easy enough to resolve.

The unfortunate thing from ColorDMD's perspective is that Pin2DMD has been aware of the issue for more than a year, yet taken no action to resolve it, or warn unsuspecting developers who use the product.