Schlage Primus patent

In a nutshell...

Once the patent expires _anyone_ can produce the key blanks. (But I'm sure you already knew that part). :)

Schlage Primus keys are unique because of the "sidebar milling" which is those extra cuts along the side of the blank that lift "finger pins" to the correct height to allow a sidebar to retract. The "side milling" is unique to the individual locksmiths (or major commercial account) who "own" that keyway (for lack of a better term).

A Primus blank will work in a standard cyl (with no sidebar), but the standard blank won't work a Primus cyl. (with a side bar) because there are no finger pin cuts on the blank This is what made them incorporatable (is that a word?) with a Schlage MK system that has already existed for years.

Once the patent is up, a keyblank manufacturer (ILCO, Jet, etc) is able to mass produce and sell a keyblank with that particular sidebar milling. Now the question is, "Will they do it?" The answer? "Probably not."

There are so many different sidebar combinations that it would be cost prohibitive to mass produce all the different ones. Now could it be done

*legally* on an individual basis? You betcha. And nothing could be done to the producer because the patent is up.

Enter Schlage "Everest" Primus..... Everest keys have something known as "back milling" running down the length of the blade of the blank. The back milling is what prevents a standard blank from entering an Everest cylinder. This back milling is similar to what is used in the new ASSA Twin "Exclusive" keyway which replaced the ASSA Twin a few years ago when it's patent expired. ASSA keys also incorporate a sidebar milling.

The difference in the patents is that Schlage's sidebar "coding" is done using unique finger pins and all the sidebars are the same. ASSA's sidebar coding is done using unique sidebars and all the finger pins are the same.

Schlage Everest Primus' patent expires in 2014. ASSA Twin Exclusive's patent expires in 2020.

Hope that was a little clearer than mud. :)

Also, I hope I have all this right. It's been about ten years since I took the certification class. If it ain't exactly right, it's close.

Bob DeWeese, CML snipped-for-privacy@spaammbearlock.com (remove"no spaamm")

Bear Lock & Security Service, Inc - A full service locksmith company specializing in professional, cost effective solutions to your Commercial, Residential, Safe, and Automotive Security Problems.

<>< But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and His righteousness; and all these things will be added unto you. Matthew 6:33

This begs the question at what stage if ever the 'after market' blank manufacturers would develop an sell a milling machine to allow key cutting booths etc to do the side millings. The same machine should be able to handle Primus, ASSA Twin as well its derivatives such as Australian Lockwood Twin.

This in turn would depend on the likely market for these keys which as well as those wanting unauthorised duplicates or are in practice entitled to have extra keys (eg ownership apartment door), could be from owners of older poorly managed systems who no longer value key control because of changing business imperatives or because the most important doors have since been rekeyed or had electronic access fitted.

Actually a machine like that already exists (but it ain't cheap!) However if someone got caught making keys that were still patent protected, they would sued by the manufacturer holding the patent. Medeco did it about ten years ago and won a huge settlement.

Now they could copy non patent protected keys, but think about it. A lot of these key cutting booths can't even cut a ford key without it getting stuck in the lock. Complicate things with a second cutting area and watch the fiasco that ensues. :)

Another thing to remember is the expense of wasted blanks and non-working returns.

I know I cringe when I mis-cut an ASSA blank. Remember, an ASSA blank costs about 25 times as much as a kwikset blank. Of course, the ASSA blank already has the sidebar cuts on it. So let's consider a nickel silver standard blank. They can cost as much as 10 times what a normal keyblank costs. And they are standard thickness. A blank to cut an ASSA key on would need to be stronger and thicker to accommodate the sidebar milling and prevent breakage, so they would certainly be more expensive than say a Sargent blank in nickel silver.

Throw away a couple of $250 boxes of keyblanks and that expensive machine would quickly follow.

And this is all good news to businesses and institutions using these systems.

Also key booths etc are less likely to keep their machines properly adjusted compared with *real* locksmiths let alone whether the after market blanks are made with sufficient accuracy. One local locksmith had a sign saying 'We do not guarantee keys cut from xxxx keys' (xxxx being a chain of key booths using their own steel blanks).

When you do it manually, a small desktop milling machine around 250 or

300 $ is enough; of course not for repeated fabrication of those keys, as it takes a longer time than with some kind of duplicator, but it can be done. A real secure key has some kind of protection with movable parts in the key, or magnets, or is complicated enough in its pattern, like an EVVA 3KS; but almost all the well known sidebar keys (in Germany we have them from Zeiss Ikon, EVVA and Winkhaus) can be duplicated by a skilled guy without any problems. Same for the dimple keys, they are often even easier to mill and drill.

regards - Ralph

Re 3KS and other milled channel key systems, the first time I saw one of these I thought there is one (relatively) easy key for an enterprising amateur to duplicate. Out of respect for the group though, I won't go into why I think it's easy . . . .

And I think it is not easy because of the simultaneous x/y-movement what is needed during milling.

regards - Ralph

Yes, I spotted that but still a v simple method came to mind.

What's so difficult about manipulating a mill in the X and Y axis? That's what they do. I was thinking about setting up a pantograph to copy sidewinders on my $300 mill. Should work great for bilock keys too.

For fun I'm going to see what it takes to mill some Primus keys.

Daniel

Troll? I wonder if he heard of Anton Pillar orders.

No, not a troll. As long as I am not recreating a patented item for sale it is 100% legal. I don't see where an Anton Pillar order would be granted. First, someone would need to prove a reasonable expecation that something illegal was happening that would be covered up in the case of legal action. That won't happen so it does not apply.

But thanks for pointing that out. I've always wondered about how a company like Microsoft could bully companies through "Anti-Piracy Police agencies" such as the BSA,SIIA,CAST, FAST, BSAA etc. It seems un-American, but that's just my opinion.

On the other hand, except in the case of the DCMA, there's no prohibition in the US against creating a machine or device that can duplicate another device. There are laws against using such devices to create replicas for sale, but that's not what I said I'd do. I said I was going to do it for fun to see how easy it was to make a spare key for my Primus lock.

Two years ago I posted a message on the subject of creating blanks on demand using techniques common to milling machines. I was told at the time that it was 1) impractical 2) too time intensive 3) illegal and 4) expensive.

Since then, I've been learning a bit about the field of machining metal. I've learned to use a small lathe and a small mill. I'm not an expert, but I've gotten to the point where I can make things turn out the way I mean them to be.

I've come to the conclusion that it's 1) possible and 2) time intensive and 3) cheaper than buying some code machines and 4) only illegal in certain instances. It also takes a modicum of skill, but if I can do it most any locksmith should be able to.

I'd originally envisioned a 3-D scanner to evaluate a key and reproduce a blank. That brought to mind a stored database with all the known keyways in it. Combine it with a code database such as Blackhawk provides and you could have a dynamite key dup/originator.

But I was told it could not be done.

Daniel

magic word.. TIME.. whats your time worth? thats the bottom line.. lets say, that the average wages in your area were $12 an hour.. ok, lets for grins, say you could reproduce a key in 20? minutes.. you now have $4 worth of time in the key, and this IGNORES the cost of the machinery..

for some keys-yes, that might be a bargain. for others? might be too high..

now, for grins.. lets say you got a GOOD capable 3d machine, and were to 'go back' and make (for example) the Mustang logo headed keys for the old Ford cars..

I will IGNORE the question of whether its legal, because of patent or copyright, to do so.. but then it comes to how much DEMAND is there for same, AND can you make em fast enough to 'make a living at it'??

perhaps there is a nitch for you..

--Shiva--

And this is not true :)

Yes, that is the fact. And when I duplicate my own key, just for learning and practice, it is far from being illegal.

In most cases it is a matter of minutes to modify an existing blank to fit in some other lock, even in many locks with restricted keyways.

And again, just to make clear, I am talking about my own locks, and in my job I do not work with locksmithing, besides from having planned the companies MK system a few years ago.

regards - Ralph

Which is why some patented systems like Everest (AFAIK) effectively check that a thin filed down blank has not been used.

Another type (Australian) was an ordinary pin tumbler cylinder but had wire springs in slots in the plug which normally pressed against the (ribbed?) pins such that once pushed up they stayed up. There is a row of 'lower' type pins at right angles to the keyway which are pressed gaainst the springs when the key is inserted allowing the main pins to move freely. An unduly thin key will not push these auxiliary pins far enough.

Medeco effectively does this as the pins will not sit at the correct angle against a thin makeshift blank.

Lastly, another Australian keyway which is similar to a Kwikset keyway but using a somewhat thicker blank. You cannot mutilate an ordinary blank without running out of metal. Vaguely like Keymark but does not need special vices (I assume Keymark uses a very thick initial blank, or is a thinner blank coined roughly into shape before milling? In this regard I have some British Yale original keys from the mid 1960's that look as if they have been coined rather than milled like early 'corrugated' cylinder keys were made - this is apart from the coining to decorate the bow).

Speaking of which, and digressing entirely: I really wish *interesting* coining was still the standard, even if it gave us less space to imprint key numbers or shop names. I miss the old Master lion, for example.

Yeah, that lion did look kinda cool... I have an older lock that I found in my grandpa's toolbox brand new in the box that came with the lion coined keys...

Heh, I ordered more locks with the same code just cause I liked that key...

:P

Evan, ~~formerly a maintenance man, now a college student... <with mid-term exams next week>

But that does not stop one from milling the extra groove needed to convert a standard blank to fit the everest. Using a mill is really very easy, especially when you are making nice straight cuts parallel to another straight edge.

Daniel

Any "sidewinder" milling type machine will do it. If you have a machine that can cut Bell, Volvo, etc. keys it will work for Primus. And the regular Schlage blanks with two narrow grooves will pass the Primus keyways now.

Any well-equipped locksmith should be able to relatively easily duplicate Primus keys today with a conventional and sidewinder key machine and a couple of quick passes with a Dremel.

Not everyone invests in a sidewinder machine, but...

I should point out that folks have been able to duplicate Medeco keys for quite some time too. In general, we don't do so carelessly; that's become mostly a matter of ethics and partly a matter of contract. So losing the patent protection may be less of a security issue than some folks seem to be assuming. Yes, it's an issue, but let's keep it in perspective.