I think this tech should be mandatory in all saws, but I also think that one company shouldn't have control over the licensing and it probably shouldn't be something companies have to pay for.
I'd be happy if my saw had the tech.
Look at it this way: Bosch decided it was better to spend a small fortune of R&D to try to avoid the patent than to pay the license fees. And even now they haven't settled the resulting lawsuit - they'd rather fight it, because the likely outcome of the fee is not "paying up" but "scrapping the entire product line as a net loss".
Also bear in mind that this technology is a major portion of the total price of a saw - up around 50% on cheaper saws. So it's going to massively increase prices, and also increase SawStop's margins. They didn't just ask for 8%, they asked for 8% while lobbying the government to increase the price they're taking margin on and ban smaller competitors.
This looks like the other form of patent abuse - where instead of trolling you make a product people can't avoid and crush competitors with patent suits.
It also seems strange for that to be a percent instead of a fixed cost since the feature is the same for all models of a saw.
Yes, they did. Both companies carried Bosch REAXX saws, which have injury detection sensors, and are advertised accordingly.
^edited to past tense because there's apparently an injunction banning US sales of REAXX. So they tried to, and the reason they don't is that the company advocating for this law won't let them.
> I also think that thinking this will remove consumer choice is inaccurate as well, because if this was mandatory it's not like current saw manufacturers would simply stop selling saws
First, it still removes consumer choice to massively increase the price of saws. The cheapest sensing models I can find listed are >$1,000. The cheapest table saws at Home Depot are ~$400. Tripling the price of the cheapest model is absolutely a restriction of choice, and one that's going to hurt both hobbyists and professionals.
Beyond that, Bosch REAXX is currently being sued by SawStop, the same company/inventor pushing for this legal requirement. Does it restrict consumer choice if there's only one legal brand, all the others having been sued out of the market?
I agree that this technology is makes saws safer. I'm not at all convinced that the safety justifies handing a single company a government monopoly on table saws.