I apologize for the OT post, but I feel the need to spead this story as
far as I can (and encourage you to do the same).

I did not write the original posting, but I share the sentiments 100%.
Such a sad state the American legal system is in that these things --
which IMO are in some cases out-and-out extortion, and in all cases
flagrant abuse of the legal system -- are allowed to continue.

Read on, and spread the word...

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...611825,00.html

What a bunch of greedy assholes.

snip

BTW, anybody as offended as me should drop them a line:
www.monstercable.com/company_info/contact.asp

I told Mr.Graham that I would print out the Denver Post article, add a
request to boycott monster cables and stick copies of that into all the
classrooms I'm teaching in at the local music university. I'm actually
done with printing.allready...
I added that from now on out studios would be 100% monster cable free
zones (they allready are, but they will remain like that as well).

Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all of you to
a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail and b) don't buy
anything of that company anymore until they changed their strategies.

man, that makes me want to go and cut up the monster cables I have all over
my home theater set-up. too bad they already got a lot of my money, the
bahstards. this stuff really is hard to believe


"Brian" wrote in message
...
I apologize for the OT post, but I feel the need to spead this story as
far as I can (and encourage you to do the same).

I did not write the original posting, but I share the sentiments 100%.
Such a sad state the American legal system is in that these things --
which IMO are in some cases out-and-out extortion, and in all cases
flagrant abuse of the legal system -- are allowed to continue.

Read on, and spread the word...

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...611825,00.html

What a bunch of greedy assholes.

snip

BTW, anybody as offended as me should drop them a line:
www.monstercable.com/company_info/contact.asp

I told Mr.Graham that I would print out the Denver Post article, add a
request to boycott monster cables and stick copies of that into all the
classrooms I'm teaching in at the local music university. I'm actually
done with printing.allready...
I added that from now on out studios would be 100% monster cable free
zones (they allready are, but they will remain like that as well).

Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all of you to
a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail and b) don't buy
anything of that company anymore until they changed their strategies.

I hope monster cable wins . they are only doing what any business does to
protect it very valuable name.Others that use similar names should expect to
looked also. Copy right laws exist for a purpose. but do not worry about
this small company (he's fine), he has done it for the free publicity for
his business.


Len
"Brian" wrote in message
...
I apologize for the OT post, but I feel the need to spead this story as
far as I can (and encourage you to do the same).

I did not write the original posting, but I share the sentiments 100%.
Such a sad state the American legal system is in that these things --
which IMO are in some cases out-and-out extortion, and in all cases
flagrant abuse of the legal system -- are allowed to continue.

Read on, and spread the word...

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...611825,00.html

What a bunch of greedy assholes.

snip

BTW, anybody as offended as me should drop them a line:
www.monstercable.com/company_info/contact.asp

I told Mr.Graham that I would print out the Denver Post article, add a
request to boycott monster cables and stick copies of that into all the
classrooms I'm teaching in at the local music university. I'm actually
done with printing.allready...
I added that from now on out studios would be 100% monster cable free
zones (they allready are, but they will remain like that as well).

Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all of you to
a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail and b) don't buy
anything of that company anymore until they changed their strategies.

"Brian" wrote in message
...
I apologize for the OT post, but I feel the need to spead this story as
far as I can (and encourage you to do the same).

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...611825,00.html

What a bunch of greedy assholes.


I've boycotted them for years. Their cables are very over-priced wire.

I recall a test done by Stereo Review some years ago. In blind testing,
none of the listeners could tell the difference between Monster cable, other
high priced brands, and lamp cord.

It can be a fine line. Monster Cable has to protect their trademark, but
they don't have to shut down businesses to do so. They could license the
use of the name for $1/year and everyone would be happy.

todd

"leonard" wrote in message
...
I hope monster cable wins . they are only doing what any business does to
protect it very valuable name.Others that use similar names should expect
to
looked also. Copy right laws exist for a purpose. but do not worry about
this small company (he's fine), he has done it for the free publicity for
his business.


Len
"Brian" wrote in message
...
I apologize for the OT post, but I feel the need to spead this story as
far as I can (and encourage you to do the same).

I did not write the original posting, but I share the sentiments 100%.
Such a sad state the American legal system is in that these things --
which IMO are in some cases out-and-out extortion, and in all cases
flagrant abuse of the legal system -- are allowed to continue.

Read on, and spread the word...

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...611825,00.html

What a bunch of greedy assholes.

snip

BTW, anybody as offended as me should drop them a line:
www.monstercable.com/company_info/contact.asp

I told Mr.Graham that I would print out the Denver Post article, add a
request to boycott monster cables and stick copies of that into all the
classrooms I'm teaching in at the local music university. I'm actually
done with printing.allready...
I added that from now on out studios would be 100% monster cable free
zones (they allready are, but they will remain like that as well).

Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all of you to
a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail and b) don't buy
anything of that company anymore until they changed their strategies.

I think it is B.S.!
Maybe he should go after Porter Cable, after all the name of his company
also uses the word "cable"!
He should be able to protect the combination of words, "Monster Cable", but
not the individual words!
By the way, I don't need to boycott them, never have bought any of their
over priced lampcord!
Greg


"leonard" wrote in message
...
I hope monster cable wins . they are only doing what any business does to
protect it very valuable name.Others that use similar names should expect
to
looked also. Copy right laws exist for a purpose. but do not worry about
this small company (he's fine), he has done it for the free publicity for
his business.


Len
"Brian" wrote in message
...
I apologize for the OT post, but I feel the need to spead this story as
far as I can (and encourage you to do the same).

I did not write the original posting, but I share the sentiments 100%.
Such a sad state the American legal system is in that these things --
which IMO are in some cases out-and-out extortion, and in all cases
flagrant abuse of the legal system -- are allowed to continue.

Read on, and spread the word...

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...611825,00.html

What a bunch of greedy assholes.

snip

BTW, anybody as offended as me should drop them a line:
www.monstercable.com/company_info/contact.asp

I told Mr.Graham that I would print out the Denver Post article, add a
request to boycott monster cables and stick copies of that into all the
classrooms I'm teaching in at the local music university. I'm actually
done with printing.allready...
I added that from now on out studios would be 100% monster cable free
zones (they allready are, but they will remain like that as well).

Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all of you to
a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail and b) don't buy
anything of that company anymore until they changed their strategies.

On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 23:18:23 -0500, "leonard"
wrote:

I hope monster cable wins . they are only doing what any business does to
protect it very valuable name.Others that use similar names should expect to
looked also. Copy right laws exist for a purpose. but do not worry about
this small company (he's fine), he has done it for the free publicity for
his business.


Leonard,

I have filed for a trademark on the letter "L", anyone else's use
of that letter would be a violation of a mark that would devalue my
trademark. I expect $1000 per year and 1% of your gross sales or income
for the continued use of my trademarked letter "L". Please respond with
your certified funds or discontinue the use of my letter "L". Is that
clear _eonard?

For monster to claim that they have a business interest in the area
of educational ski training videos for children and that Mr. Turners use of
the English word "monster" in his business name for that business niche
thus infringes their business interests is ludicrous. The current state of
affairs with various companies and corporations attempting to copyright
and/or trademark the use of common English names or phrases is a very
dangerous trend. Building a brand and trademark is certainly something
that needs to be protected; attempting to assert that they have the
exclusive use of a common word or phrase and actually successfully having
legal actions assert that is going to lead to severe problems as our
ability to use our language becomes more and more restricted. If all
businesses behaved as monster, using the same rationale, think of the
business names and descriptions that would either require paying extortion
to some corporate entity or denied from use: (just a few words just from
various businesses I could think of in about 60 seconds):
Home, Toys, Depot, Basement, Burgers, Office, Max, Red, Black, Best,
Circuit, Buy, City, Fry, Dollar, New York, Times, Fox, Cable, News,
Broadcasting, King, King's, White, White's, Quick
Each and everyone of the previous words is associated with a business
name and branding of some sort and thus someone like Joe's Home Repair
could ostensibly be sued by Home Depot since Joe's Home Repair is using one
of Home Depot's names in a business area in which "Home" Depot has a
presence (darned sight more logical argument BTW, than monster's ludicrous
claim regarding the educational videos market segment). IMHO, a branding
or trademark should apply *only* to the entire brand and trade mark of a
particular company.



Len
"Brian" wrote in message
...
I apologize for the OT post, but I feel the need to spead this story as
far as I can (and encourage you to do the same).

I did not write the original posting, but I share the sentiments 100%.
Such a sad state the American legal system is in that these things --
which IMO are in some cases out-and-out extortion, and in all cases
flagrant abuse of the legal system -- are allowed to continue.

Read on, and spread the word...

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...611825,00.html

What a bunch of greedy assholes.

snip

BTW, anybody as offended as me should drop them a line:
www.monstercable.com/company_info/contact.asp

I told Mr.Graham that I would print out the Denver Post article, add a
request to boycott monster cables and stick copies of that into all the
classrooms I'm teaching in at the local music university. I'm actually
done with printing.allready...
I added that from now on out studios would be 100% monster cable free
zones (they allready are, but they will remain like that as well).

Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all of you to
a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail and b) don't buy
anything of that company anymore until they changed their strategies.




+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Now we'll just use some glue to hold things in place until the brads dry

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Monster cables have always been ridiculously over priced. They are good
quality, but they aren't that much better than the $10 cables you can
buy with RCA plugs on them.

As for the lawsuit, anybody that fights back against big corporations
trying to dominate a market (that they don't have any real business with
especially) has my vote. Most people don't even know what Monster
cables are...unless they're audiophiles or professional musicians/video
production types.

I've forwarded the article to everyone I know.


bkr

leonard wrote:

I hope monster cable wins . they are only doing what any business does to
protect it very valuable name.Others that use similar names should expect to
looked also. Copy right laws exist for a purpose. but do not worry about
this small company (he's fine), he has done it for the free publicity for
his business.


Len
"Brian" wrote in message
...

I apologize for the OT post, but I feel the need to spead this story as
far as I can (and encourage you to do the same).

I did not write the original posting, but I share the sentiments 100%.
Such a sad state the American legal system is in that these things --
which IMO are in some cases out-and-out extortion, and in all cases
flagrant abuse of the legal system -- are allowed to continue.

Read on, and spread the word...

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...611825,00.html

What a bunch of greedy assholes.

snip

BTW, anybody as offended as me should drop them a line:
www.monstercable.com/company_info/contact.asp

I told Mr.Graham that I would print out the Denver Post article, add a
request to boycott monster cables and stick copies of that into all the
classrooms I'm teaching in at the local music university. I'm actually
done with printing.allready...
I added that from now on out studios would be 100% monster cable free
zones (they allready are, but they will remain like that as well).

Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all of you to
a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail and b) don't buy
anything of that company anymore until they changed their strategies.



First of all nice troll. Second, if you're going to troll, at least get
the facts straight...this is a trademark case, not a copyright case.

bkr

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 04:23:41 GMT, "Edwin Pawlowski"
wrote:
I recall a test done by Stereo Review some years ago. In blind testing,
none of the listeners could tell the difference between Monster cable, other
high priced brands, and lamp cord.

Audiophiles get off on these things, but as you said, they're really
overpriced crap.

I hope the courts make them pay everyones legal costs then fine them
for their nuisance suit. It is not like Disney, who built the name. If
this is allowed to continue, all names and words will be registered
trademarks in very short order - not dissimilar to the domain name
squatting of yesteryear.

"Brian" wrote in message
...
I apologize for the OT post, but I feel the need to spead this story as
far as I can (and encourage you to do the same).

I did not write the original posting, but I share the sentiments 100%.
Such a sad state the American legal system is in that these things --
which IMO are in some cases out-and-out extortion, and in all cases
flagrant abuse of the legal system -- are allowed to continue.

Read on, and spread the word...

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...611825,00.html


Actually I always thought Monster Cable was all about marketing anyway. The
cable looks pretty limp once you strip away the quadruple magnification
insulation.

"bkr" wrote in message
...


Most people don't even know what Monster
cables are...unless they're audiophiles or professional musicians/video
production types.


Umm, they are large diameter transparent insulators with tiny wires running
through them.

For pro audio (AKa not home or car audio most of the time) monaster cable
makes 100% lifetime guaranteed stuff don't they?

For a traveling band or high traffic studio / stage environment, that is
worth it alone IMHO.

Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
http://www.autodrill.com
http://www.multi-spindle-heads.com

V8013

My eBay: http://tinyurl.com/4hpnc

Gotta make money somehow. Why not sue everybody who's ever used the
name "Monster" to keep money rolling through the bank. If you can't
make money selling wires they might as well sue and hope for a
settlement. meanwhile shut down anybody trying to make an honest
living. Thanks for bringing this to my attention Brian.

Bobby Pickett should sue the whole damn lot of them. He copyrighted "Monster
Mash" in 1962

You'll need a better example. Porter Cable has been trademarked long
before Monster was even a dream. Still B.S., though!

Greg O wrote:

I think it is B.S.!
Maybe he should go after Porter Cable, after all the name of his company
also uses the word "cable"!
He should be able to protect the combination of words, "Monster Cable", but
not the individual words!
By the way, I don't need to boycott them, never have bought any of their
over priced lampcord!
Greg


"leonard" wrote in message
...


I hope monster cable wins . they are only doing what any business does to
protect it very valuable name.Others that use similar names should expect


to


looked also. Copy right laws exist for a purpose. but do not worry about
this small company (he's fine), he has done it for the free publicity for
his business.


Len
"Brian" wrote in message
...


I apologize for the OT post, but I feel the need to spead this story as
far as I can (and encourage you to do the same).

I did not write the original posting, but I share the sentiments 100%.
Such a sad state the American legal system is in that these things --
which IMO are in some cases out-and-out extortion, and in all cases
flagrant abuse of the legal system -- are allowed to continue.

Read on, and spread the word...

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...611825,00.html

What a bunch of greedy assholes.

snip

BTW, anybody as offended as me should drop them a line:
www.monstercable.com/company_info/contact.asp

I told Mr.Graham that I would print out the Denver Post article, add a
request to boycott monster cables and stick copies of that into all the
classrooms I'm teaching in at the local music university. I'm actually
done with printing.allready...
I added that from now on out studios would be 100% monster cable free
zones (they allready are, but they will remain like that as well).

Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all of you to
a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail and b) don't buy
anything of that company anymore until they changed their strategies.

Mike in Mystic wrote:

man, that makes me want to go and cut up the monster cables I have all
over
my home theater set-up. too bad they already got a lot of my money, the
bahstards. this stuff really is hard to believe

You could cut them up and mail them to the Monster home office with a letter
to leave the poor hippy lady alone. But it would be an expensive way to
make a statement.

If this thing goes the way it could, I look for either K-Mart or Wal-Mart to
sue the other one's pants off. Whoever grabbed it first. I'm not quite
sure. Wal-Mart seems new to me because we didn't have one anywhere around
here until 1989, but they've been around since the '70s. I'm not sure how
old K-Mart is. Rather older, I think.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/
http://rosegarden.sourceforge.net/tutorial/

I recall a test done by Stereo Review some years ago. In blind testing,
none of the listeners could tell the difference between Monster cable,
other high priced brands, and lamp cord.

More that likely either the tests were faulty of the reviewers had tin ears.
Probably a combination of both.

Silvan wrote:

Mike in Mystic wrote:

man, that makes me want to go and cut up the monster cables I have
all over
my home theater set-up. too bad they already got a lot of my money,
the bahstards. this stuff really is hard to believe

You could cut them up and mail them to the Monster home office with a
letter to leave the poor hippy lady alone. But it would be an
expensive way to make a statement.

If this thing goes the way it could, I look for either K-Mart or
Wal-Mart to sue the other one's pants off. Whoever grabbed it first.
I'm not quite sure. Wal-Mart seems new to me because we didn't have
one anywhere around here until 1989, but they've been around since the
'70s. I'm not sure how old K-Mart is. Rather older, I think.

K-Mart morphed out of Kresge's and Kresge's was old in the 50s.

WalMart started as one store in the 50s or 60s in Arkansas. Harrisonvile,
IIRC.

Mark and Kim Smith wrote:
You'll need a better example. Porter Cable has been trademarked long
before Monster was even a dream. Still B.S., though!


Monster was a word long before Monster Cable existed. Maybe Paramount Studios
ought to sue those assholes.

Personally, I don't use their crap either. I was using cheap RCA cables WAY
back with success and see no reason to switch. To me using their stuff is like
buying USB cables from CompUSA for $40 when I can buy perfectly good ones on the
internet for $2.50. Companies like Monster Cable depend on people's ignorance
for their continued success.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

Mike in Mystic wrote:

man, that makes me want to go and cut up the monster cables I have all
over
my home theater set-up. too bad they already got a lot of my money, the
bahstards. this stuff really is hard to believe


There are many other companies which do the same thing. Microsoft for
example, if your company or product, software or not has the word Windows
or something similar you can expect a lawsuit.

Sooooooooooooo, let's see now. Has the death toll topped
the 150,000 mark yet? How many more will die from the after
affects/disease/malnutrition?

You white guys in the 'burbs with nothing else to do need to
rearrange your perspective a wee bit.

UA100, who really thinks the OP is Darwin Award class
material or just an idjit...

Greg wrote:

Bobby Pickett should sue the whole damn lot of them. He copyrighted
"Monster Mash" in 1962

Who holds the copyright to Steppenwolf's "Monster"? (Please dear Lord let
it be somebody big enough to buy Monster Cable outright out of petty cash
and fire the whole lot for cause then sue them personally for everything
their sharks-on-a-leash can think of so they don't get away with a pile
from their stock options).

Shame on Disney--Disney's big enough to stomp them flat, but instead they
settled.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

bkr wrote:

Monster cables have always been ridiculously over priced. They are good
quality, but they aren't that much better than the $10 cables you can
buy with RCA plugs on them.

As for the lawsuit, anybody that fights back against big corporations
trying to dominate a market (that they don't have any real business with
especially) has my vote. Most people don't even know what Monster
cables are...unless they're audiophiles or professional musicians/video
production types.

Most people may not be aware of the brand, but a lot of people who aren't
audiophiles or professional musicians/video production types have them--it
seems to be the only brand that Best Buy sells--if not the only brand then
it's the one they're pushing.

Personally I think Best Buy ought to drop that product line, but making
money on cables seems to be a successful marketing strategy at this point
(go down to CompUSA, find any Belkin cable, write down the price, the name,
and the SKU, then plug those into Froogle).

I've forwarded the article to everyone I know.


bkr

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

mp wrote:

I recall a test done by Stereo Review some years ago. In blind testing,
none of the listeners could tell the difference between Monster cable,
other high priced brands, and lamp cord.

More that likely either the tests were faulty of the reviewers had tin
ears. Probably a combination of both.

I note no smiley so I assume that you are one who actually believes that
there's something magic about sticking the name "monster" on a piece of
lamp cord that makes it perform better.

And I'm not going to go into the debate with you--if you want to worship at
the altar of Monster's bull**** that's your business, but if you're going
to proselytize join the Mormons or somebody else who's at least honest
about it.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

leonard wrote:

I hope monster cable wins . they are only doing what any business does to
protect it very valuable name.Others that use similar names should expect
to
looked also. Copy right laws exist for a purpose. but do not worry about
this small company (he's fine), he has done it for the free publicity for
his business.

Uh, did you read the damned article? He's launching a preemptive
strike--they sued Disney and some woman who named her little hole in the
wall store after her cat. Since nobody in their right mind buys their
overpriced lamp cord they seem to be trying to salvage their dying company
by profiting on lawsuits.

Further, it's not copyright, it's trademark, and the general legal situation
is that you only have a legitimate claim if there is a reasonable
possibility that the use of the word might create confusion. There is no
possibility that someone is going to confuse, say, "Monsters, Inc", with a
cable manufacturer, but they sue anyway knowing that most folks will cave
rather than fighting it out. Unfortunately, Disney caved when Monster
Cable went after them--they would have done the world a real service by
smashing that outfit flat and forcing it into bankruptcy then buying up the
scraps and shipping them to Japan to be melted down and turned into
something useful.

Len
"Brian" wrote in message
...
I apologize for the OT post, but I feel the need to spead this story as
far as I can (and encourage you to do the same).

I did not write the original posting, but I share the sentiments 100%.
Such a sad state the American legal system is in that these things --
which IMO are in some cases out-and-out extortion, and in all cases
flagrant abuse of the legal system -- are allowed to continue.

Read on, and spread the word...

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...611825,00.html

What a bunch of greedy assholes.

snip

BTW, anybody as offended as me should drop them a line:
www.monstercable.com/company_info/contact.asp

I told Mr.Graham that I would print out the Denver Post article, add a
request to boycott monster cables and stick copies of that into all the
classrooms I'm teaching in at the local music university. I'm actually
done with printing.allready...
I added that from now on out studios would be 100% monster cable free
zones (they allready are, but they will remain like that as well).

Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all of you to
a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail and b) don't buy
anything of that company anymore until they changed their strategies.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Todd Fatheree wrote:

It can be a fine line. Monster Cable has to protect their trademark, but
they don't have to shut down businesses to do so. They could license the
use of the name for $1/year and everyone would be happy.

Yeah, they have to protect their trademark, but their trademark is "Monster
Cable". If somebody started selling cable as "Monsters Cable" or "Mobster
Cable" or "Monster Wire" or something else that could be easily confused
with their trademark then they'd have a legitimate case, but no sane person
is going to confuse snowboarding videos or an animated feature film with
overpriced glorified lamp cord.

They're not suing to protect their trademark, they're doing it to make a
profit off of those who won't fight them to the end.

todd

"leonard" wrote in message
...
I hope monster cable wins . they are only doing what any business does to
protect it very valuable name.Others that use similar names should expect
to
looked also. Copy right laws exist for a purpose. but do not worry about
this small company (he's fine), he has done it for the free publicity
for his business.


Len
"Brian" wrote in message
...
I apologize for the OT post, but I feel the need to spead this story as
far as I can (and encourage you to do the same).

I did not write the original posting, but I share the sentiments 100%.
Such a sad state the American legal system is in that these things --
which IMO are in some cases out-and-out extortion, and in all cases
flagrant abuse of the legal system -- are allowed to continue.

Read on, and spread the word...


:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...611825,00.html

What a bunch of greedy assholes.

snip

BTW, anybody as offended as me should drop them a line:
www.monstercable.com/company_info/contact.asp

I told Mr.Graham that I would print out the Denver Post article, add a
request to boycott monster cables and stick copies of that into all the
classrooms I'm teaching in at the local music university. I'm actually
done with printing.allready...
I added that from now on out studios would be 100% monster cable free
zones (they allready are, but they will remain like that as well).

Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all of you to
a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail and b) don't buy
anything of that company anymore until they changed their strategies.



--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Silvan wrote:

Mike in Mystic wrote:

man, that makes me want to go and cut up the monster cables I have all
over
my home theater set-up. too bad they already got a lot of my money, the
bahstards. this stuff really is hard to believe

You could cut them up and mail them to the Monster home office with a
letter
to leave the poor hippy lady alone. But it would be an expensive way to
make a statement.

Not really, it's sunk cost and replacing them would cost about 20 bucks for
a roll of zip cord at Home Depot.

If this thing goes the way it could, I look for either K-Mart or Wal-Mart
to
sue the other one's pants off. Whoever grabbed it first. I'm not quite
sure. Wal-Mart seems new to me because we didn't have one anywhere around
here until 1989, but they've been around since the '70s. I'm not sure how
old K-Mart is. Rather older, I think.

That would be interesting--K-Mart's claim would be more legitimate than
Monster's, but I suspect the courts would toss it out on the basis that
"mart" is a well established synonym for "store" and that both are in fact
stores.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 21:55:04 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:

For monster to claim that they have a business interest in the area
of educational ski training videos for children and that Mr. Turners use of
the English word "monster" in his business name for that business niche
thus infringes their business interests is ludicrous. The current state of
affairs with various companies and corporations attempting to copyright
and/or trademark the use of common English names or phrases is a very
dangerous trend. Building a brand and trademark is certainly something
that needs to be protected; attempting to assert that they have the
exclusive use of a common word or phrase and actually successfully having
legal actions assert that is going to lead to severe problems as our
ability to use our language becomes more and more restricted.

(unfortunately, i couldn't read the original story,
the link was broken, or taken down or something...)

agree agree agree

copyright/trademark law is a personal pet
peeve of mine, for a number of reasons...

i have done *some* amount of esearch, legal
readings, and even consulted a trademark/
copyright lawyer several years ago...

besides being *quite* the tangled web of
regional, national and international laws and
legal precedents, it generally protects only
those big korporations who have the resources
to have teams of parasites, er, lawyers on
retainer...

while *supposedly* it offers protection to
the originator/creator/artist, in reality, li'l
peeps can not generally afford :

1. the protection officially registering trademarks
and copyrights can provide if/when legal action
is contemplated/necessary...

(yes, don't tell me how easy it is to copyright
stuff *FORMALLY*/'legally', it is *still* a pain
in the patootie that many/most independent
artists don't have the time to do assiduously...
trademarking is even more of a pain, in that it
costs a chunk of change, has to searched and
approved, has to be renewed regularly, etc...)

2. don't have the resources and manpower to
'police' their trademarks/copyrights...

(in a knockdown drag out legal brawl, it WILL
NOT metaphysically matter if you ARE the
creator of art/widget 'X'; if BigCo, Inc. steals
your idea/art, files the paperwork, and then
sics a team of lawyers on you, you WILL lose...)

3. don't have the lawyers on retainer looking
for something to justify their existence...

(trademarks in particular, are *supposed* to
be 'policed' on a constant, consistent basis
-even if you live in key west and the 'violation'
of your trademark occurs in walla walla- or
you will lose the 'right' to 'own' that trademark...)

4. most creations are done as 'work for hire'
FOR a korporation, such that -once again-
korporate interests are paramount, not
granma moses scraping out a living selling
pieces of her talent/soul...

further, korporate kreeps like disney are THE
prime copyright/trademark nazis when it comes
to 'enforcing' their 'rights' in this area...

they have and will go after people as 'innocent'
and as a nursery school who had crude
pics of goofy, mickey rat, etc painted on their
walls... (needless to say, the kids lost... *how*
this is supposed to be a feather in the cap for
dizzyworld is beyond me...)

(for the kamper who *seemed* to be saying
that disney 'deserves' their agressive protection
because of their 'creativity', i should remind him
that ALL the crap that disney (nike, whoever)
puts out that is popular and sells a zillion units of
mickey mouse crap, are popular *because* of US
MAKING IT POPULAR, not some inherent,
incredible artistic value... ULTIMATELY, disney/etc
are parasitizing OUR popular culture that WE made
popular...)

not only that, but disney has snuck through
kongress a number of extensions to the terms
that copyrights/trademarks are good for, SOLELY
to 'protect' 'their' ownership of mickey rat, donald
duck, goofy, etc, when their trademarks/copyrights
*SHOULD* have expired in the last couple years...

(in other words, the big guys change the rules of
the game when it suits their purposes... surprise...)

now, the point about this that makes me mad, is
that we STARTED out with trademark/copyright
laws that had something like 16-17 years for
'protection' (even patents on inventions have
less time protection than stupid freaking
mickey rat-type crapola ! ! ! ); then it was increased
to the lifetime of the 'artist'; then it was increased
to the lifetime of the 'artist' plus X years, now it is
lifetime plus 75 years, etc...

anyone want to guess the 'lifetime' of immortal,
fictitious legal entities we call korporations ? ? ?

(THE root of all evil, by the way; not corporations
per se, their immortal immoral status as super-citizens
who are more important than impotent li'l peeps...)

how is it that when we depended upon a
fragmented society, with (relatively) crappy,
ineffecient communications where it could take
years for ideas, inventions, text, artwork, etc
to be reproduced (if it even could be), and
spread from one end of a relatively small country
to the other, we had 'protection' periods which
are a fraction of what we have in a huge, relatively
homogenous, instant-communication, xeroxed,
pop-culture society ? ? ?

*shouldn't* the periods of protection be
DECREASING as our society speeds up and
pieces/parts of our culture are fragmented,
sampled, re-mixed, and assimilated at an
incredible pace ? ? ?

the nike swooshtika hasn't sold a gazillion
tee shirts/etc because of the inherent artfulness,
creativity, and appeal of that design; it has
sold a gazillion because THE PEOPLE MADE
IT POPULAR, IT 'BELONGS' to US...

on top of it all, greedy rat *******s in
corporations -and other public figures-
are trying mightily to remove any and
all usage for 'fair use', so that they can't be
made fun of with their own useless crap...

my two centavos...

eof

On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 22:58:54 -0500, Brian wrote:

Such a sad state the American legal system is in that these things --
which IMO are in some cases out-and-out extortion, and in all cases
flagrant abuse of the legal system -- are allowed to continue.

Playing Devil's Avocado for a moment...

Monster Cable have a legal duty to do this, as the law permits them to
issue these vexatious suits and their duty to their shareholders
requires them to extort money from all possible avenues. Don't blame
Monster for this, blame the unholy mess that is the US legal system.

The suits are bad and wrong. But they're perfectly legal, and if you
don't have a court system that will reject them out of hand, them
Monster are just acting in a way that's being positively encouraged.


For a UK version of this, take a look at "EasyJet" and the owner's
ferocious pursuit of Easy* names

--
Smert' spamionam

"Joe" wrote in message
For pro audio (AKa not home or car audio most of the time) monaster cable
makes 100% lifetime guaranteed stuff don't they?

For a traveling band or high traffic studio / stage environment, that is
worth it alone IMHO.

Nope. I've owned a recording studio (www.hsound.com) since 1978, and played
in many a "traveling band".

I've never used the cables in the studio because of the price/performance
ratio, and I don't know anyone who does for very long, at least anyone who
has been in the studio business longer than the 2 years the average
"recording studio" stays in business.

IME, they are a consumer item whose connectors don't last with rugged use.

I did try them with on my basses many years ago, but they broke so often
that, despite the warranty, I went back to something I could more easily fix
with a soldering iron in Podunk, GA on a Saturday night.

I once had a certified gold set of way better than average ears, have
recorded and mixed over 200 albums with these same ears, and I was always of
the opinion that anyone who falls for Monster's claims has too much spare
change, along with a large helping of naiveté.

But what the hell ... if Eric Johnson can tell the difference between brands
of 9 volt batteries in his guitar pedals, who am I to say?

Just my experience ... ymmv

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04

"Andy Dingley" wrote in message
...

Monster Cable have a legal duty to do this, as the law permits them to
issue these vexatious suits and their duty to their shareholders
requires them to extort money from all possible avenues. Don't blame
Monster for this, blame the unholy mess that is the US legal system.

Well, you can lay blame on Monster Cable as equally they are not required by
law to persue this avenue. Just because it is legal does NOT mean that is
Morally Correct. The laws are a problem but equally a problem are those
that choose the law to legally cast injustices on others.

Legal or not, you can with out reservation condemn or shun the people that
choose the immoral route.

"Andy Dingley" wrote in message

The suits are bad and wrong. But they're perfectly legal,

F*ck "legal" .. this example of hijacking a word in common usage for
_exclusive_ commercial purposes is a "wrong" that needs to be "righted".

Recall the tired old comeback that it was once "perfectly legal" to own
slaves, or in your case, to abuse a serf.

Lawyers (and law schools where "legal" always takes precedence over "moral",
if the latter is ever mentioned at all) and politicians decide what's
"legal" .. often an indictment from the very getgo, as this example
illustrates.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04

"Swingman" wrote in message
...
"Andy Dingley" wrote in message

The suits are bad and wrong. But they're perfectly legal,

F*ck "legal" .. this example of hijacking a word in common usage for
_exclusive_ commercial purposes is a "wrong" that needs to be "righted".


Snip,


I think we just demonstrated Good Cop, Bad Cop, in responding to "Its
Legal". LOL

On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 21:55:04 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:

|On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 23:18:23 -0500, "leonard"
|wrote:
|
|I hope monster cable wins . they are only doing what any business does to
|protect it very valuable name.Others that use similar names should expect to
|looked also. Copy right laws exist for a purpose. but do not worry about
|this small company (he's fine), he has done it for the free publicity for
|his business.
|
|
|Leonard,
|
| I have filed for a trademark on the letter "L", anyone else's use
|of that letter would be a violation of a mark that would devalue my
|trademark. I expect $1000 per year and 1% of your gross sales or income
|for the continued use of my trademarked letter "L". Please respond with
|your certified funds or discontinue the use of my letter "L". Is that
|clear _eonard?

Actually, the University of Arizona has a trademark on the letter "A".
I should hope so after the silly *******s spent a ton of my tax money
having some company design the new "A" logo.

http://policy.web.arizona.edu/~policy/trademark.shtml

Also, I believe it was "60 Minutes" that did a piece on some poor soul
in Scotland or Ireland, named McDonald, who had the nerve to use
his/her own name on a restaurant. McDonald's was suing to protect
their good name. I'm surprised they haven't sued the U of A too,
after all, "McDonald's" has an "a" in its name.

What a Kroc.

"Leon" wrote in message

Well, you can lay blame on Monster Cable as equally they are not required
by
law to persue this avenue.

Bingo! ... nor were they forced to use a word in common usage in their
business name.

However, they _are_ more or less 'required by law" to pursue any use of the
phrase "Monster Cable" in order to maintain their rights.

This has been stretched by precedent (bought and paid for, I am sure) to the
point of ridiculousness whereby the individual common usage words that make
up the phrase.are concerned.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04

"Wes Stewart" wrote in message

What a Kroc.

LOL!

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04

On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 00:24:29 -0800, "mp" wrote:

| I recall a test done by Stereo Review some years ago. In blind testing,
| none of the listeners could tell the difference between Monster cable,
| other high priced brands, and lamp cord.
|
|More that likely either the tests were faulty of the reviewers had tin ears.
|Probably a combination of both.

Oh sure.

http://www.national.com/rap/Story/0,1562,3,00.html

"Andy Dingley" wrote in message
Don't blame
Monster for this, blame the unholy mess that is the US legal system.

The suits are bad and wrong. But they're perfectly legal, and if you
don't have a court system that will reject them out of hand, them
Monster are just acting in a way that's being positively encouraged.

It may be legal, but no one is forcing them to do anything that is immoral.
It is not the system of laws encouraging them, it is unethical lawyers out
looking to make a buck, how matter how.

On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 00:24:29 -0800, "mp" wrote:

I recall a test done by Stereo Review some years ago. In blind testing,
none of the listeners could tell the difference between Monster cable,
other high priced brands, and lamp cord.

More that likely either the tests were faulty of the reviewers had tin ears.
Probably a combination of both.

More likely that the reviewers had very good ears but not
a whole heck of a lot of imagination.