Copyright, Patent, General Intellectual Property Discussion (Branch from M32 Thread)

[Charlie McGee]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

When a drunk driver wins their court case and goes free, it doesn't mean that they weren't drunk, and driving..

Jason

Jason, you're right, but in this case there were over 3 independant validations of Behringer's theory. Not just the court, but also more than one expert witness and a U.S. patent examiner who granted Behringer their own patent. Who do you believe should settle a dispute like this?

Seriously, if all of the emotions are stripped from this matter here's what we have: Peavey thought JR's patent was copied. Behringer thought that they had an original invention. A judge, expert witnesses, and a US patent examiner all agreed with Behringer's position that there was no copying and he was permitted to take his invention to the marketplace. I find it odd that people disagree with me on the Behringer matter. It isn't my opinion. It's just the facts. Here's the thing-- people can disagree with me and dislike me forever. It won't change the facts. When it comes to the dispute, Behringer won, got their patent and sold their product. Everything else is hurt feelings, reputation, rumors, and wishful thinking.

 

[Matt Lillie]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

"If the glove don't fit"

People get away with stuff all the time.

 

[John Roberts]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

I get that it's easier to attack me than to provide any factual argument to shut me up. Speculating about me and when I will go away is certainly far easier than providing any factual argument to shut me up. JR, my argument is extremely credible and valid. There was a court case and we already know how that ended. No need to restate it.

I have provided factual accounts of my personal experience and understanding of the sundry issues.

There have been multiple court cases over the years. With that much smoke there was surely some fire? I have even heard the claim that the lawsuits were some form of marketing strategy, really? Why would several companies gang up against Behringer? A more plausible explanation is that these sundry companies believed they were wronged, and pursued relief in the courts. Again this is all public record, while most settlements are private.

I agree with Kemper, I'd also like to take this time to personally thank you for your contributions to these forums over the past years.

You are welcome.

But, your contributions are lessened when you dismiss the court of law,

How my posts are valued is not my primary concern. Again, please stop the false attributions. I do not dismiss the court of law even if I do not agree with their findings. I accept it.

While I was first to invent FLS, and Peavey did secure a utility patent covering my invention, it is very possible that the claims language in that original patent filing was not written broadly enough to prevent leaving wiggle room for a legal copy. I know that I did it first and then it was copied. The legality of that copy is now a settled issue in a US court.

a patent examiner

Just to be factual.. I do not dispute Behringer receiving an improvement patent. Saying that I dismiss the patent examiner is yet one more false attribution (straw man argument).

They did come up with a tweak to my invention that makes it cheaper as I have previously also stated. They shifted the hold circuit from the individual bandpasses to the final compound comparator. This eliminates some 30 small capacitors so is a significant cost reduction. In my judgement this is not a new invention but a variation made to mine. A patent can be issued for an improvement without changing the authority of the first patent. The second patent only protects the new variation not the basic technology.

At this point the legality of this has been argued and settled in court so moot. I am not making new arguments to challenge that legal standing, but explaining my personal perspective.

and expert witnesses in favor of your own judgment.

Expert witnesses and lawyers are paid to argue one position or the other. Just like Peavey's expert witnesses and lawyers would agree with me, it is very likely that I disagree with Behringer's hired guns, that is the nature of legal disputes.

Seems a bit pathetic for someone who has such a rich history on this site.

You are entitled to your opinion, and me mine. It is an old axiom about arguments, that when one side lowers the level of discourse to ad hominum (personal attack like calling me pathetic) that is evidence that they are losing the argument (or believe they are losing).

I am pleased that many people value my judgement and I try to be fair about all topics. I do not expect to please all the people all the time, That is life.

As I have said before I take no pleasure from this discussion. This is ancient history for Behringer and for me.

That said You don't get to re-write history and neither do I. The history is what it is, and many here have lived through it. That collective industry experience informs readers here about which of us is writing truth and which is creative writing.

Finally, I don't work for Behringer. Never have and have never even applied. I have observed this discussion with a great deal of curiosity and it's clear to me that Behringer is treated unfairly. I don't like it so I am going to stick around for a while.

You can express your opinions, but don't confuse repetition and attributing false claims to me for new information or thoughtful discourse. Once again I do not appreciate the personal invectives hurled my way. I have received more personal insults from you in this one exchange than from years of participation on several forums. I am a big boy and I can take it but i do not like it. You will not win any argument with me by being insulting, it just reflects poorly on your presentation.

JR

 

[Scott Helmke]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

Jason, you're right, but in this case there were over 3 independant validations of Behringer's theory. Not just the court, but also more than one expert witness and a U.S. patent examiner who granted Behringer their own patent. Who do you believe should settle a dispute like this?

Seriously, if all of the emotions are stripped from this matter here's what we have: Peavey thought JR's patent was copied. Behringer thought that they had an original invention. A judge, expert witnesses, and a US patent examiner all agreed with Behringer's position that there was no copying and he was permitted to take his invention to the marketplace. I find it odd that people disagree with me on the Behringer matter. It isn't my opinion. It's just the facts. Here's the thing-- people can disagree with me and dislike me forever. It won't change the facts. When it comes to the dispute, Behringer won, got their patent and sold their product. Everything else is hurt feelings, reputation, rumors, and wishful thinking.

Charlie, the big problem that you're butting your head against here is that your sudden appearance and choice of arguments would tend to very closely fit the pattern of what is known as an Internet "sock puppet".
Sockpuppet (Internet) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You can easily validate yourself here by becoming a part of the community, by sharing in discussions about live sound and related issues. Several months and perhaps a few dozen good responses in threads unrelated to Behringer's murky legal/ethical history would give you (and your arguments) a much better reputation.

 

[Joe Sanborn]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

Dear Guys,

Let me start first, by saying that our strict company policy requires every employee posting on forums to ALWAYS use their real name and association with the MUSIC Group. You can check my profile on LinkedIn.

The other people who post from our company are the CEO, Uli Behringer, John DiNicola (NYC), Evan Hooton (Colorado), Sean Fairchild (Seattle), Mario VanHelden (Germany), and from the Professional Division Chase McKnight, and Kyle Chirnside (Las Vegas). If other staff help out, they also identify themselves as employees.

Our team of Product Specialists are primarily involved with the forums to answer questions about our products. The X32 alone has represented the largest ever thread on SoundForums with over 1 million views. As a sound engineer myself, I fully understand that when you need help with a product, you require immediate assistance as “the show must go on”. For this reason, we answer forum questions, PM messages, emails, and even phone calls in the evening and on weekends. We are passionate about our products and the company we work for and hence we are going out of our way to help our customers.

In addition to answering product questions, we are also here to set the record straight in case there is misinformation. For many years, we have stayed out of forums and kept silent; as a result we left the playing field to certain individuals and also competitors who deliberately spread wrong information. While we are not here to “rewrite history” as often claimed, we will stand up and correct false information – all this through providing proper facts.

In today’s global Internet culture, “myths” often develop a life of their own and manifest themselves. If it is on the internet, it must be true, right?

One of the cases that endures in people’s memories is when we were sued by Mackie over alleged infringement of their alleged IP. After a series of very costly and bitter court cases all of which we won, Mackie reached out to us for a settlement which did not involve any money.
It is important that you carefully read what the BEHRINGER Wiki says: “The Mackie suit also mentioned similar cases filed by BBE, dbx and Drawmer.” Among the many accusations Mackie made in their complaints, this was another false one – we were never sued by BBE, dbx or Drawmer. Just to clarify once more, we also did not copy Mackie’s schematics and PCBs as proven in court. The persistent rumor that we had competitor’s logos on our PCB’s, is plain stupid. It was proven in multiple courts that we had neither copied Mackie’s schematics nor PCB layouts, nor had we infringed on any patents as there were simply none.

If you need more information, please refer to Uli’s earlier post here.

The MUSIC Group is leading the industry with ground-breaking products and we are very proud of our achievements. We just won 6 major industry awards at the recent NAMM show, earned only by those who are producing the most innovative products and pushing the envelope in terms of technology. As an employee myself, I say this out of pride and also for all the thousands of people at MUSIC Group involved.

Having worked for 8 years for MUSIC Group, I could not be prouder of the work we’re doing. If anyone is in China, we invite you to come by our factory; if you happen to be in Las Vegas, please stop by our CARE facility. If you are in the UK, drop by our MIDAS Research facility, and if you are in Los Angeles, let me take you to lunch and talk about any aspect of our products.

We are a dedicated global group of engineers with extreme passion for what we do as we are now building the next Big Thing.

 

[John Roberts]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

Jason, you're right, but in this case there were over 3 independant validations of Behringer's theory. Not just the court, but also more than one expert witness and a U.S. patent examiner who granted Behringer their own patent. Who do you believe should settle a dispute like this?

Those findings are a matter of record and not in dispute.

Seriously, if all of the emotions are stripped from this matter here's what we have: Peavey thought JR's patent was copied. Behringer thought that they had an original invention. A judge, expert witnesses, and a US patent examiner all agreed with Behringer's position that there was no copying and he was permitted to take his invention to the marketplace. I find it odd that people disagree with me on the Behringer matter. It isn't my opinion. It's just the facts. Here's the thing-- people can disagree with me and dislike me forever. It won't change the facts. When it comes to the dispute, Behringer won, got their patent and sold their product. Everything else is hurt feelings, reputation, rumors, and wishful thinking.

Peavey invented and filed a patent for FLS trying to protect it from being copied and Behringer managed to legally knock-off that very successful product. Peavey sued to defend what it believed it had secured patent protection for. The court sided with Behringer.

It is obviously clever business to knock off other company's successful products if you can. Parsing the narrow legal definitions about what is or is not a "legal" copy, means less than what is right and wrong to the court of public opinion. What actually happened is apparent to any who were active in the industry at the time.

i view this as a matter of principle and ethics, not just what is legal. I also consider this ancient history. All this legal nit picking will not change my personal recollection of events that I lived.

JR

[edit- I did not see Joe's post before I posted this, so I am not responding to his specific comments. /edit]

 

[Charlie McGee]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

i view this as a matter of principle and ethics, not just what is legal.

Of course you do because you can't win the legal argument. Who defines principles and ethics in this case? You? That's awfully convenient. Actually you have attacked Behringer's character, his principles and his ethics. You have accused him of copying and have offered ZERO proof of your claims. On the other hand, Behringer has convinced a judge, won a lawsuit, registered the patent and put the product in the marketplace. Those are the facts. Attacking a man's character while offering no facts to support your position is pretty low. Who really has behaved unethically here?

 

[Per Søvik]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

Who really has behaved unethically here?

JR isn't the one starting these arguments, he's simply defending his beliefs, and when did that become unethical?

Why don't you just accuse JR for treason while you're at it, he has been criticizing the government on more than one occasion 8)~~

 

[Mike Smith]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

You are a real firestarter, Charlie McGee.

If you love Music Group so much, maybe you and they should go get a room.

 

[Kemper Watson]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

You are the only one attacking character.

 

[Rob Timmerman]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

Of course you do because you can't win the legal argument. Who defines principles and ethics in this case? You? That's awfully convenient. Actually you have attacked Behringer's character, his principles and his ethics. You have accused him of copying and have offered ZERO proof of your claims. On the other hand, Behringer has convinced a judge, won a lawsuit, registered the patent and put the product in the marketplace. Those are the facts. Attacking a man's character while offering no facts to support your position is pretty low. Who really has behaved unethically here?

There was a time when many Behringer products bore more similarities to competitive products that predated them in the marketplace than was needed from a purely functional aspect. This trend included product documentation that in some cases appeared to by a word-for-word copy of another manufacturer's documentation. Specific examples were hashed out on various online fora that predate this one (including at least one that has since undergone some major changes, potentially includig the loss of forum archives), and I won't belabor them here.

US intellectual property laws provide relatively weak protection for functional designs, covering them under Design Patents, and then only if the patent is granted. Filing and enforcement costs may make a design patent impractical, especially if the design is not especially novel (an analog mixer layout tends to follow a primarily functional path, although each designer may make their own tweaks, so is likely not worth protecting). Likewise, the USPTO has stated that circuit board designs are not covered by copyright (and neither are circuit schematics typically, although those may be covered by patent). So new iterations on designs (particularly for products designed to a price point) are typically unprotected from an IP point of view.

While it may be straightforward for a designer in a given field (someone "skilled in the art") to design a new product, that takes R+D time and effort. Modifying an existing design tends to be quicker and easier, as the fundamentals have already been proven. It has been suggested that Behringer (the company, not the founder personally) has a history of "borrowing" designs (not just feature sets) from the marketplace as starting points for their own product lines, likely to reduce R+D time and costs. While this may be legal under the specific IP framework set out by the USPTO, it does tend to irk designers and companies who have spent time and money creating a new design instead of using somebody else's design. (Of interest, this situation is completely different legally for cover bands, although the scenario is very similar).

 

[Tim McCulloch]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

Charlie, I'll say this here because:

a) you deserve it and
b) I can get away with it.

You're a douche bag of the carpetbagger variety.

You make your grand entrance with a flame attack on a respected and well known industry figure whose designs were infringed, in fact if not in legality. Your failure to comprehend the distinction between those and your insistence that your hero did no wrong, is why you're a douche bag.

If you have something of substance to contribute here, please do so. If you have expertise in pro audio beyond your lovefest for Behringer, it's welcome here. Being an asshole, however, means you've earned you a spot in my Iggy Bin. I don't expect that to influence you one way or another, but consider that some of the biggest names in pro audio (manufacturers, sales reps, regional and national providers and their officers, band engineers, fixed installation contractors and users, etc) lurk here without posting often or at all. You've yet to stop stepping on you male appendage since post #1. Please do so, and find some topic to contribute to that will help negate some of the ill will you have created.

And yes, this is a one-way conversation now as I no longer see your posts...

ps. If you tour the US, I or some of my union brothers will undoubtedly meet you. I hope you're nicer in person as the contempt you display here will make it difficult for stagehands, Teamsters, IBEW electricians, and other technicians to justify putting forth any extra efforts on your behalf.

 

[Steve Payne]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

The case of O.J. Simpson always comes to mind when someone brings up a court decision as indisputable evidence of guilt or innocence.

 

[John Roberts]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

Of course you do because you can't win the legal argument.

Perhaps you were not listening, but as I said before, I no longer have an economic interest in this. My patent was assigned, other stuff was work for hire. So I have no personal damages or legal basis to pursue, even if I was so inclined. (now you with all your defamatory accusations and false statements attributed to me might be another matter, but relax this kind of attack is all to common on the WWW, and I am not litigious, just annoyed)..

Who defines principles and ethics in this case? You? That's awfully convenient.

While I have my strong opinions, no I am not arbiter for right and wrong here. That is more what the forum community thinks is right and wrong. Surely not a monotonic uniform belief system, as evidenced by your very aggressive arguments for your viewpoint as a (very new) member here.

Perhaps a poll might determine if I am an isolated outlier, or if these are widely held beliefs among experienced professionals here. Of course a subjective belief being widely held does not mean that it is correct, and your "legal" centric arguments have helped refine and inform that understanding (hopefully). Just like you characterize copying as "competition", I would characterize this ex post facto management of brand perception is "marketing" and it does influence the value of that intangible asset (aka IP).

Actually you have attacked Behringer's character, his principles and his ethics.

Actually no, and I apologize if he is taking this personally. That is not my intent. I speak only about the company's (past) behavior. It seems I am spending more time defending myself against your creative interpretations of my position.

You have accused him of copying and have offered ZERO proof of your claims.

I have demonstrated my priority in the two cases that personally involved me. I never called the small mixer an "illegal" copy, and now the patented technology was later determined by a court to be legal use. Even if I do not agree, I accept that court ruling.

On the other hand, Behringer has convinced a judge, won a lawsuit, registered the patent and put the product in the marketplace. Those are the facts.

A legal copy does not mean that it isn't a copy, only that it is legal.

Attacking a man's character while offering no facts to support your position is pretty low. Who really has behaved unethically here?

Again I am not attacking the man (I have already been warned privately about slander). I am addressing a company's past behavior. In fact I am not attacking this behavior unilaterally, but pushing back against an IMO too rosy re-characterization of that period in time. I along with many here lived through the period so already have an understanding and strong opinions based on our own personal experience. I also understand the difficulty of separating personal behavior from from corporate behavior for a wholly owned company.

Laws and what is legal behavior only covers a fairly narrow segment of human behavior with very high standards of proof. Running a business involves more than just avoiding prosecution or unfavorable court rulings, while the legal system and regulation only defines the extremes of acceptable corporate behavior.

I grow weary of your repeated rephrasing of my position, but even you have helped inform this discussion with your pedantry.

JR

 

[Charlie McGee]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

Despite what you might think, I am not a Music Group superfan. They aren't perfect. I have owned many Behringer products and some I have liked more than others. Even Uli himself has admitted that they have made some mistakes in the past.

Likewise, I am not into the character assassination of JR. He strikes me as a smart guy who has made good contributions to the industry.

I have been in the technology Industry for a long time and I understand IP. My problem is how Behringer is treated on this forum. If you are going to make claims about illegal copying you need to assert facts to prove it. Especially in the face of so many facts to the contrary. There must be a fair standard or people can just claim anything. Business is defined around law and not be personal beliefs or "ethical" standards defined by JR.

 

[Arik Semagin]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

...I have been in the technology Industry for a long time and I understand IP. My problem is how Behringer is treated on this forum. If you are going to make claims about illegal copying you need to assert facts to prove it. Especially in the face of so many facts to the contrary. There must be a fair standard or people can just claim anything. Business is defined around law and not be personal beliefs or "ethical" standards defined by JR.

Just my 2c: I think some people here hate Uli Behringer for one reason: he is a success story. He doesn't really need to be defended. There will be always someone who will talk shit about him and B-branded gear in general, based on hearsay or past experience. While I totally support John Roberts in his ethical vs. legal position, there's nothing can be done if IP wasn't adequately protected. If not Behringer, somebody else would've done it. And yes, sometimes lawyers and experts win the courts, not the truth. (O.J.Simpson 1995 trial is the prime example). There's a lot more shady court rulings in computer and software industry, and also in music copyrights. There were numerous accusations that Mark Zuckerberg stole the idea of Facebook from his college mates, but ..... he's the one who implemented it.

I'm surprised that Uli takes time to answer some accusations here personally. Most other technology leaders wouldn't even bother.

There's new aggressive player in the same entry-level market segment, InMusic Brands (ALTO, AKAI Pro, Alesis, Numark, M-AUDIO and a few others). Some of their small-format mixers looks suspiciously similar to Behringer's mixers. It would be interesting to see how the competition unfolds and how much of a copying will take place.

 

[Tim Padrick]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

Patent examiners, attorneys, "experts" and judges all f*** up sometimes. Whether any of them did in JRs case is unknown to me. But the possibility is certainly there.

 

[Scott Helmke]

Re: New Midas M32 Console

OK, let's all stop feeding the troll.

 

[David Sturzenbecher]

Copyright, Patent, General Intellectual Property Discussion (Branch from M32 ...

One thing this discussion has done is stirred up the "not so squeaky clean" Behringer past to a whole new generation. Personally, I knew they made cheaper stuff, and tour engineers rumored of them copying the drawmer comps, but the multiple point of view history lesson is appreciated. I wouldn't have purchased Behrenger products in the past and don't see that changing, as the products simply don't fit my client base.

 

[Tim McCulloch]

Re: Copyright, Patent, General Intellectual Property Discussion (Branch from M32 ...

One thing this discussion has done is stirred up the "not so squeaky clean" Behringer past to a whole new generation. Personally, I knew they made cheaper stuff, and tour engineers rumored of them copying the drawmer comps, but the multiple point of view history lesson is appreciated. I wouldn't have purchased Behrenger products in the past and don't see that changing, as the products simply don't fit my client base.

Kind of like finding "no Peavey, no Behringer, no Allen-heath....." in a rider. I don't see anyone jumping up to defend Allen-Heath, who has a pretty good track record over the past 15 years or so. But they make a shitty mixer 20 years ago and have never been forgiven. At least they didn't make obvious appropriations of IP, I guess that's what it takes to get someone like McGee to be a shill.