Log in
Register
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Featured content
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
News
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Features
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to thread
Home
Forums
Off Topic
The Basement
Copyright, Patent, General Intellectual Property Discussion (Branch from M32 Thread)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="John Roberts" data-source="post: 115553" data-attributes="member: 126"><p>Re: New Midas M32 Console</p><p></p><p></p><p>Perhaps you have a different life experience. Some of us have worked inside the industry for decades and have personal experiences and memories. </p><p></p><p>I haven't called him evil. He seems personable enough. IMO some of the blatant copying during his rapid line-extension period strikes me as borderline unethical. I take no pleasure from re-hashing this over and over. I do not start threads about this or bring up the subject. I generally respond to attempts to re-write history, disputing that past (kind of like this one). I have much better things to do with my time. I wish people would just stop talking about it. </p><p></p><p>I really do not want to have to dig up chapter and verse. The lawsuits are public record. Some were settled, a number of them he won. He won the court case when sued about my FLS invention. </p><p></p><p>Do you really want me to list them? There are several here... <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behringer" target="_blank">Behringer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</a> Frankly I try to forget about them. </p><p></p><p>copied my invention... </p><p></p><p>Life is too short for me to parse patent law with you on a public forum. And I was not in that court room so I did not hear exactly what was said. I read the judge's ruling after it was over and Peavey's complaint was dismissed. So Behringer won by not losing. </p><p></p><p>I do not hold myself above the law, that does not change the timeline of who came up with the idea first, and who came up with a legal copy second. </p><p></p><p>The court has ruled that he did not infringe on my patent. I do not dispute the ruling even if I do not agree with it. </p><p></p><p>Think about it. Perhaps I'm objective about this too (and a little sad). </p><p></p><p>If you have the time, understanding of patent law, and familiarity with discrete circuit design I'll be glad to present my arguments, but what's the point? I do not have a commercial interest in this and it's been settled by the courts. To me it's just a matter of principle. Peavey's lawyers and expert witnesses lost to Behringer's lawyers and expert witnesses. It was a legal contest and they won in the legal arena. Congratulations. </p><p></p><p>I concede he is "not infringing" on my invention. I still know I was copied but apparently it was within the law. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Seriously do you want more of this... ? Most people want this to just go away. Me included. </p><p></p><p>OK here's another example I was involved with. Here's a small mixer I did years ago at Peavey... </p><p></p><p><img src="http://c1.zzounds.com/media/quality,85/rq200_lg-60b6ea78936c15170e11902fd68e6a3b.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" /></p><p></p><p>Here's the Behringer version that came out shortly after it was in the market... </p><p></p><p><img src="http://www.behringer.com/assets/1002B_P0A04_Top_XL.png" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" /></p><p></p><p>As I mentioned before it isn't worth the trouble and expense to file design patents for every single SKU, but the resemblance between these two mixers strikes me as more than coincidence, but things like this are not worth the trouble to pursue. They're probably just different enough. </p><p></p><p>Please do not ask for more. </p><p></p><p>JR</p><p></p><p>PS: I noticed while searching for this old mixer doppelganger pair, that the old forum discussion links talking about this had been scrubbed... maybe it's just coincidence.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="John Roberts, post: 115553, member: 126"] Re: New Midas M32 Console Perhaps you have a different life experience. Some of us have worked inside the industry for decades and have personal experiences and memories. I haven't called him evil. He seems personable enough. IMO some of the blatant copying during his rapid line-extension period strikes me as borderline unethical. I take no pleasure from re-hashing this over and over. I do not start threads about this or bring up the subject. I generally respond to attempts to re-write history, disputing that past (kind of like this one). I have much better things to do with my time. I wish people would just stop talking about it. I really do not want to have to dig up chapter and verse. The lawsuits are public record. Some were settled, a number of them he won. He won the court case when sued about my FLS invention. Do you really want me to list them? There are several here... [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behringer]Behringer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url] Frankly I try to forget about them. copied my invention... Life is too short for me to parse patent law with you on a public forum. And I was not in that court room so I did not hear exactly what was said. I read the judge's ruling after it was over and Peavey's complaint was dismissed. So Behringer won by not losing. I do not hold myself above the law, that does not change the timeline of who came up with the idea first, and who came up with a legal copy second. The court has ruled that he did not infringe on my patent. I do not dispute the ruling even if I do not agree with it. Think about it. Perhaps I'm objective about this too (and a little sad). If you have the time, understanding of patent law, and familiarity with discrete circuit design I'll be glad to present my arguments, but what's the point? I do not have a commercial interest in this and it's been settled by the courts. To me it's just a matter of principle. Peavey's lawyers and expert witnesses lost to Behringer's lawyers and expert witnesses. It was a legal contest and they won in the legal arena. Congratulations. I concede he is "not infringing" on my invention. I still know I was copied but apparently it was within the law. Seriously do you want more of this... ? Most people want this to just go away. Me included. OK here's another example I was involved with. Here's a small mixer I did years ago at Peavey... [img]http://c1.zzounds.com/media/quality,85/rq200_lg-60b6ea78936c15170e11902fd68e6a3b.jpg[/img] Here's the Behringer version that came out shortly after it was in the market... [img]http://www.behringer.com/assets/1002B_P0A04_Top_XL.png[/img] As I mentioned before it isn't worth the trouble and expense to file design patents for every single SKU, but the resemblance between these two mixers strikes me as more than coincidence, but things like this are not worth the trouble to pursue. They're probably just different enough. Please do not ask for more. JR PS: I noticed while searching for this old mixer doppelganger pair, that the old forum discussion links talking about this had been scrubbed... maybe it's just coincidence. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Off Topic
The Basement
Copyright, Patent, General Intellectual Property Discussion (Branch from M32 Thread)
Top
Bottom
Sign-up
or
log in
to join the discussion today!
