Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="harrybrilljr" data-source="post: 89572" data-attributes="member: 103">Re: List of digital consolesI saw the desk for the first time Sat.  Scuttlebutt at FOH was these are having fader issues.  Bad news travels fast.  The guy that actually brought the desk liked it very much.  A world class engineer with lots of snow on the mountain, I spoke with last week said it sounded very good.  He was shocked and excited at the same time.  I won't use his name here but if he reads this he may post himself.  He can have any desk he wants.  He was at a festival or a one off and they had this mixer and he liked it fine.There is no doubt there is a reputation that is well earned.  I have used small mixers 4 channels that sounded worse than any consumer electronics I've ever owned.  Then there is this.....<a href="http://cachepe.zzounds.com/media/quality,85/swizz-ctlefthorizontal_clipped-0facc277a2d383473148b0af63225f9d.jpg" target="_blank">http://cachepe.zzounds.com/media/quality,85/swizz-ctlefthorizontal_clipped-0facc277a2d383473148b0af63225f9d.jpg</a><a href="http://www.copystars.com/images_products/behringer_cable_tester_ct100_b20006.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.copystars.com/images_products/behringer_cable_tester_ct100_b20006.jpg</a>Legal casesIn June 1997, Mackie accused Behringer of trademark and trade dress infringement, and brought suit seeking $327M in damages[15][16] but such claims were later rejected by the court. In their suit, Mackie said that Behringer had a history of copying products by other manufacturers and selling them as their own.[17] The Mackie suit detailed an instance in which Behringer was sued by Aphex Systems for copying the Aural Exciter Type F—in that case Aphex Systems won 690,000 Deutsche Mark.[17] The Mackie suit also mentioned similar cases filed by BBE, dbx and Drawmer.[17] On 30 November 1999, the U.S. District Court in Seattle, Washington, dismissed Mackie claims that Behringer had infringed on Mackie copyrights with its MX 8000 mixer, noting that circuit schematics are not covered by copyright laws.[18][19][20]In 2005, Roland Corporation sued to enforce Roland's trade dress, trademark, and other intellectual property rights with regard to Behringer's recently released guitar pedals.[21] The two companies came to a confidential settlement in 2006 after Behringer changed their designs.[22]In 2009 Peavey Electronics Corp. filed two lawsuits against various companies under Behringer/Music Group umbrella for patent infringement, federal and common law trademark infringement, false designation of origin, trademark dilution and unfair competition.[23] In 2011 The Music Group filed a lawsuit against Peavey for "false advertising, false patent marking and unfair competition".[24]The law suits were valid.  I walked into Thoroughbred music intending to buy some dbx166.  Sales guy pushed hard for me to buy that MDX1000 autocom ( i still have) because it was "the same" only better and less money (read bigger spiffs for the sales guy).  I bought it and it works fine.  Later dbx sued behringer and Sam Ash, the national distributer (Thoroughbred became Sam Ash but that's unrelated)How many?</blockquote>

Verification

Top Bottom