Stupid Monster lawsuit of the day

PolkThug

**This is not an actual lawsuit** -PT

Proceeding 76558864

Monster files against Revell-Monogram LLC over a monster truck model. It never ends. Good thing too, because boy was I suprised when I opened the box to find a 1/25 scale model truck instead of a speaker wire.

RuSsMaN

Why do they do this? I don't get it. How are any of these things hurting or affecting their business? Are they actually winning any suits, or do they have SO much money, they can afford to sue EVERYONE.

I don't see the point here, they are the LARGEST cable manufacturer in the WORLD, no? You can hardly walk into a shop and buy ANYTHING BUT Monster cables. Radio Shack, Best Buy, Circuit City, Tweeter, Ultimate Electronics.

They have the brick and mortar retail market cornered.

Cheers,
Russ

jdhdiggs

Seriously though, don't most of these companies have some sort of prior use protection on their items that have any type of monster tag?

How long has Monster cable been in business? I remember monster trucks forever...


Man, if I were a judge, I would slap a several million dollar fine on Monster every time they came in the court room for wasting the other companies and the courts time.

Still suprising that they have not sued monster.com though....

PhantomOG

also on the currently being sued list is the Sesame Workshop for the "Monster Clubhouse" (for the Cookie Monster and such), and Hanna-Barbara for "Scooby-Do and the Monster of Mexico.

I emailed them. This was the response. I did not call (lost interest), but if you do call, let me me know what they say and how Sesame Street is diluting their brand.

From Dave Tognotti:

Brian

Thank you for your message. Before you rush to judgment you should have all the facts. Please feel free to call me to discuss further at 415-840-2000. I welcome your call, and calls from any of your friends.

Our trademark protection strategy is reasonable and necessary to protect our brand. We have invested an extraordinary amount of money and effort over the last 26 years to build our brand. It is wrong for companies to leverage our brand identity and goodwill for their own gain.

You may know us as Monster Cable, however we have many business units which sell other products under the Monster brand such as: clothing, furniture, food products, apparel, automotive products, amplifiers, training services, speakers, gaming products, and music, to name a few. Because our product line has grown so broadly we have to protect our trademark in many areas.

Trademarks are important to companies and to consumers. They tell consumers what they are getting is the genuine article made by and backed by the company identified by the trademark. Monster's work to protect its trademark also protects consumers who might think that some of these goods are made by Monster, when they are not of the same quality and standards of Monster goods.

I know you are concerned about the trademark related lawsuits we have filed, please know:

We do not file a lawsuit without having a compelling legal and business reason to do so, and in the majority of the cases, only after giving the infringing party ample warning and sufficient opportunity to resolve the matter on reasonable terms. A lawsuit is a last resort option.

We do not seek to profit off of these lawsuits. In fact, they are very costly. We sue to protect our brand from dilution and infringement, not to make money. Unfortunately, this is a necessary cost doing of business when you have a famous brand, and as long as there are unscrupulous people who want to trade off of someone else's brand.

Monster is a famous trademark, that has come to stand for our unique products which broadly range from stereo cables (the first MCP product) and interconnects to power products, automotive accessories, clothing, video game products, home theater products including M Design furniture and even Monster mints. Because our product line has grown so broadly we have to protect our trademark in many areas.

We don't target small businesses. We have sued large multinational companies when it was necessary to protect our brand. In fact, we are involved in several suits right now with companies that are many times larger than us. We don't focus on the size of a company before suing them. We focus on whether or not their activity is (or has the chance to) harm our company and brand.

We have over 50 "Monster" trademarks registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office, for many products (not just cable). Many of these "Monster" trademarks are incontestable and have been registered for over 20+ years.

We know we don't own the word Monster, nor do we purport to, however, we like any other trademark holder do have the right and need to protect our Monster brand when it is in danger of being diluted, tarnished, or infringed.

We are still a family company, owned and run by our founder, Noel Lee. He started our company in his parent's garage 25 years ago. He named the company "Monster" and created the Monster brand long before anyone else had the courage or marketing foresight to call a company and its products "Monster." We have been using the Monster brand since 1978, it's an important part of the company's culture and stands for the high quality, innovative products that Monster has offered under the Monster trademark for decades, and is worthy of careful protection.

I hope this information helps. We value you as a customer, and hope you stay with us. We feel that our product quality and innovation is second to none, and would like for you to continue to enjoy your music and video in the best way possible.

Thanks,

Dave

PhantomOG

Dave's email address:

dtognotti@monstercable.com

dkg999

I am involved in protecting trademarks for the products my team manages for the company I work for. None of the trademark, patent attorneys I work with advocate this type of aggressiveness. There has to be other reasons Monster feels they need to pursue this. Between this and their heavy-handed tactics at the retailer level, I just have made the personal choice not to support them. As an example, I love the sound of the Klipsch RF-7 speakers, and seriously considered adding a set to my two channel system. The salesperson made the comment that they are wired internally with all Monster wire, etc. That was enough for me, not interested if it's true. Hopefully it's not!

MacLeod

Can you really trademark a word such as Monster? So if I start a business and call it Tornado Enterprises and trademark it, can I sue the National Weather Service everytime they have a tornado alert?

I understand trademarking Polk Audio, or MB Quart and suing anyone using those names without permission but Monster? :rolleyes:

I think Im done buying Monster cables now.

PhantomOG

Originally posted by MacLeod
Can you really trademark a word such as Monster? So if I start a business and call it Tornado Enterprises and trademark it, can I sue the National Weather Service everytime they have a tornado alert?

I understand trademarking Polk Audio, or MB Quart and suing anyone using those names without permission but Monster? :rolleyes:

I think Im done buying Monster cables now.

Good question. I read (can't remember where) that when Monster Cable sued Disney over Monsters, Inc. Disney countered with fillings to say that the word "monster" was too vague to trademark. Monster Cable immediately dropped their suit against Disney.

Joelsbass

Originally posted by PhantomOG
Good question. I read (can't remember where) that when Monster Cable sued Disney over Monsters, Inc. Disney countered with fillings to say that the word "monster" was too vague to trademark. Monster Cable immediately dropped their suit against Disney.

like any bully, push back and they'll fold :cool:

dkg999

If I have time next week I'll try to pull their Trademark's and see what they actually TM'd and under what usage. They may also have service marked some version of "monster". I believe from my discussions with our attorneys that trademarking a generic word like "monster" would be a waste of time and money, if possible at all. Now via a lot of legal moves against anyone without the financial clout to fight back, you could try to carve out a protected usage of the word, but why? It just doesn't make sense! And if you did want to have a case, you would have to take on everyone, big and little. So their selective nature in trying to protect the word "monster" should be an eye-opening piece of information in court.

madmax

For quite some time I've seen Monster as a company living off its name. Compare their products part by part to the competition and you will see they demand almost twice the price for the same quality/performance. Bose if you will. So, sue because someone is trying to use their gold mine? You bet your a$$.
madmax

steveinaz

Let me get this straight, if my wife wants me to get a monster hard-on, I can be sued?

They'll be gettin a call from my wife this evening.....;)

Dennis Gardner

Steve,

I usually don't laugh out loud when I'm the only one in the house, but that was hilarious.



I hope your wife gets to put it to the test!!!:D

Here's to many more infringements!!!!!

DG

madmax

If she actually says "Monster" hard-on and you deliver then I think they have a case.
madmax

ohskigod

if she wrote you a note requesting said "monster" hard on, they would have a stronger legal case.


i posted about this before, i am still slowly swapping the monster cable out of my theater and 2 channel systems. lawsuits against sesame street ensures them a special ticket and seat on the amtrack to hell.



aaaaaalllllllll abooooaaaaaaard!!!!!!!

rskarvan

Xerox failed to protect their trademark and lost it when it attempted to do so after the competition had been abusing the name for years. Seriously. If Monster did not take steps to protect their trademark, they could permanently lose exclusive rights to their own corporate name.

Think about it this way. Pepsi pays BIG BUCKS to promote their name. Without name brand recognition, it simply is a can of flavored carbonated sugar water. Have you ever compared the price of a case of Pepsi to the price of a case of generic Big K cola? I don't know about you... but, l pay the little bit extra to buy PEPSI - simply for the brand name. This is what Monster is trying to protect. Without it, they are simply another wire-company that has to compete entirely via price.

Would we have NASCAR without corporate branding?

- Ron

Joelsbass

i like RC cola... just as good as pepsi and coke.. my ex's stepdad drank it and that's how i got hooked...

exalted512

i drink lemon lime from H-E-B
25 cents a pop from the machines:D
but referring to the xerox thing...i highly doubt people are going to go around saying "give me that monster for my receiver"
i mean how is seasame street living off the monster name?
frickin ridiculous if you ask me
judges should throw it out as soon as they got wind of it
-Cody

fireshoes

I bet Hardee's gets sued for their Monster Thickburger. I saw a segment on NBC news about it. 1400 calories and 107 grams of fat!

Joelsbass

Originally posted by fireshoes
I bet Hardee's gets sued for their Monster Thickburger. I saw a segment on NBC news about it. 1400 calories and 107 grams of fat!

but they sure as hell do taste good

F1nut

Monster......Monster......Monster

There I said it three times.......go ahead and sue me you rat ****.

hotwheelman

Originally posted by F1nut
Monster......Monster......Monster

There I said it three times.......go ahead and sue me you rat ****.

TEE HEE.:D

sowen010599

Hmmmm..... Say it 5 times while looking in a mirror.

See if their lawyers don't pop up behind you with meat-hooks. I'm gonna go try it.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Damn! No luck......... and I had my Glock out and everything. Oh well.

kingtut

If they're so sue-happy, the terrorists over the Middle East call us monsters, why isn't Monster sue the terrorist too?

Toxis

Originally posted by dkg999
I love the sound of the Klipsch RF-7 speakers, and seriously considered adding a set to my two channel system. The salesperson made the comment that they are wired internally with all Monster wire, etc. That was enough for me, not interested if it's true. Hopefully it's not!

Sorry but it's true. Klipsch has jumped on the marketing bandwagon and uses all Z-series (supposedly) wiring internally for their Reference line. Wharfedale uses Monster XP to wire their Diamond line drivers... and they still sound like total dog ****.

RuSsMaN

I find it odd you are so anti-marketing, with a nothing-but-total-spam link for a free ipod in your sig line.

Pot, Kettle, Black, that whole thing?

Cheers,
Russ

brettw22

Originally posted by rskarvan
Think about it this way. Pepsi pays BIG BUCKS to promote their name. Without name brand recognition, it simply is a can of flavored carbonated sugar water. Have you ever compared the price of a case of Pepsi to the price of a case of generic Big K cola? I don't know about you... but, l pay the little bit extra to buy PEPSI - simply for the brand name. This is what Monster is trying to protect. Without it, they are simply another wire-company that has to compete entirely via price.

You just made the case on why their cases are absolutely ridiculous. Your example makes sense because you're comparing Pepsi "flavored carbonated sugar water" to Big K Cola's version of "flavored carbonated sugar water". Apples to apples.....

That's VASTLY different than Monster cable suing companies that (as was noted in the first thread about this a while back) sell vintage used t-shirts, or this threads example of a company that makes 1/25 scale model truck's. Apples to watermelons.....

Monster Cable should be sued for every frivolous lawsuit like this that they file.......

ohskigod

brett called it right

protecting a trademark is one thing, but suing everyone in the planet that uses a common word for blatantly unrelated products is another.

heard a rumor that the trademark office has a seperate room just for Monsters complaints. Monster is certainly not the biggest corporation in the planet, but i bet the trademark office thinks it is.

polktycoon

Monster cables in the news again

M word

Monster Cables Expensive?
Have you ever looked at a set of Monster Cables and thought to yourself, "These idiots at Monster Cable must be out of their minds if they think I am paying them gold standard prices for wire!" Well, it just came to my attention that Monster Cable may have to charge what we see as over inflated prices just to keep the legal fires stoked against every company in the galaxy that uses "monster" in their name.


It seems that Monster Cable Inc. is pushing a very aggressive campaign to get rid of any business name or web domain using the word "Monster". If, after reviewing some of the information below, and you feel so inclined, please drop them an email with your comments on this and other similar situations.

Feel like telling Monster Cable that they are a bunch of monster **** munchers for beating on the little folks like MonsterHTPC? Fire off an monster email to self proclaimed "PR Monster" Daniel Graham at Monster Cable Products. Just remember that dictionary.com defines a monster as one who inspires horror or disgust. At least Monster Cable went with a name that fits.


244 "Trademark infringements"
More M word


Some crazy stuff. Guess its time to choose a new cable vendor.

fireshoes

I'm not familiar with MonsterHTPC, but it seems like that would be hitting pretty close to MonsterCable's core business of home theater. I would probably sue too. It's the lawsuits against completely unrelated items that are dumb.

jdhdiggs

Agreed Fireshoes, I looked at the monster HTPC website and in this I think monster has a case. Hasbro's monster trucks or Sesames Street, not so much...