Let's be a proactive force for the little guy

[audiomatrix]

If anyone is even remotely curious about the real intentions of Monster Cable in regards to protecting their name from 'confusion', one needs only review this link and amount of legal filings going back and forth in just this one case:

http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=91124683&pty=OPP&eno=35

Monster Cable takes Brunswick to trial over a bowling ball?!!!

You draw your own conclusions about any postings by Noel Lee as to his genuine commitment to only pursue incidents of trademark confusion where it is necessary.

Sad. I liked the post by Ray Kimber - only wish everyone could read it and see what is going on and take a stand.

[ThomasW]

Interesting item for sale on ebay

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=67780&item=5743706836&rd=1

[Rolyasm]

Wow, I always knew Monster cable was a monster price, so I would not have purchased their stuff. However, I was looking at power conditioners and surge protection from them. I will be rethinking my purchase and just sent them a letter telling them so. Thanks for the info.
Roly

[ThomasW]

This should be fun :B

http://www.monsterlawsuits.com/

[David Meek]

Hmmmm, irresistable force vs. immovable object? Heehee. :B

[purplepeople]

Hi all,

Just saw this article on The Durango Herald website.

ensen.

http://durangoherald.com/asp-bin/article_generation.asp?article_type=news&article_path=/news/05/news050113_4.htm

*****

January 13, 2005

'Monsters' battle, reach settlement

By Dominic Weilminster
Herald Staff Writer

Snow Monsters, a small Durango company that went to federal court last month, ended its battle this week with Monster Cable, the home electronics giant. They made peace out of court, clearing up a trademark dispute.

Jack Turner, owner of Snow Monsters, and David Tognotti, attorney for Monster Cable, refused to release details. Snow Monsters, a producer of ski and snowboard instructional videos, substituted the link "Boycott Monster Cable" with "Monster Cable" on its Web site. The new link leads to a letter from Turner to customers.

Last month, Turner claimed that Monster Cable wanted to "drive Snow Monsters into the ground" over his brand name. He urged customers to "Help protect free speech and small business (and) Boycott Monster Cable products" by phoning complaints to Monster Cable CEO Noel Lee. And Turner asked the court to declare his right to use monster in his company name.

In the past, Monster Cable has aggressively challenged other "monster" companies over brand names.

They targeted The Discovery Channel with its show "Monster Garage" and Disney with its film "Monsters Inc." among more than 100 instances. Like Turner's, most disputes ended out of court.

On Monday, Turner acknowledged "serious, but cordial discussions" expressing that no ill-will remains and that Snow Monsters:

• Is not responsible for misleading information published by others about Monster Cable.

• Never claimed that Monster Cable filed frivolous lawsuits against others.

• Agrees that trademark opposition is typical for trademark owners.

• Withdrew its claim in federal court.

"I thought it wouldn't be a happy outcome," Turner said. "But sometimes what appears to be the darkest dark can turn out to be the brightest light."

*****

[ThomasW]

http://www.monstersofcrock.com/

[Bruce]

Monster cable is still fulfilling the bully role with it's continued harassment of the small company MonsterVintage clothes. This is a pretty disgusting practice by Monster's lawyers.

I have vowed to NEVER buy a Monster Cable product and would like to see this story go on for a long time and get some national press. Monster Cable deserves nothing less than the full wrath of a consumer boycott.

[Patt]

On another Forum, for the life of me I can't remember now, {Noel himself} said the Patent people, not him, were deciding who could and who could not use the name....... :grab:

[Hdale85]

I dont thinkt he patent people care unless one of the people that patented it seems to have a problem with it.

[pikers]

Actually Bose sued Monster for the use of the word "LightWave"

Gorden,

They also went after Monster House. Maybe the Monster house crew could pay Noel Lee a visit at his home ......... :roflmao:

On the other hand, one wonders why counsel for these "Monster" shows and other organizations don't heed what has happened to others that have been sued. Then all of the hue and cry could have been avoided.

Walking into a punch only yields you so much sympathy...

[David Meek]

So pikers just be clear, you advocate everyone rolling over and letting some uber-corporation do just what they feel is best - rights be damned?

[pikers]

So pikers just be clear, you advocate everyone rolling over and letting some uber-corporation do just what they feel is best - rights be damned?

No, I expect the "little guy" companies to do their homework.

Fact is, anyone in this climate that puts "Monster" in their name is ASKING for it.

[ThomasW]

Fact is, anyone in this climate that puts "Monster" in their name is ASKING for it

Monster Cable does not own the rights to the word monster..and they ran away from a suit in federal court when a tiny used clothing store won a change of venue out of Monster Cable's home court....

http://www.monstervintage.com/

Another interesting article

http://wistechnology.com/article.php?id=1957

And here's a little letter written early in 2005 year by the head monster when his company was taking a pounding on internet forums. It's pretty interesting reading since the legal teams actions contradict Noel Lee's claims...... :roll:

Monster Wrongfully Accused: A Note from Noel Lee, CEO of Monster Cable Products.

There have been a lot of rumors, misinformation, and false accusations spread on the web about Monster Cable and its trademark and brand protection efforts. We have been wrongfully accused of suing any company using the “Monster” name, and as being a “corporate bully.”

Anyone who knows our company, or me personally, knows that we are not that kind of company, and I am not that kind of person. The information out there is categorically untrue.

Being a champion of the entrepreneur, and having started Monster in a garage with no money myself, I would be the last person to want to stop someone who had a legitimate right to use a trade name for their business. Those who know me and have met me, know that we have built a fantastic company from nothing through sheer hard work and a lot of sweat equity. You can check out our story at: http://monstercable.com/company_info/ and http://www.monsterparksf.com/info/WhoIsMonster.asp

I have even spoken at several colleges about how to become an entrepreneur, and value these opportunities. In fact, my parents were on one of the last boats out of China during its civil war. I truly have lived the American dream, and I am not going to prevent others from achieving it. I feel fortunate to have been born an American.

Some of the negative press you have read may have started with some newspaper articles that have mistaken information in them, or others who have found this opportunity to spread negative press for their own agendas.

Snow Monsters mistakenly portrayed that our objection to their attempt to register trademarks was a lawsuit, which isn’t true. We have not sued Snow Monsters. We would never try to harm a company whose focus is on ski education programs and products for children.

In fact, Monster is a big supporter of programs for children. You can see what we have recently done with kids at Monster Park. http://www.monsterparksf.com/fun/Photos.asp

Before you form any negative impressions of my company or how I have directed it, permit me to straighten out some of the misconceptions.

1) We do not have any trademark infringement lawsuits pending, and we do not object or take action against businesses just because they sell products that have “Monster” in their names. If we did, we would never be able to run our business, not to mention the financial burden would crush us. We have better things to do than spend this kind of money and time.

2) There are over 1,100 registered “Monster” trademarks in the U.S. Patent and Trademark office, and probably hundreds more that are unregistered. We don’t have any intention of suing them or taking any action against them. These marks have been allowed by the Trademark Office, just as our 50+ marks in the various classes listed below.

3) We have not sued or filed actions against the hundreds of companies that are using the word Monster. So if anyone is representing this to you, they are not right and should be corrected.

What I think has happened, is people are misinterpreting the U.S. Patent and Trademark office’s database. When you do a search on the USPTO database for Monster, it brings up a bunch of records dating back to 1983; like a Google search does. It appears people are seeing the search results and assuming they are lawsuits. They are not lawsuits. In fact, most of the search results are duplicate listings or merely requests for 60 day extensions (which allow us to do further investigation to see if there are any potential conflicts). The database shows Monster has opposed about 80 trademarks over the last twenty years. That’s about 4 trademark oppositions a year, which isn’t very many for a company that has over 50+ Monster trademarks and is a famous brand.

Don’t just take my word for it, please search the database for yourself.
(Click on the links and you will see the words “Extension of Time” on many of them).
http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?q...e+Products%2C+ ...

4) Trademark registrations and trademark oppositions are decided by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, not us. Even if we do object to a particular filing to register a trademark, it is the Trademark office that determines if the business or person filing for the trademark registration is entitled to it, NOT US.

5) Our examination and investigation of businesses filing trademarks with our name Monster is normal processes for any company having a trademark that they want to protect. We know we don't own the word Monster; however like any other trademark holder we do have the right and need to protect our Monster brand when it is in danger of being diluted, tarnished, or infringed.

6) The federal trademark law says that we are required to police our marks and enforce them or we will lose them, or risk weakening them. We didn’t make these rules. Congress and years of Supreme Court rulings have determined the rules of the game. This type of protection is authorized by federal and state statutes (referred to as anti-dilution laws) designed to prevent the weakening of a famous mark's reputation. For more information, you may want to check out: Nolo Press (http://www.nolo.com/lawcenter/ency/a...EF7D691972BE58)

7) Anyone can use a trademark without having the trademark registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark office, as long as it doesn’t infringe or dilute someone else’s trademark. This is referred to as a common law trademark. There are many trademarks that exist under common law rights.

In the case of Snow Monsters, we have NEVER sued them, and we are not trying to harm their company. I think that their products are great and don’t cause us any problems, I have written them and told them so. They are also using the word “monster” for characters, not as a brand, which is how we use Monster. Please, see the list of our trademarks below that I have provided for you.

I hate frivolous lawsuits as much as the next person, and would never engage in a lawsuit that was frivolous. They are a waste of the public’s money, and the time of the parties involved. In fact, the courts do not allow “frivolous” lawsuits to proceed. The courts have procedural safeguards to eliminate frivolous lawsuits, as well as penalties (like Rule 11) that can be levied against attorneys and parties who bring such suits. We have never been accused by a court of filing frivolous lawsuits.

9) The newspaper articles and other rumors that said we sued the Chicago Bears, Boston Red Sox, Fenway Park, or a Cajun restaurant are all untrue. We have NEVER filed any lawsuits or other actions against them. Don’t just take our word for it, do a search of the court records, and the USPTO database, and we can guarantee that you will find that we have not sued (or even filed trademark oppositions) against these companies.

10) There are millions of Monster fans who love our company and love our products. My passion for the products and unrelenting drive to innovate and create the highest quality products is well known in the industry and with consumers. Where most companies find out how to take quality out of something to reduce costs, we find how we can “improve” products and make them the best of class. That’s why our customers love Monster products.

I am very sad indeed to see misinformation out there as it wrongfully portrays the company to be a corporate bully, when nothing could be further from the truth.

If anyone wants to talk with me about this, or if this email does not answer your questions, please email me at monsterinformation@monstercable.com. Although I may not get back to you immediately since I am currently on travel, I will get back to you.

In the meantime, I ask everyone not to prejudge until you know all of the facts.

Hope this clears things up for you. We merely want to protect the trademarks that it has taken me 25 years of hard work to build.

If anyone else is under a wrong impression about our intention otherwise, please feel free to pass this on.

Monsterously yours,

Noel Lee
The Head Monster

Monster Web Site

http://www.monstercable.com

Here is the list of our registered Monster trademarks. We have many more that are pending registration.

Class 6: Electronic Cables and Wires
Monster Cable

Class 9: Consumer Electronics

In class 9 we have the following registered trademarks, some which date back as far as 1978:

Monster
Monster Cable
Monster Power
Monster Music
Monster Batteries
Monster Car Audio
Monster Central
Monster Computer
Monster Internet
Monster Digital
Monster Game
Monster Home Theatre
Monster Lock
Monster Microphone
Monster Mobile
Monster Mounts
Monster Multimedia
Monster Networking
Monster Satellite
Monster Sport
Monster Standard
Monster Tips
Monster USB
Monster Wire America

Class 16: Consumer Electronics
Monster
Monster Connection

Class 18: Leather Bags and Apparel
Monster Design

Class 25: Clothing and Apparel

In Class 25, we have the following registered trademarks, some which date back over 15 years:

I Am A Monster
Monster
Monster Attitude
Monster Design
Monster Sport

Class 35: Advertising and Marketing Services
eMonster
iMonster
Monster Bucks
Monsterbook
Monsterguide

Class 36: Financial Services
Monstermoney

Class 41: Entertainment, Educational and Training Services
Monster Music
Monster Style

Class 42: Research and Development Services
Monster Music
Monsterlinks

Regards
Monster ThomasW...:wink:

[NMyTree]

Actions speak louder than words.

And Mr. Lees words........are barely audible.

Regardless, never shall I spend a penny on Mr. Lees products. Never.

[David Meek]

I couldn't have said it better. :T

[pikers]

I'm not pro-Monster, or anyone else in favor of frivolous litigation. I am against companies that fail to exercise due diligence, and then whine about the results.

What's ironic is that the exposure of Monster Cable has no doubt spurred others into using that moniker for their product as well. In that, I can see Noel's point. OTOH, enough's enough.

[Lex]

the word monster has had meaning outside of cables, a lot longer than one may think. Anyone remember Monster Mash, the song? Vintage 1970 probably. Monster trucks? Been around a while!

I don't look at using the word Monster by itself or with something other than cables as being ripped off. I look at it as adaptation of a word that has multiple meanings, but mostly originates as a description for goulish looking characters like Herman Munster, and his predecessor, Frankenstein, yes, a Monster. Monster also became known as a conotation for LARGE from mostly the Monster Truck association I think.

-D

[pikers]

MC clearly at one point thought that there was brand confusion with others using Monster in their name, and sued. Then, decided to go nuts apparently....

[KeithM]

Next thing you know, Noel Lee will become copyrighted so we can't talk about him. Anyways, the only monster cable I have is a low-end one that I got free because they sent me a wrong part, and it's been replaced by a better rat-shack cable.

[pikers]

Let's just make sure that we don't like Brand A because we perceived an unfavorable performance issue, not because we like to jump on the bandwagon. :T

[Boombox]

What will happen if your surname is Kables and you just happened to name your first son..."Monsta".....??

MONSTA Kables