Monsters battle it out
Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:43 pm
These trademarks and patents are getting rediculous. I mean monster™ is a really widely used word, they should not be able to trademark it and sue people if they use it... lol
http://www.ohio.com/mld/beaconjournal/10496674.htm?1c
`Monster' trademark war brews
Monster Cable files suits across county for exclusive rights to word
By Jason Blevins
Denver Post
Monster Cable, a company that makes high-performance audio and visual cables, is at war.
The Brisbane, Calif.-based company has filed trademark lawsuits across the country against companies using the word ``monster.''
Discovery Channel has felt Monster's wrath for its show Monster Garage. Bally Gaming is under Monster's glare because of its Monster slot machine. Monster sued Walt Disney Co., maker of the animated flick Monsters Inc. Even the Chicago Bears, aka ``The Monsters of the Midway,'' once were eyed by Monster.
But Jack Turner is taking the offensive. The Durango, Colo., businessman, who six years ago started a video company called Snow Monsters aiming to get kids on skis, said Monster Cable has filed formal opposition to his 2-year-old trademark application. So he's suing Monster Cable.
``I run the most clean-cut business in the country,'' said Turner, whose videos feature costumed skiers such as Powder Pig and Snow Snake teaching kids how to be safe and have fun on the ski hill. ``I mean, why don't you go beat up on the March of Dimes?''
Assuming he will one day be sued by Monster Cable, Turner is asking a Colorado district court judge to rule that Snow Monsters does not infringe on Monster Cable's trademark. It's a pre-emptive move to foil what could be years of legal wrangling that would break Turner's bank.
Monster Cable, which makes cables and wires for home, car and computer audio and video equipment, has filed more than 250 oppositions to trademark applications with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Most of the filings were simply requests for additional time so Monster Cable attorneys could study various trademark applications. Others were formal oppositions. Some ended in lawsuits.
Monster Cable sued Monster.com, the online resume site. It sued Disney and Discovery Channel. In all three suits, Monster reached a confidential settlement. The company's general counsel, David Tognotti, said the company is now involved in ``great partnerships'' with all three companies.
Tognotti said Monster Cable is simply doing what many ``premium'' brand companies do: protecting a hard-earned image.
``We have spent millions of dollars and countless hours trying to build a quality premium brand in the marketplace, and there are individuals trying to leverage off that for their own gain,'' said Tognotti, noting that Turner's trademark applications are in categories in which Monster Cable has business interests.
``It would be harmful to us for him to have a monster trademark in those classes. We have a duty to protect our trademark.''
Like Turner, Cathy West is weathering Monster's glare. Her tiny MonsterVintage.com in Camas, Wash., sells vintage clothing including striped bell bottoms and 1970-era Grateful Dead concert shirts over the Internet.
She thought someone was joking with her two years ago when she got a licensing agreement package from Monster Cable suggesting that she pay the wire-maker $1,000 a year and 1 percent of gross sales in exchange for use of the word ``monster.''
She threw the packet out, thinking it was junk mail. Now she has an attorney who estimates legal fees could reach $50,000 in a trademark fight.
``We don't have the money to fight this,'' said West, who named the company after her cat, Monster. ``We tried to negotiate with them, but let me tell you, these guys are not nice characters. It's just bizarre. All we are doing is turning old rags into a decent way to pay the bills. I'd never even heard of Monster Cable before.''
Turner said he is shouldering the load for the little guys, much as he has done for the next generation of skiers with his videos. He is asking visitors to his Web site, snowmonsters.com, to boycott Monster Cable products. He calls his fight a battle against ``corporate bullies.''
Earlier this year, he told Monster Cable attorneys he would never dabble in the speaker and stereo wire business. The company countered with its own idea for Turner's company: give up all rights to the word ``monster,'' sign a licensing agreement and give Monster Cable the right to approve or reject Turner's marketing plan.
So now Turner is paying $500 an hour to two law firms -- one in Boulder and one in New York. He thinks Monster, with a stable of lawyers on staff, would happily while away months in court. That's not an option for him. He said a favorable ruling in his Denver lawsuit would eliminate the potential of a protracted legal fight.
``They say they own the name monster,'' Turner said. ``They are big. They are mean. They play dirty. It's time for someone to stand up to the bullies and say enough is enough.''
Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:3007, old post ID:24742
http://www.ohio.com/mld/beaconjournal/10496674.htm?1c
`Monster' trademark war brews
Monster Cable files suits across county for exclusive rights to word
By Jason Blevins
Denver Post
Monster Cable, a company that makes high-performance audio and visual cables, is at war.
The Brisbane, Calif.-based company has filed trademark lawsuits across the country against companies using the word ``monster.''
Discovery Channel has felt Monster's wrath for its show Monster Garage. Bally Gaming is under Monster's glare because of its Monster slot machine. Monster sued Walt Disney Co., maker of the animated flick Monsters Inc. Even the Chicago Bears, aka ``The Monsters of the Midway,'' once were eyed by Monster.
But Jack Turner is taking the offensive. The Durango, Colo., businessman, who six years ago started a video company called Snow Monsters aiming to get kids on skis, said Monster Cable has filed formal opposition to his 2-year-old trademark application. So he's suing Monster Cable.
``I run the most clean-cut business in the country,'' said Turner, whose videos feature costumed skiers such as Powder Pig and Snow Snake teaching kids how to be safe and have fun on the ski hill. ``I mean, why don't you go beat up on the March of Dimes?''
Assuming he will one day be sued by Monster Cable, Turner is asking a Colorado district court judge to rule that Snow Monsters does not infringe on Monster Cable's trademark. It's a pre-emptive move to foil what could be years of legal wrangling that would break Turner's bank.
Monster Cable, which makes cables and wires for home, car and computer audio and video equipment, has filed more than 250 oppositions to trademark applications with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Most of the filings were simply requests for additional time so Monster Cable attorneys could study various trademark applications. Others were formal oppositions. Some ended in lawsuits.
Monster Cable sued Monster.com, the online resume site. It sued Disney and Discovery Channel. In all three suits, Monster reached a confidential settlement. The company's general counsel, David Tognotti, said the company is now involved in ``great partnerships'' with all three companies.
Tognotti said Monster Cable is simply doing what many ``premium'' brand companies do: protecting a hard-earned image.
``We have spent millions of dollars and countless hours trying to build a quality premium brand in the marketplace, and there are individuals trying to leverage off that for their own gain,'' said Tognotti, noting that Turner's trademark applications are in categories in which Monster Cable has business interests.
``It would be harmful to us for him to have a monster trademark in those classes. We have a duty to protect our trademark.''
Like Turner, Cathy West is weathering Monster's glare. Her tiny MonsterVintage.com in Camas, Wash., sells vintage clothing including striped bell bottoms and 1970-era Grateful Dead concert shirts over the Internet.
She thought someone was joking with her two years ago when she got a licensing agreement package from Monster Cable suggesting that she pay the wire-maker $1,000 a year and 1 percent of gross sales in exchange for use of the word ``monster.''
She threw the packet out, thinking it was junk mail. Now she has an attorney who estimates legal fees could reach $50,000 in a trademark fight.
``We don't have the money to fight this,'' said West, who named the company after her cat, Monster. ``We tried to negotiate with them, but let me tell you, these guys are not nice characters. It's just bizarre. All we are doing is turning old rags into a decent way to pay the bills. I'd never even heard of Monster Cable before.''
Turner said he is shouldering the load for the little guys, much as he has done for the next generation of skiers with his videos. He is asking visitors to his Web site, snowmonsters.com, to boycott Monster Cable products. He calls his fight a battle against ``corporate bullies.''
Earlier this year, he told Monster Cable attorneys he would never dabble in the speaker and stereo wire business. The company countered with its own idea for Turner's company: give up all rights to the word ``monster,'' sign a licensing agreement and give Monster Cable the right to approve or reject Turner's marketing plan.
So now Turner is paying $500 an hour to two law firms -- one in Boulder and one in New York. He thinks Monster, with a stable of lawyers on staff, would happily while away months in court. That's not an option for him. He said a favorable ruling in his Denver lawsuit would eliminate the potential of a protracted legal fight.
``They say they own the name monster,'' Turner said. ``They are big. They are mean. They play dirty. It's time for someone to stand up to the bullies and say enough is enough.''
Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:3007, old post ID:24742