[Reposted from the Logic Users Group (LUG).]

I did not write the original posting, but I share the sentiments 100%.
Such a sad state the American legal system is in that these things --
which IMO are in some cases out-and-out extortion, and in all cases
flagrant abuse of the legal system -- are allowed to continue.

Read on...


:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...611825,00.html

What a bunch of greedy assholes.

snip

Btw, anybody as offended as me should drop them a line:
http://www.monstercable.com/company_info/contact.asp

I told Mr.Graham that I would print out the Denver Post article, add a
request to boycott monster cables and stick copies of that into all the
classrooms I'm teaching in at the local music university. I'm actually
done with printing.allready...
I added that from now on out studios would be 100% monster cable free
zones (they allready are, but they will remain like that as well).

Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all of you to
a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail and b) don't buy
anything of that company anymore until they changed their strategies.

"Brian" wrote ...
Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all
of you to a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail
and b) don't buy anything of that company anymore until they
changed their strategies.

I was boycotting them before just on the general principle that
I don't value hype and brand names when buying something as
prosaic as cables. Their other strategies just reinforce my low
opinion of them.

I ordered some stuff from a fairly well known audio distributor (who shall
remain nameless to protect the innocent) a couple of days ago. One item I
needed was a 3' Zoalla word clock cable. They were out and I was offered the
substitution of a Monster version. I declined and told them why. My order
was not insignificant as far as $$$ amount and the explanation of my refusal
to use Monster cable was passed further up the food chain. I got a call
today from the owner of the business asking for more details. My objections
were noted, the URL was given to him, discussions were had, yadda, yadda,
FWIW. Maybe if we who don't like this sort of thing are a bit more outspoken
about it when we are cattin'round the audio bordello's, it might start to
make a dent in this sort of crap.

DJ


"Richard Crowley" wrote in message
...
"Brian" wrote ...
Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all
of you to a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail
and b) don't buy anything of that company anymore until they
changed their strategies.

I was boycotting them before just on the general principle that
I don't value hype and brand names when buying something as
prosaic as cables. Their other strategies just reinforce my low
opinion of them.

It's unfortunate that the US system (trademarks and patents) allows
businesses to appropriate such generic words like "monster". I could
understand them getting a trademark on "Monster Cable", but simply the use
of "monster"? So why doesn't John Deere get to own the word "Tractor"?
Because its not a brand specific term. I would think "monster" would be the
same. Its like when Trump recently failed to trademark "you're fired".
Corporate greed is running American government, and some sensibility needs
to surface soon or the government will be completely owned and run by
business (some may claim its there already).

I think the patent and trademark laws need to be changed to not include such
generic terms. As for "Monster Cable", I've never used the over-priced,
over-hyped stuff. I can buy premium grade cables for a fraction of their
"dumbsumer" prices and use them professionally in the studio.

Now, however, I will label the studio "Monster Free Zone" and let others
know of the heavy handed policies they have used against other businesses.

Richard Crowley wrote:

"Brian" wrote ...
Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all
of you to a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail
and b) don't buy anything of that company anymore until they
changed their strategies.

I was boycotting them before just on the general principle that
I don't value hype and brand names when buying something as
prosaic as cables. Their other strategies just reinforce my low
opinion of them.

But if their marketing engineers teamed with Bose's marketing engineers,
they could sell cow **** to feedlots.

--
ha

"Rob" wrote in message
...
It's unfortunate that the US system (trademarks and patents) allows
businesses to appropriate such generic words like "monster". I could
understand them getting a trademark on "Monster Cable", but simply the use
of "monster"? So why doesn't John Deere get to own the word "Tractor"?
Because its not a brand specific term. I would think "monster" would be
the
same. Its like when Trump recently failed to trademark "you're fired".
Corporate greed is running American government, and some sensibility needs
to surface soon or the government will be completely owned and run by
business (some may claim its there already).

I think the patent and trademark laws need to be changed to not include
such
generic terms. As for "Monster Cable", I've never used the over-priced,
over-hyped stuff. I can buy premium grade cables for a fraction of their
"dumbsumer" prices and use them professionally in the studio.

Now, however, I will label the studio "Monster Free Zone" and let others
know of the heavy handed policies they have used against other businesses.



Yeah. I can see them being concerned over company names like 'Monster
Wire', Cable Monster' or maybe even 'Munster Cable' but based on the
lawsuits they've been filing I think they should sue who ever installed the
HVAC in their factory because I think the vinyl/plastic fumes have caused
some serious damage..

I was getting pretty annoyed with these stupid lawsuits they are filing so I
decided to look up how old the word 'monster' is. I don't know how accurate
this web site is but after reading the original meanings of the word, I
realized that they all seem to fit Monster Cable, it's management and legal
team perfectly :

Taken from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=monster :

monster
c.1300, "malformed animal, creature afflicted with a birth defect," from
O.Fr. monstre, from L. monstrum "monster, monstrosity, omen, portent, sign,"
from root of monere "warn" (see monitor). Abnormal or prodigious animals
were regarded as signs or omens of impending evil. Extended c.1385 to
imaginary animals composed of parts of creatures (centaur, griffin, etc.).
Meaning "animal of vast size" is from 1530; sense of "person of inhuman
cruelty or wickedness" is from 1556. In O.E., the monster Grendel was an
aglæca, a word related to aglæc "calamity, terror, distress, oppression."

John L Rice

Fire off an email to the company and complain...they get enough of them
from their customer base - us - maybe they might do a little backpedaling,
maybe not, but at leas tyou've told them what you think

Don

"Brian" wrote in message
...
[Reposted from the Logic Users Group (LUG).]

I did not write the original posting, but I share the sentiments 100%.
Such a sad state the American legal system is in that these things --
which IMO are in some cases out-and-out extortion, and in all cases
flagrant abuse of the legal system -- are allowed to continue.

Read on...


:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...611825,00.html

What a bunch of greedy assholes.

snip

Btw, anybody as offended as me should drop them a line:
http://www.monstercable.com/company_info/contact.asp

I told Mr.Graham that I would print out the Denver Post article, add a
request to boycott monster cables and stick copies of that into all the
classrooms I'm teaching in at the local music university. I'm actually
done with printing.allready...
I added that from now on out studios would be 100% monster cable free
zones (they allready are, but they will remain like that as well).

Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all of you to
a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail and b) don't buy
anything of that company anymore until they changed their strategies.

On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 22:42:06 -0800, "John L Rice"
wrote:


"Rob" wrote in message
...
It's unfortunate that the US system (trademarks and patents) allows
businesses to appropriate such generic words like "monster". I could
understand them getting a trademark on "Monster Cable", but simply the use
of "monster"? So why doesn't John Deere get to own the word "Tractor"?
Because its not a brand specific term. I would think "monster" would be
the
same. Its like when Trump recently failed to trademark "you're fired".
Corporate greed is running American government, and some sensibility needs
to surface soon or the government will be completely owned and run by
business (some may claim its there already).

I think the patent and trademark laws need to be changed to not include
such
generic terms. As for "Monster Cable", I've never used the over-priced,
over-hyped stuff. I can buy premium grade cables for a fraction of their
"dumbsumer" prices and use them professionally in the studio.

Now, however, I will label the studio "Monster Free Zone" and let others
know of the heavy handed policies they have used against other businesses.

---------nosnip----------------

Yeah. I can see them being concerned over company names like 'Monster
Wire', Cable Monster' or maybe even 'Munster Cable' but based on the
lawsuits they've been filing I think they should sue who ever installed the
HVAC in their factory because I think the vinyl/plastic fumes have caused
some serious damage..

I was getting pretty annoyed with these stupid lawsuits they are filing so I
decided to look up how old the word 'monster' is. I don't know how accurate
this web site is but after reading the original meanings of the word, I
realized that they all seem to fit Monster Cable, it's management and legal
team perfectly :

Taken from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=monster :

monster
c.1300, "malformed animal, creature afflicted with a birth defect," from
O.Fr. monstre, from L. monstrum "monster, monstrosity, omen, portent, sign,"
from root of monere "warn" (see monitor). Abnormal or prodigious animals
were regarded as signs or omens of impending evil. Extended c.1385 to
imaginary animals composed of parts of creatures (centaur, griffin, etc.).
Meaning "animal of vast size" is from 1530; sense of "person of inhuman
cruelty or wickedness" is from 1556. In O.E., the monster Grendel was an
agl?ca, a word related to agl?c "calamity, terror, distress, oppression."

John L Rice



-- Oh, such law oddities leave such a metallica taste in my mouth. I
even heard of one claiming a chord to copyright. The industry is the
industry, but it ain't business like show business )

Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia

On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 22:42:06 -0800, "John L Rice"
wrote:

I was getting pretty annoyed with these stupid lawsuits they are filing so I
decided to look up how old the word 'monster' is. snip

Don't look now, but Bush's proposed "tort reform" doesn't even TOUCH
suits like this! All it does is deprive the average Joe any chance at
getting back at a corporation. Karl Rove and the other criminals
designed the roll-out to be all about medical tort reform, which is a
non-issue. The real problem with malpractice insurance? The
insurance cartels.

dB

"hank alrich" wrote in message

Richard Crowley wrote:

"Brian" wrote ...
Seriously, this just can't go unanswered. I sincerely ask all
of you to a) write Mr. Graham a reasonable but honest mail
and b) don't buy anything of that company anymore until they
changed their strategies.

I was boycotting them before just on the general principle that
I don't value hype and brand names when buying something as
prosaic as cables. Their other strategies just reinforce my low
opinion of them.

But if their marketing engineers teamed with Bose's marketing
engineers, they could sell cow **** to feedlots.

You don't think that this, in some sense, hasn't already happened?

"John L Rice" wrote in message


Yeah. I can see them being concerned over company names like 'Monster
Wire', Cable Monster' or maybe even 'Munster Cable' but based on the
lawsuits they've been filing I think they should sue who ever
installed the HVAC in their factory because I think the vinyl/plastic
fumes have caused some serious damage..

The irony is that Monster doesn't have a factory. They farm out just about
every phase of production and distribution. The brand is pretty much all
they have.

Fire off an email to the company and complain BRBR


I sent this thee day the Denver Post Article was published.


Dear Monster Cable:

I read with dismay the article in the Denver Post which spelled out the ways in
which Monster Cable brand seeks to retain sole use of the word "monster" in the
marketplace.*

The article quotes a Monster Cable brand lawyer as saying, "We have spent
millions of dollars and countless hours trying to build a quality premium brand
in the marketplace..."

Why doesn't Monster Cable brand pour these millions of dollars into developing
scientifically engineered products that do what the sales people at countless
hi fi shops claim?* It seems to me that Monster Cable brand is at its core a
marketing company, hawking its brand like a snake oil salesman.

I own and operate a medium sized commercial recording and video production
company.* Let me assure you that among those of us who listen to audio for a
living, Monster Cable brand has a lousy reputation.* In newsgroups and
professional discussion boards Monster Cable brand is held up as the pinnacle
of form over function, of overpriced mediocre connectors and cable.* Mogami,
Canare, Belden and Gepco are all held in high regard.* Monster Cable brand and
Hosa live at the bottom.

I will pass on the information from the Denver Post article to my colleagues.*
This unwarranted abuse of the legal system merely reinforces the likelihood
that I will never purchase Monster Cable brand products, and that I will go out
of my way to dissuade others from purchasing them.



Joe Egan
EMP
Colchester, VT
www.eganmedia.com

In article ,
"John L Rice" wrote:

[snip]
In O.E., the monster Grendel was an
aglæca, a word related to aglæc "calamity, terror, distress, oppression."

John L Rice



I recorded a band called Grendel a few years ago, and now I know what Grendel
is. Thanks!

-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x

On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 07:45:59 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"John L Rice" wrote in message


Yeah. I can see them being concerned over company names like 'Monster
Wire', Cable Monster' or maybe even 'Munster Cable' but based on the
lawsuits they've been filing I think they should sue who ever
installed the HVAC in their factory because I think the vinyl/plastic
fumes have caused some serious damage..

The irony is that Monster doesn't have a factory. They farm out just about
every phase of production and distribution. The brand is pretty much all
they have.

Which would explain why they are guarding it so fiercly.

Al

On 2005-01-07, Arny Krueger wrote:

The irony is that Monster doesn't have a factory. They farm out just about
every phase of production and distribution. The brand is pretty much all
they have.

They did a hell of a good job in the early 80's, of convincing hip-hop
kiddies that their product was a necessary (and sufficient!) component
of the car stereo system if the bass is to be heard two blocks away.

It never occurred to me until now that other people had bought into any
of their hype.

Great letter Joe!

Don


"EganMedia" wrote in message
...
Fire off an email to the company and complain BRBR


I sent this thee day the Denver Post Article was published.


Dear Monster Cable:

I read with dismay the article in the Denver Post which spelled out the
ways in
which Monster Cable brand seeks to retain sole use of the word "monster"
in the
marketplace.

The article quotes a Monster Cable brand lawyer as saying, "We have spent
millions of dollars and countless hours trying to build a quality premium
brand
in the marketplace..."

Why doesn't Monster Cable brand pour these millions of dollars into
developing
scientifically engineered products that do what the sales people at
countless
hi fi shops claim? It seems to me that Monster Cable brand is at its core
a
marketing company, hawking its brand like a snake oil salesman.

I own and operate a medium sized commercial recording and video production
company. Let me assure you that among those of us who listen to audio for
a
living, Monster Cable brand has a lousy reputation. In newsgroups and
professional discussion boards Monster Cable brand is held up as the
pinnacle
of form over function, of overpriced mediocre connectors and cable.
Mogami,
Canare, Belden and Gepco are all held in high regard. Monster Cable brand
and
Hosa live at the bottom.

I will pass on the information from the Denver Post article to my
colleagues.
This unwarranted abuse of the legal system merely reinforces the
likelihood
that I will never purchase Monster Cable brand products, and that I will
go out
of my way to dissuade others from purchasing them.



Joe Egan
EMP
Colchester, VT
www.eganmedia.com

On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 21:57:44 GMT, james of tucson
wrote:

They did a hell of a good job in the early 80's, of convincing hip-hop
kiddies that their product was a necessary (and sufficient!) component
of the car stereo system if the bass is to be heard two blocks away.

It never occurred to me until now that other people had bought into any
of their hype. snip

In the case of the hip-hoppers, you have to consider the IQ
level...LOW.

dB

"EganMedia" wrote in message
...
Fire off an email to the company and complain BRBR


I sent this thee day the Denver Post Article was published.

Excellent! I also sent one of a similar nature, though with considerably
less G-rated language. Did you get back the standard cut and pasted reply
from their legal department?

Jay Kadis wrote:

In article ,
"John L Rice" wrote:

[snip]
In O.E., the monster Grendel was an
aglæca, a word related to aglæc "calamity, terror, distress, oppression."

John L Rice



I recorded a band called Grendel a few years ago, and now I know what
Grendel
is. Thanks!

-Jay

Grendel was a character in the ancient poem "Beowulf", thought to originate
around 1000 a.d. Go here for more info.

http://www.humanities.mcmaster.ca/~beowulf/

Have fun.....

"Rob" wrote in message
...
It's unfortunate that the US system (trademarks and patents) allows
businesses to appropriate such generic words like "monster". I could
understand them getting a trademark on "Monster Cable", but simply the use
of "monster"? So why doesn't John Deere get to own the word "Tractor"?
Because its not a brand specific term. I would think "monster" would be
the
same. Its like when Trump recently failed to trademark "you're fired".
Corporate greed is running American government, and some sensibility needs
to surface soon or the government will be completely owned and run by
business (some may claim its there already).

I think the patent and trademark laws need to be changed to not include
such
generic terms. As for "Monster Cable", I've never used the over-priced,
over-hyped stuff. I can buy premium grade cables for a fraction of their
"dumbsumer" prices and use them professionally in the studio.

Now, however, I will label the studio "Monster Free Zone" and let others
know of the heavy handed policies they have used against other businesses.




Not an attorney here, but I don't think that the system 'allows' them to
trademark generic words per se. It's just that most folks don't have the
means to fight a corporation with deep pockets and legal teams looking for
loopholes. Remember that anybody can sue anybody at any time for any reason.

On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 05:59:03 -0500, "Richard Edmondson"
wrote:

Not an attorney here, but I don't think that the system 'allows' them to
trademark generic words per se.

Exactly. They're throwing crap on the wall, and seeing how much
will stick. They're also lacing it with super-glue.

It's just that most folks don't have the
means to fight a corporation with deep pockets and legal teams looking for
loopholes. Remember that anybody can sue anybody at any time for any reason.

It would seem to me (IANAL either) that this could be considered
abuse of process. They're not (just, or even for the most part) trying
to protect their trademark, they're trying to EXTEND the law's
protection to ANY commercial use of the word monster.

-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

There is a link I found at www.boycottmonstercable.com that will take
you to a list of companies that Monster has filed against at the US
Patent and Trademark office.

This link should take you to the Patent Office listing:
http://tinyurl.com/52v37


It a pretty long list.

--
Eric

www.Raw-Tracks.com

EricK wrote:

There is a link I found at www.boycottmonstercable.com that will take
you to a list of companies that Monster has filed against at the US
Patent and Trademark office.

This link should take you to the Patent Office listing:
http://tinyurl.com/52v37


It a pretty long list.


The attorney responsible for the filings:

Matthew A. Powelson
LaRiviere Grubman & Payne, LLP
19 Upper Ragsdale DriveSuite 200
Monterey, CA 93942


Let *them* know how you feel.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

EricK wrote:
There is a link I found at www.boycottmonstercable.com that will take
you to a list of companies that Monster has filed against at the US
Patent and Trademark office.

It a pretty long list.

I looked through that list, and it *is* a pretty long list.

But, they did forget one: they aren't (yet) suing the Cookie Monster.

- Logan

EricK wrote:

There is a link I found at www.boycottmonstercable.com that will take
you to a list of companies that Monster has filed against at the US
Patent and Trademark office.

This link should take you to the Patent Office listing:
http://tinyurl.com/52v37


It a pretty long list.



The best idea might be for everyone to forward any observed use of
MONSTER to them. If they go after enough people, they're going to
eventually hit a brick wall, which will help the smaller guys who don't
have enough money to fight. MONSTER is everywhere. They don't have the
resources to object to every use.

But, they did forget one: they aren't (yet) suing the Cookie Monster.

He's older than the cables. Similarly, the USOC can't go after Gyro
businesses that were started prior to the incorporation of the Olympic
committee.

They even went after the name of a friggin bowling ball! (Brunswick makes a
line of Monster balls....Swamp Monster, Monster Smash'r, etc.)

-John O

In article ,
Logan Shaw wrote:

EricK wrote:
There is a link I found at www.boycottmonstercable.com that will take
you to a list of companies that Monster has filed against at the US
Patent and Trademark office.

It a pretty long list.

I looked through that list, and it *is* a pretty long list.

But, they did forget one: they aren't (yet) suing the Cookie Monster.

- Logan

Not quite, but they sued Sesame Productions (the company that produces
Sesame Street) over their Monster Clubhouse segment. The *******s!!!

On or about Mon, 10 Jan 2005 13:41:26 GMT, John O allegedly wrote:

But, they did forget one: they aren't (yet) suing the Cookie Monster.

He's older than the cables. Similarly, the USOC can't go after Gyro
businesses that were started prior to the incorporation of the Olympic
committee.

They even went after the name of a friggin bowling ball! (Brunswick makes a
line of Monster balls....Swamp Monster, Monster Smash'r, etc.)


What about that 'Monster Mash' song (from the mid 70's?)? Perhaps they
should change it to 'Monster Mush' and use it as a theme.


Noel Bachelor noelbachelorAT(From:_domain)
Language Recordings Inc (Darwin Australia)