Mackie Lawsuit
Phoenix
Has anyone heard anything lately on the outcome of the Mackie/Behringer
lawsuit if any?
RJ...@aol.com
February 5, 1998
JUDGE DISMISSES MACKIE CLAIMS
Syosset, NY -- Samson Technologies Corp. CEO, Scott Goodman announced
today that the US District Court for the Western District of Washington
has dismissed the patent infringement claim brought by Mackie Designs,
Inc. against Samson's supplier Behringer Spezielle Studio-Technik GmbH.
The Judge's opinion also dismissed all of Mackie's claims against
Goodman, Sam Ash Music Corporation and Sam Ash CEO, Richard Ash, and threw
out as unreliable the only evidence Mackie could muster to support its
claim of intentional wrongdoing in the case.
Although the litigation may still continue as to some other claims,
Goodman noted, "This decision confirms everything we said at the outset of
the case. We are now in the process of preparing with our legal counsel, a
major countersuit against Mackie for among other things, slander, libel
and defamation.
"It is regrettable that so much time and energy has been wasted on what
we've claimed from the beginning to be a spiteful and mean-spirited
lawsuit."
Skaface
from the other's design. This is the history of this industry. If you use
Mackie and gain enjoyment/profit/etc., out of it, or Behringer for that
matter- good. Unless you are a douchebag lawyer or some kinda gear groupie
- WHO CARES?
Milton Finks
RJ...@aol.com wrote:
>
> In article <34E103...@sunshine.net>, pho...@sunshine.net wrote:
>
> > Has anyone heard anything lately on the outcome of the Mackie/Behringer
> > lawsuit if any?
> >
> > pho...@sunshine.net
>
>
>
>
> JUDGE DISMISSES MACKIE CLAIMS
>
> Syosset, NY -- Samson Technologies Corp. CEO, Scott Goodman announced
> today that the US District Court for the Western District of Washington
> has dismissed the patent infringement claim brought by Mackie Designs,
> Inc. against Samson's supplier Behringer Spezielle Studio-Technik GmbH.
> The Judge's opinion also dismissed all of Mackie's claims against
> Goodman, Sam Ash Music Corporation and Sam Ash CEO, Richard Ash, and threw
> out as unreliable the only evidence Mackie could muster to support its
> claim of intentional wrongdoing in the case.
> Although the litigation may still continue as to some other claims,
> Goodman noted, "This decision confirms everything we said at the outset of
> the case. We are now in the process of preparing with our legal counsel, a
> major countersuit against Mackie for among other things, slander, libel
> and defamation.
> "It is regrettable that so much time and energy has been wasted on what
> we've claimed from the beginning to be a spiteful and mean-spirited
> lawsuit."
And it was a massive right wing conspiracy that forced Behringer to make
and sell this copy of a Mackie product!! Herr Behringer can resume his
"borrowing" of other peoples designes!
MF
Gary Hampson
WOODINVILLE, WA. - February 6, 1998 - Mackie Designs Inc. (Nasdaq:MKIE)
today made the following announcement: On Friday, January 30, 1998 the US
District Court for the Western District of Washington ruled that Mackie’s
case against Behringer Spezielle Studio-Technick Gmbh, Ulrich Bernard
Behringer and Samson Technologies Corporation would proceed in Seattle. The
same court said that Mackie should bring its case against Sam Ash Music
Corporation, Richard Ash and Scott Goodman in a different court, which
Mackie intends to do. The litigation, until now tied up in procedural
matters, will now proceed to substance.
In the open court hearing, Samson, Behringer and the other defendants
admitted that Mackie’s design patent was valid and that they had stopped
selling Mackie patented products after the lawsuit was filed. The court
therefore removed the patent claims from the lawsuit on the basis that it
was no longer the subject of dispute.
The complaint for trademark and trade dress infringement, dilution,
copyright infringement, breach of contract, unfair competition and joint
venture will proceed as claimed in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Washington at Seattle.
“Samson’s victory dance is premature,” stated Chief Operating Officer Roy
Wemyss, following review of their press release received yesterday. “We are
pleased with the Court’s decision to keep most of the lawsuit here and we
look forward to proving Mackie’s claims. This matter is in the hands of our
lawyers while we focus on our business.
“I am confident that our effort to protect our intellectual property rights
will prevail and that both our customers and the industry will benefit
long-term. Mackie has invested heavily in research and development over the
years, and continues to do so for the benefit of our customers. Evidence
collected at NAMM in Los Angeles last week confirms that the market
appreciates true and real innovation, a testament to Mackie’s focus on user
friendly products.”
RJ...@aol.com wrote in message ...
Marc
Skaface wrote:
>
> Not to be rude, but who really gives a fuck? I mean, so what if one stole
> from the other's design. This is the history of this industry. If you use
> Mackie and gain enjoyment/profit/etc., out of it, or Behringer for that
> matter- good. Unless you are a douchebag lawyer or some kinda gear groupie
> - WHO CARES?
>
You *are* rude. Not to mention someone who probably is inbred and living
in a mobile home beside a muddy creek. Who the fuck cares whether *you*
give a fuck? The guy posted perfectly reasonable on-topic content. If
you don't care, fine. I do.
Now go away before I come to your shack and poke a hole in your
flatboat. That's if I can stand walking through the dog shit to get to
it.
Love,
Marc
jason.b...@cwi.cablew.com
Skaface <Brad...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Not to be rude, but who really gives a fuck? I mean, so what if one stole
> from the other's design. This is the history of this industry. If you use
> Mackie and gain enjoyment/profit/etc., out of it, or Behringer for that
> matter- good. Unless you are a douchebag lawyer or some kinda gear groupie
> - WHO CARES?
>
You obviously never took any economics courses. The long term effect is
that the PROFITS of the market are transferred to the thieves while the
people who bust their asses doing R&D are not rewarded for their efforts
(with PROFITS - this isn't charity, ya know) because they have to
UNDERCUT THEIR PRICES to compete with the thieves who have such low
prices because they didn't spend any money on R&D. Thus the victims LOSE
THEIR INCENTIVE to keep developing such wonderful tools in the future.
And that ends up hurting us, not the thieves.
For instance, if Empirical Labs thought that they would have had the
design for their Distressor ripped off, I guarantee they wouldn't have
produced it or even bothered trying - because they would not have been
able to make any money. So aside from the IMMORALITY of it, it damages
our ability to acquire the tools that help facillitate us improving our
Holy Grail, SOUND QUALITY.
Jason Browning
P.S. I'm too poor to be a real gear groupie.
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Irwin Shur
And, for the Mackie side of the story:
Samson/Behringer Motion To Dismiss Denied.
Case to proceed to Trial.
Judge determines jurisdiction over key defendants in Mackie
lawsuit.
RJ...@aol.com wrote:
> In article <34E103...@sunshine.net>, pho...@sunshine.net wrote:
>
> > Has anyone heard anything lately on the outcome of the Mackie/Behringer
> > lawsuit if any?
> >
> > pho...@sunshine.net
>
>
>
> February 5, 1998
>
> JUDGE DISMISSES MACKIE CLAIMS
>
> Syosset, NY -- Samson Technologies Corp. CEO, Scott Goodman announced
> today that the US District Court for the Western District of Washington
> has dismissed the patent infringement claim brought by Mackie Designs,
> Inc. against Samson's supplier Behringer Spezielle Studio-Technik GmbH.
> The Judge's opinion also dismissed all of Mackie's claims against
> Goodman, Sam Ash Music Corporation and Sam Ash CEO, Richard Ash, and threw
> out as unreliable the only evidence Mackie could muster to support its
> claim of intentional wrongdoing in the case.
> Although the litigation may still continue as to some other claims,
> Goodman noted, "This decision confirms everything we said at the outset of
> the case. We are now in the process of preparing with our legal counsel, a
> major countersuit against Mackie for among other things, slander, libel
> and defamation.
> "It is regrettable that so much time and energy has been wasted on what
> we've claimed from the beginning to be a spiteful and mean-spirited
> lawsuit."
--
Irwin Shur
ishu...@lnn.com
Rhyming Disclaimer: "Here I only speak for me, and not at all for APV."
Michael Riehle
In article <34E1E94B...@apv.co.uk> on Wed, 11 Feb 1998 12:09:15 -0600 Irwin Shur (is...@apv.co.uk) wrote:
: And, for the Mackie side of the story:
: Samson/Behringer Motion To Dismiss Denied.
: Case to proceed to Trial.
: Judge determines jurisdiction over key defendants in Mackie
: lawsuit.
[...very informative article snipped...]
And what this all means to me is that I'm very happy I bought a Mackie
and not a Behringer board. That and this is one more reason why I won't
be buying anything from Behringer in the future.
--
--------------------------------------------------------
Michael Riehle Send mail to mcr at the mriehle.com
San Jose, CA domain.
http://www.mriehle.com/live.dressed.girls
#include <std.disclaimer>
--------------------------------------------------------
Americans for Non-smokers Rights http://www.no-smoke.org
Bay Area Sendhand Smoke Hotline (408)999-0500
--------------------------------------------------------
Yumpin' Yiminy
jason.b...@cwi.cablew.com wrote:
>
> Skaface <Brad...@earthlink.net> wrote:
---schnipping the first guy's fuel...---
>
> You obviously never took any economics courses.
Not REALLY required to understand, even loosely, what you're about to
explain.
> The long term effect is
> that the PROFITS of the market are transferred to the thieves while the
> people who bust their asses doing R&D are not rewarded for their efforts
> (with PROFITS - this isn't charity, ya know) because they have to
> UNDERCUT THEIR PRICES to compete with the thieves who have such low
> prices because they didn't spend any money on R&D. Thus the victims LOSE
> THEIR INCENTIVE to keep developing such wonderful tools in the future.
> And that ends up hurting us, not the thieves.
Absolutely - in 'some' cases. The real problem stems from the ignorant
consumer who prefers to remain ignorant because they HAVE no desire to
have long term vision. After several decades of being bombarded by
consumer advocasy groups proclaiming that PRICE is the ONLY thing worth
considering and you are a fool if you don't shop 'til you drop - or the
salesman drops - then we now are faced with legions upon generations of
people who refuse to buy into long-term philosophies as they apply to
the subject you describe - ESPECIALLY in THIS industry.
H O W E V E R... WHO on earth REALLY thinks that the subjects of
contention are legitimate, other than Greggie? GIMME A BREAK!! It's
NOT like we're talkin' 'bout Rupert's or George's EQ, or how someone got
their fader to move magically or anuthing like that.... It's a wittle
mixer. Not even a GREAT mixer - but certainly serviceable for MANY
people who hain't gots big bucks to drop on something "better".... The
unstated reality - and this is not an original opinion, but it IS just
an opinion nonetheless so don't crucify ME too quickly - is that MR.
Mackie didn't like someone cuttin' into market share that he had the
good sense to identify and aggressively attack before someone else with
enough wherewithall decided to follow suit. Sorry, but for the products
being dealt with/of concern, it is difficult to grant innovative
propriety to anything other than the equivalent of a game of jacks to
decide where to move what around.
>
> For instance, if Empirical Labs thought that they would have had the
> design for their Distressor ripped off, I guarantee they wouldn't have
> produced it or even bothered trying - because they would not have been
> able to make any money. So aside from the IMMORALITY of it, it damages
> our ability to acquire the tools that help facillitate us improving our
> Holy Grail, SOUND QUALITY.
Innovative technology is ONE thing. And agreed. Re-arranging,
re-labeling, and re-marketing the same ol' pots an' faders with a
different paint job and then complaining when someone else gets so close
that, cosmeticly, you feel they are slapping you.... Uhhh, sorry, but I
cannot accept that - but Greg should!
>
> Jason Browning
> P.S. I'm too poor to be a real gear groupie.
As am I, Jason. But ya see - Greg thinks that HE should OWN that
market. There IS a difference between possessing the clear lions share
and being a leader in your respective marketplace, and attempting to
infringe and restrict the business of a competitor who can pose the
possibility of both reducing your market share AND spurring you on to
develop new ideas and products to keep AHEAD of your competetion and
thereby retain your market share. And as long as the CONSUMER elects to
vote, with their checkbook, for the best marketing ploy out there, and
the "legal system", (let's NOT get started on THAT debate - we're far
enough off topic as it is....,) endorses those who would seek redress
because they think they can, not necessarily because there is just
cause, then we will all have to deal with this kind of hooey for the
foreseeable future.
JD
--
+............................................................+
| Nous sommes change, nous c'est le meme chose! |
| Are you "Right Brain" or "Left Brain"? Remember: what's |
| not right, is what's left! bigki...@rocketmail.com |
+............................................................+
Tom Loredo
Howdy-
Wow, talk about spin doctoring! The two versions of the decision
sound like they're about different events happening on different
planets.
As for why we should care, check the closing editorial/article in
*Recording* this month. It does not mention this suit by name, but
I presume it is the topic of the piece.
I for one avoid Behringer for just the reasons cited in the article.
Peace,
Tom Loredo
Yalk
<<That and this is one more reason why I won't
be buying anything from Behringer in the future
wrote
Michael Riehle>>
That's right, folks. Vote with your pocketbook. It will be a cold day below
before I sell (buy) a Behringer product.
Regards,
Klay Anderson
Klay Anderson Audio, Inc.
1.800.FOR.KLAY
http://www.klay.com
"Good Sound is the Absence of Bad Sound"tm
Greg Hanks
I'm not a real fan of Mackie stuff. It's good bang for the buck, low end
stuff. But God Damn It! Behringer Ripped The PCB ART off! That's low! We
all learn from each other, in design, form fit and function. I love
output servo's so we don't need coupling caps. (Thanks Crest for showing
me an easy how.) Not a direct rip off, borrow- push the envelope a
little further... But THIS WAS OUTRIGHT THEFT!
FUCK BEHRINGER!
Good Luck to you Mr Mackie, It's a noble fight!
Greg Hanks
ark
On Wed, 11 Feb 1998 13:00:23 -0800, Yumpin' Yiminy wrote:
<snip>
> H O W E V E R... WHO on earth REALLY thinks that the subjects of
>contention are legitimate, other than Greggie? GIMME A BREAK!! It's
>NOT like we're talkin' 'bout Rupert's or George's EQ, or how someone got
>their fader to move magically or anuthing like that.... It's a wittle
>mixer. Not even a GREAT mixer - but certainly serviceable for MANY
>people who hain't gots big bucks to drop on something "better"....
Your opinion (or anyone else's) of the merits of the product have
nothing to do with the issue. Can't you understand the principle of
this? Somebody STOLE their trademarked product design. How
innovative it is is not the point.
Al
Yumpin' Yiminy
ark wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Feb 1998 13:00:23 -0800, Yumpin' Yiminy wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > H O W E V E R... WHO on earth REALLY thinks that the subjects of
> >contention are legitimate, other than Greggie? GIMME A BREAK!! It's
> >NOT like we're talkin' 'bout Rupert's or George's EQ, or how someone got
> >their fader to move magically or anuthing like that.... It's a wittle
> >mixer. Not even a GREAT mixer - but certainly serviceable for MANY
> >people who hain't gots big bucks to drop on something "better"....
>
> Your opinion (or anyone else's) of the merits of the product have
> nothing to do with the issue.
Granted. But, it is a topic of discussion in an open forum and I do
have the option to participate and display as much insight, opinion, or
blasphemous ignorance on the topic as the next person. And you have the
option to tell me just how ignorant you think I am being if I open my
yap. Thanks for exercising your option.
> Can't you understand the principle of
> this? Somebody STOLE their trademarked product design. How
> innovative it is is not the point.
I understand what is being touted as prinicple. Perhaps, since I am so
distant to the actual controversy I am less sensitive to its import.
Frankly though, all I am saying - without the benefit of engineering
details - is that *I* find it difficult to beleive there is REAL cause
for the suit. I don't favor either one of the companies. I don't own
one piece of their products and with enough money and a little luck, I
won't have to. I have my heart's desire set on more expensive toys that
will probably be overpriced for the difference in performance they might
yield. But, that's what we do in this biz, ain't it? Pay for bragging
rights? Yeah, yeah, there's some substance some of the time. But, in
my more than humble opinion, NOT with this suit!
BUT - as Dennis Miller is fond of saying: "...I could be wrong..."
Please note that not wishing to incur any litigatory processes myself I
DID give proper credit to the quotation!!
Cheers!
JD
--
+............................................................+
Yumpin' Yiminy
Greg Hanks wrote:
>
> I'm not a real fan of Mackie stuff. It's good bang for the buck, low end
> stuff. But God Damn It! Behringer Ripped The PCB ART off!
Is that what is alleged? Or has Behringer copped to it? Or what? I
admit to being pleasantly on the periphery of the entire topic - but I
grew bored of listening to Monica/Bill stories being
over-sensationalized and....
> That's low!
You're saying that matched the etch masks trace for trace?
Hmmmmmm.......??????????
That would be not just low, but profoundedly STUPID to try to pullthat
off. THAT is why *I* have a bit of a hard time accepting the whole
thang. Cosmetic surface similarities? Maybe I get perturbed and make a
stink and point fingers and throw a creme pie at a public gathering or
something. Just flame a litle bit. Kick and stomp. Law Suit????
> We all learn from each other, in design, form fit and function. I love
> output servo's so we don't need coupling caps. (Thanks Crest for showing
> me an easy how.) Not a direct rip off, borrow- push the envelope a
> little further... But THIS WAS OUTRIGHT THEFT!
If that IS the case, then it should be a fairly simple matter to prove
and the process shouldn't drag on very long. Once proceeedings actually
commence, the lawyers dance a little bit, ya trots out the hard cold
facts and voila! Settlement! We'll see!
> FUCK BEHRINGER!
Nahhhhh - I'm strictly hetero, but I'll watch!
> Good Luck to you Mr Mackie, It's a noble fight!
> Greg Hanks
If it is, it'll be the first in a long time.
Basscraft
If anyone wants to see the actual complaint that was filed by Mackie, I have it
in a .pdf file (you'll need Adobe Acrobat Reader 3.0 to view it). DL'd off the
Mackie site a while back, I think it's not there now. Just Email me and I'll
send it to you.
If you read the complaint, it will shed a lot of light on the situation.
So what if the court in Washington dismissed the case against Samson/Sam Ash.
That's procedural. It was dismissed on a jurisdictional basis, not
evidentiury(sp); the suit against them should have been filed in New York. That
Samson is jumping for joy and declaring a victory is rather premature...
Thanks to whoever it was to post the updates!
matt
*** * * * *** *** * * * ***
Moving right along...
Matt Macchiarolo
ATM SoundWorks
Dinty Floon
Samson products are shit, Sam Ash is run by a bunch of evil insects! Fuck 'em!
Palermo141
>So what if the court in Washington dismissed the case against Samson/Sam Ash.
>That's procedural. It was dismissed on a jurisdictional basis, not
>evidentiury(sp); the suit against them should have been filed in New York.
Procedural. At $200+ an hour mackie should sue their attorneys
Basscraft
In article <19980213143...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, paler...@aol.com
(Palermo141) writes:
I don't know a lot about law, but I do know that if I was suing or being sued
I'd want my lawyer to leave no stone unturned...I suspect that the attorneys
knew those charges would be dismissed, they just wanted them on record, and
also the had probably planned to file suit in NY all along
art
Greg Hanks wrote:
>
> I'm not a real fan of Mackie stuff. It's good bang for the buck, low end
> all learn from each other, in design, form fit and function. I love
> output servo's so we don't need coupling caps. (Thanks Crest for showing
> me an easy how.) Not a direct rip off, borrow- push the envelope a
> little further... But THIS WAS OUTRIGHT THEFT!
> Good Luck to you Mr Mackie, It's a noble fight!
> Greg Hanks
Ignoble is more like it. Mr Mackie who is still looking for items to
copy from the 02R is one to talk. Have you seen the actual PC bds? Have
you looked to find the complete boards duped? That means every part has
to be of same size. That means all mechanicals have to located on the
same spot. Izzat so?
Art Yeap
Greg Hanks
In a word... YES!
GH
David L. Rick
Art Yeap wrote:
> Greg Hanks wrote:
> >
> > I'm not a real fan of Mackie stuff. It's good bang for the buck, low end
> > stuff. But God Damn It! Behringer Ripped The PCB ART off! <snip>
>
> Ignoble is more like it. Mr Mackie who is still looking for items to
> copy from the 02R is one to talk.
Don't be a fool. Yamaha used proprietary DSP chips available to noone
else.
Mackie is using (many more) commercially available DSPs made by Analog
Devices.
Obviously, the instruction sets are totally different and Mackie's DSP
code is written from scratch. The user interface is completely
different,
and the automation is based on Mackie's pre-existing Ultramix software.
That software runs on an Intel processor, not the RISK chip used by
Yamaha.
The preamps are the same ones found in other Mackie boards. You may
like
'em or you may hate them, but they bear no resemblence to those in the
Yamaha product. There is some technology in the board which Mackie did
not develop in-house, but they got it fair and square by licensing it
from Apogee. I doubt that Uli Behringer has ever licensed anything
besides his car.
[Back to Behringer vs. Mackie]
> Have you seen the actual PC bds? Have
> you looked to find the complete boards duped? That means every part has
> to be of same size. That means all mechanicals have to located on the
> same spot. Izzat so?
Yup, almost exactly. There's one switch or something moved slightly,
otherwise
the holes in the sheet metal line up perfectly. So said Rick Chinn,
former
Mackoid, when queried on the subject some months ago. I don't think he
can
talk about it any more.
David L. Rick
Seventh String Recording
dr...@hach.com
Paulo Abreu
Maybe you guys are right about stolen ideas, but is there a completly
"virgin" company that is always inventing the wheel...
I have a Mackie 1604 (that I really love) and I also have one of these
new (very small) Behringer 8 chanel mixers (I'm sorry but I'm not at
home right now, and I do not know the name of the model but its the last
one) that is really handy when I travel (its smaller than the small
makie, and also cheaper) but it is not similar in sound, it has the same
color? looks? but is much, and I mean much more noisy than the Mackie,
it ain't the same, really... But has good points (better-or less bad EQ
and its really small)...kind of a toy.
Look, unfortunatly more than half of you (and me also at work) are using
win95 PCs and do not complain about how miserable Microsoft is in this
department ; )
No one complains, and is so cinical that sometimes makes me think that
copyright or whatever just do not make sense, does it?
To be honest I think that the Mackie guy (greg..?) really do not have to
be worried about Behringer because we are talking of a different market
($$$). Maybe he can be worried about Soundcraft or Allen&? (sorry too
complicated...they know nothing about marketing), but not with
Behringer, you simply can not make a DAT master for professional use on
a Behringer (or else just spend more than the difference of price on a
noise gate, maybe also on a better mic preamp and on a ...).
OK. Goodbye.
Hope it helps,
John Fonseca
I can't comment on Behringer's other mixers, but I have a mx8000
eurodesk and I think it's pretty good for what it is.
I really only use it as a keyboard mixer right now and in that
function I much prefer it to the Mackie 8 buss.
When I bought the Behringer almost 2 years ago I of course had a
choice between it and the mackie. Have previously owned a mackie 24x8
at another studio I had, I was fully aware of it's capabilities and
limitations. I ended up buying the eurodesk not because it was
cheaper, but because of the improved eq section. Instead of stealing
bands from the main eq to apply them on the B-inputs, you get two
dedicated (fixed) bands of eq on each B input.
For my application (keyboard mixer) this made the eurodesk a superior
product to the Mackie. As for the mic pre's, I still can't comment on
them because I've never used them. I understand that they are
inferior to the mackie product, but truthfully I never used the Mackie
mic pre's either when I had that board in favor of sexier outboard mic
pre's. As for overall noisiness, from what I recall the Mackie wasn't
too different. I haven't done an a/b comparison, so this is purely
subjective.
Peace.
John
On Tue, 17 Feb 1998 14:27:19 +0000, Paulo Abreu <pea...@isa.utl.pt>
wrote: