Current Insight Community Cases

Essential Datacenter Tips On Application Performance Monitoring

The Importance Of Skilled Immigrants To The American Economy

Help A New Kind of Music Label Revolutionize The Industry

Mandates To Buy American Should Be More Carefully Considered

Navigating The New Business World After This Recession

Shut Us Up

-- For Only $100 Million

Brought to you by Floor64 and the Techdirt crew.

stories about: "monster mini golf"
Legal Issues

Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
trademark

Companies:
monster cable, monster mini golf



Monster Cable Caves Again, With Oddly Worded Apology

from the monster-bullies dept

Well, it looks like after years and years of articles highlighting what an incredible trademark bully Monster Cable has been, the company has finally realized that maybe (sorta) it needs to reconsider its strategy (maybe). At least that's what I take from the news that the company has settled its trademark dispute with Monster Mini Golf that got plenty of attention when the Monster Mini Golf folks took to eBay to get out the word about how they were being bullied.

At some point, Monster Cable realized it was losing the PR battle (really badly) in this whole thing, and tried a new tack, claiming that it was just a small family business doing what it was required to do to defend its trademarks. Then it offered up a bogus "deal" whereby it pulled the lawsuit it had filed but still demanded that Monster Mini Golf pay it to "license" the name, though it promised to donate the money to charity. That's emotional bribery.

Either way, the matter was settled as 2008 came to a close when the top two folks from each company held a conference call without their lawyers present (initially, the lawyers were there, but they kicked them out). Monster Mini Golf can now go ahead with its trademark application and Monster Cable agreed to pay their legal fees. Monster Cable's CEO even issued an apology (sorta). After talking up how nice it was to work out an amicable deal in person without lawyers, he states:

I will say that this is a landmark kind of situation, as public opinion wins over what is the right thing to do for trademark protection of a famous mark. We have made the decision that public opinion, and that of our valued customers is more important than the letter of the law that requires us to prevent the dilution of our mark risk losing it.
Of course, it's not a landmark situation at all (even for Monster Cable -- who's been known to be on the receiving end of similar public relations nightmares for similar actions in the past). And, he's wrong that this is a case where "public opinion wins over what is the right thing to do for trademark protection." Monster Cable's overly aggressive attempts to block pretty much anyone from using "Monster" are not "the right thing to do" -- they're abuse of the trademark process. Public opinion was right: Monster Cable was being a bully, and it only backed down because public opinion made that clear. It's pretty weak in an apology for Monster Cable to act magnanimous for doing what the company should have done in the first place (i.e., leave Monster Mini Golf alone).

As for "the letter of the law" that only requires Monster Cable to police the use of its trademark in cases where there's likely to be confusion or dilution in its areas of business. There is simply no way that any reasonable person (let alone the moron in a hurry who has shown up at various trademark lawsuits) would confuse Monster Cable with Monster Mini Golf -- and thus the law does not require that Monster Cable stop others from using the word in those cases. While it's nice that Monster Cable has finally come to its senses, the real question is how it acts the next time this happens -- and given Monster Cable's history, it's likely to happen again soon.

40 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Legal Issues

Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
monster, trademark

Companies:
ebay, monster cable, monster mini golf



Monster Mini Golf Using eBay To Fight Monster Cable's Trademark Lawsuit

from the good-for-them dept

Monster Cable is famously litigious over its trademark -- suing just about anyone who uses the name "Monster" as a part of their corporate offering. Most of these lawsuits are bogus -- as trademark only covers the specific areas of business you're in, and doesn't give you complete control over the name. Thus, if you make a salt lick for deer called Monster Deer Block, you shouldn't have to worry about a lawsuit from Monster Cable... but you'd still get one, as pretty much everyone from the TV show Monster Garage to the Boston Red Sox (for the "Monster seats" on top of the "Green Monster" wall in left field) have found out.

Earlier this year, the company went after a small mini-golf operation in California called Monster Mini Golf, which we doubted anyone would confuse with the cable makers. Apparently, that wasn't the only Monster Mini Golf that Monster's lawyers were busy hassling. Chris Collett alerts us to the fact that a Rhode Island based Monster Mini Golf is also facing a lawsuit, and asking for help. But, there's an interesting twist here. The company is pleading it's case on eBay, and asking people to contribute to its defense fund via eBay. I'm not sure if this goes against eBay's terms of service, though I hope it doesn't. (Update: It did go against eBay's ToS, so it was taken down -- but the company has put up a new auction for a coupon at Monster Mini Golf which will serve the same purpose):

BUT...one man is destined to crush what we have built. He is the founder of Monster Cable Inc. (a company that makes Audio cables) and he's suing us for "Trademark Infringement".

In a nutshell, trademark infringement is based solely on "Likelihood of Confusion", or essentially, "could the average consumer be confused between the two?". The answer is no, as decided by the Patent and Trademark Office when they granted our trademarks, but Monster Cable Inc filed an opposition against that decision, and sued us.

To this day, this one man has opposed approx 400 companies...and it doesn't look like he EVER intends to stop. This is the true meaning of Corporate Bully.

Their tactic is to run the smaller companies out of money, and force them into a settlement where they surrender their name to Monster Cable Inc, who then licenses it back to them for a fee. Yes, so then we would be paying him for a concept and business we created and have worked very hard for! It is essentially extortion, but sadly, it is cheaper than going to trial, which can be crippling to small businesses like ours.

Unlike the 414 companies he has forced into settlement by bleeding them dry.... we have decided to continue on and fight the good fight. We have chosen to stand up for anyone who has ever been bullied, picked on, abused, or otherwise forced into an unfair or unjust situation by a bigger, stronger, (or in this case, richer) opponent.

Each small business that was forced to sign over their name is one more brick in the massive Monster Cable Inc wall, held together by the blood of those crushed beneath their corporate wheels. It is very very sad.

So far our legal fees are well over $100,000. (And counting) and will likely reach $250,000 when all is said and done. No wonder why 400 companies have waived the white flag!! 250K is the cost of "Winning"!! We need your help, we cannot afford to do it alone. Wondering if this is real or not...just google Monster Mini Golf and Cable. Or visit audioholics web site and you will also read about many other cases there as well.

What we are selling is a "Piece" of our legal defense and a small slice of Justice to you for $1. Yep, just a buck....and as Sally Struthers once said, that's less than a cup of coffee! Geez...at Starbucks, it wouldn't even buy you that!

In return for your gracious purchase, you will receive a heartfelt "Thank You" from us and the knowledge that you have helped defeat a corporate bully who has been abusing the legal system for years! And, if you print your paypal receipt and take it to any Monster Mini Golf location, we'll take $2 Off a round of Mini Golf! (that's double your money back! Reg price for 18 holes is between $5.50-$7.50)
This is interesting, as I hadn't heard that Monster Cable was apparently selling the Monster name back to people it bullied. That's even more obnoxious -- and a clear abuse of trademark law. Also, it's been a while since we've seen companies using eBay auctions for PR, so maybe that's making a comeback. Either way, if you want to help stop one of the biggest trademark bullies out there, maybe try to buy a share of the legal defenses, and hope eBay doesn't take the auction down.

69 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Legal Issues

Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
mini golf, monster, trademark

Companies:
monster, monster cable, monster mini golf



Can We Send A Moron In A Hurry With A Mini Golf Club Over To Monster Cable?

from the monster-monster-monster-monster-monster dept

The company Monster Cable has a rather infamous reputation for way too aggressively trying to enforce its trademark on the word "monster." It's sued or threatened just about everyone, including the TV show Monster Garage, a clothing store called MonsterVintage, Disney for the movie Monsters, Inc., the makers of Monster Energy drink, the Chicago Bears for having the nickname "Monsters of the Midway," and the Boston Red Sox for offering "Monster seats" on top of their famous "Green Monster" wall. The latest, sent in by reader Ben S., is that the target is now Monster Mini Golf in California.

Now, because this always comes up in the comments on posts like this, let's address the key point that people always bring up, claiming that Monster "has to" enforce its trademark or face the mark becoming generic (like aspirin, kleenex or band-aids). That's not quite true. It is true that you have to enforce the mark -- but only in cases where it's likely to confuse people or dilute your mark in the area it's designed for. A trademark does not give you total control over the word. It is not designed as a "property right" but really as a consumer protection statute, to prevent people from getting confused and believing that one company or product is sponsoring another. That's why we have the lovely "moron in a hurry" test. If a moron in a hurry wouldn't be confused, then there's no violation. And I have a hard time believing that any moron (even one in a hurry) would see a mini-golf course and assume that it's associated with the company that makes ridiculously expensive tv cables.

62 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Search Techdirt
And now, a word from our Sponsors..



Popular Posts
Poll

Which Internet Concern Worries You The Most?

 

 

 

 

 

 


Add Techdirt RSS To Your Reader
rss Add Techdirt to your Bloglines
Add Techdirt to your Google Add Techdirt to your My Yahoo
Add Techdirt to your Netvibes Add Techdirt to your Newsgator
Subscribe to Techdirt's Daily Email Newsletter

Techdirt's Daily Email Newsletter

Older Stuff

Monday

11:01am: Spanish Court Dismisses Complaint From Nintendo Against Counterfiet DS Cartridges, Since They Add Functionality (12)
9:55am: Dear PR People: If Your Exec Has A Comment, Our Comments Are Open (25)
8:44am: What Kind Of Mickey Mouse (And Donald Duck) Lawsuits Are These? (23)
7:30am: Prosecutors Ending Lawsuit Against Lori Drew (13)
6:06am: Dear Rupert: You Don't Succeed By Making Life More Difficult For Users (70)
4:20am: ESPN Writer Suspended From Twitter (59)
2:10am: School Can't Handle Critical Community Message Board; Sends Legal Nastygram (21)

Friday

7:39pm: Liberian Laws Are A Secret Due To Copyright; Even The Gov't Doesn't Have Them (43)
6:56pm: Lily Allen: It's Ok To Sell My Counterfeit CDs, Just Don't Give My Music For Free (97)
6:10pm: EFF Looks To Bust Bogus Podcasting Patent; Needs Prior Art (34)
5:28pm: Google Blocking Set Top Boxes From Showing YouTube Unless They Pay Up? (64)
4:44pm: Entertainment Industry: Yes, Please Keep Negotiating Secret Copyright Treaty To Save Our Asses (43)
4:02pm: If Google's Book Scanning Violates Copyright Law, What About The AP's Book Scanning? (21)
3:05pm: iPhone App Developer Backlash Growing (49)
2:14pm: Norwegian Band Told It Can't Post Its Own Music To The Pirate Bay, Even Though It Wants To (24)
1:08pm: If You Only Share A Tiny Bit Of A File Via BitTorrent, Is It Still Copyright Infringement? (79)
12:00pm: UK Digital Economy Bill As Bad As Expected; Digital Britain Minister Flat Out Lies About ISP Support (25)
10:57am: NPR's Daniel Schorr Blames The Internet For Ft. Hood Shootings (37)
9:49am: No, ACTA Secrecy Is Not 'Normal' -- Nor Is It A 'Distraction' (28)
8:33am: Murdoch's The Times Accused Of Blatant Copying, Just As It Tells The World You Should Pay For News (28)
7:15am: Copyright Extension Moves To Japan (24)
5:46am: Canadian Ebook Store Offers 'Free' Public Domain Ebooks -- Claims Copyright Says You Can Only Make 1 Copy (27)
4:01am: There Are Lots Of Ways To Fund Journalism (14)
1:49am: Winner Takes All, Long Tails And The Fractilization Of Culture (10)

Thursday

10:37pm: The Lobbyists' Ability To Control The Message (29)
8:11pm: In Going Free, London Evening Standard Doubles Circulation While Slashing Costs (27)
6:10pm: Senate Exploring Med School Profs Putting Names On Ghostwritten Journal Articles In Favor Of Drugs (22)
4:52pm: What Does It Say When A Comedy Show Does More Fact Checking Than News Programs? (56)
3:33pm: Nordic Music Week: Optimism Galore And Found Songs (11)
2:10pm: Would Top Sites Really Opt-Out Of Google Based On A Microsoft Bribe? (38)
More arrow
Quick Links
Close
E-mail It