D
Deleted member 472
Guest
Whatever. You’re still a bully.You Epiphone guys stick together.
Behringer Klone
- Thread starter banned
- Start date
D
Deleted member 472
Guest
Why wouldn’t he want compensation? Someone has to pay for the attorney and the court costs as well as his time.
Eagle
Rock Star
- Messages
- 6,203
Bullshit ,Dave can take care of himself.
Boudoir Guitar
Rock Star
- Messages
- 4,876
It is well past your bedtime….
D
Deleted member 472
Guest
If Behringer’s parent company, Music Tribe, is found guilty in the U.S. federal court case brought by Klon LLC, the court’s ability to enforce its judgment against a foreign company depends on several factors, including jurisdiction, the nature of the claims, and international legal cooperation. Here’s a breakdown of what U.S. courts can do:
1. Monetary Damages: The court could order Music Tribe to pay damages for trademark infringement, counterfeiting, or unfair competition. For trademark counterfeiting under the Lanham Act, damages could include actual damages, profits from infringing sales, or statutory damages (up to $2 million per mark for willful infringement). However, collecting these damages may be challenging if Music Tribe’s assets are primarily outside the U.S. Klon LLC would need to seek enforcement in jurisdictions where Music Tribe holds assets, which could involve foreign courts recognizing the U.S. judgment under international treaties or local laws.
2. Injunctive Relief: The court could issue an injunction ordering Music Tribe to cease selling the allegedly infringing Centaur Overdrive pedal in the U.S. market. This could include halting distribution, advertising, or sales through U.S.-based retailers or online platforms. If Music Tribe ignores the injunction, they could face contempt of court penalties, but enforcement would be limited to U.S. jurisdiction (e.g., seizing products at U.S. borders or targeting U.S.-based distributors).
3. Seizure of Goods: If infringing products are found within the U.S., the court could order their seizure or destruction. U.S. Customs Service may also block imports of the infringing pedals at the border if Klon LLC records its trademark with customs authorities.
4. Jurisdictional Limits: Music Tribe is based in the Philippines, and Behringer operates out of Germany and other countries. If Music Tribe lacks significant assets or operations in the U.S., enforcing a judgment could be difficult. Klon LLC would need to pursue enforcement in foreign jurisdictions, which depends on whether those countries recognize U.S. judgments. For example, Germany (where Behringer has operations) is not party to a bilateral treaty with the U.S. for automatic recognition of judgments, so Klon would need to file a new action in a German court, proving the U.S. judgment’s validity under German law.
5. Practical Challenges: If Music Tribe has U.S.-based subsidiaries, bank accounts, or distributors, the court could target those assets to satisfy a judgment. However, if most of Music Tribe’s operations and assets are abroad, enforcement becomes complex, costly, and time-consuming, requiring cooperation from foreign courts. Additionally, online sales through platforms like Amazon could be targeted in the U.S., with courts ordering platforms to remove infringing listings.
6. Reputational and Market Impact: Beyond legal remedies, a guilty verdict could pressure Music Tribe to settle or alter their practices to avoid further litigation or reputational damage in the U.S. market, where Klon has a strong following.
In summary, while the U.S. court can impose significant penalties like damages, injunctions, or seizures, enforcing these against a foreign entity like Music Tribe is limited by their U.S. presence and international legal cooperation. Klon LLC would likely need to pursue additional legal actions in foreign jurisdictions to fully enforce a favorable ruling.
1. Monetary Damages: The court could order Music Tribe to pay damages for trademark infringement, counterfeiting, or unfair competition. For trademark counterfeiting under the Lanham Act, damages could include actual damages, profits from infringing sales, or statutory damages (up to $2 million per mark for willful infringement). However, collecting these damages may be challenging if Music Tribe’s assets are primarily outside the U.S. Klon LLC would need to seek enforcement in jurisdictions where Music Tribe holds assets, which could involve foreign courts recognizing the U.S. judgment under international treaties or local laws.
2. Injunctive Relief: The court could issue an injunction ordering Music Tribe to cease selling the allegedly infringing Centaur Overdrive pedal in the U.S. market. This could include halting distribution, advertising, or sales through U.S.-based retailers or online platforms. If Music Tribe ignores the injunction, they could face contempt of court penalties, but enforcement would be limited to U.S. jurisdiction (e.g., seizing products at U.S. borders or targeting U.S.-based distributors).
3. Seizure of Goods: If infringing products are found within the U.S., the court could order their seizure or destruction. U.S. Customs Service may also block imports of the infringing pedals at the border if Klon LLC records its trademark with customs authorities.
4. Jurisdictional Limits: Music Tribe is based in the Philippines, and Behringer operates out of Germany and other countries. If Music Tribe lacks significant assets or operations in the U.S., enforcing a judgment could be difficult. Klon LLC would need to pursue enforcement in foreign jurisdictions, which depends on whether those countries recognize U.S. judgments. For example, Germany (where Behringer has operations) is not party to a bilateral treaty with the U.S. for automatic recognition of judgments, so Klon would need to file a new action in a German court, proving the U.S. judgment’s validity under German law.
5. Practical Challenges: If Music Tribe has U.S.-based subsidiaries, bank accounts, or distributors, the court could target those assets to satisfy a judgment. However, if most of Music Tribe’s operations and assets are abroad, enforcement becomes complex, costly, and time-consuming, requiring cooperation from foreign courts. Additionally, online sales through platforms like Amazon could be targeted in the U.S., with courts ordering platforms to remove infringing listings.
6. Reputational and Market Impact: Beyond legal remedies, a guilty verdict could pressure Music Tribe to settle or alter their practices to avoid further litigation or reputational damage in the U.S. market, where Klon has a strong following.
In summary, while the U.S. court can impose significant penalties like damages, injunctions, or seizures, enforcing these against a foreign entity like Music Tribe is limited by their U.S. presence and international legal cooperation. Klon LLC would likely need to pursue additional legal actions in foreign jurisdictions to fully enforce a favorable ruling.
SillyOctpuss
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,270
D
Deleted member 472
Guest
Example of Seizure of Goods:
www.rollingstone.com
U.S. Border Agents Seize $18 Million of Fake Gibson Guitars
U.S. Customs and Border Protection announced it had seized 3,000 fake Gibson guitars, calling it one of the biggest fake instrument busts in history.
www.rollingstone.com
Dave Lewis
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,719
What the same history books that at school told us how Great Britain was but left out all the bits about Raping Pillaging Murdering And Slavery and fucking up countries & there peoples around the world .
I don’t think they are on display anymore So give them back to where they belong because it’s deffonitely not London
D
Deleted member 472
Guest
• Fender Musical Instruments Corp. v. Various Manufacturers (1970s–1980s): https://www.thegearpage.net/board/index.php?threads/trademark-infringement.664134/
Fender successfully enforced trademarks on their Stratocaster and Telecaster headstock designs against companies like Tokai and Greco, known as “lawsuit guitars,” for copying headstock shapes, leading to cease-and-desist actions and settlements.
• Ernie Ball, Inc. v. Earvana, LLC (2005): https://www.alankorn.com/articles/earvana.html Ernie Ball, the maker of Music Man instruments, won a trademark infringement case against Earvana, a company producing guitar accessories. The dispute centered on Earvana’s use of a 4+2 tuner configuration and headstock design similar to Music Man’s trademarked designs, resulting in a court ruling in Ernie Ball’s favor and an injunction against Earvana.
• Gibson v. Elger Co. (Ibanez) (1977):
Gibson, through its parent company Norlin, sued Elger, the U.S. distributor of Ibanez guitars, in Philadelphia Federal District Court for trademark infringement over Ibanez’s use of Gibson’s “open book” headstock design on their copies of Gibson models. The case, filed on June 28, 1977, resulted in an out-of-court settlement where Ibanez agreed to stop copying Gibson’s headstock and using similar model names. By 1978, Ibanez ceased production of these copies and redesigned their headstocks. Link: https://acousticmusic.org/ibanez-lawsuit-elger-guitars/
Fender successfully enforced trademarks on their Stratocaster and Telecaster headstock designs against companies like Tokai and Greco, known as “lawsuit guitars,” for copying headstock shapes, leading to cease-and-desist actions and settlements.
• Ernie Ball, Inc. v. Earvana, LLC (2005): https://www.alankorn.com/articles/earvana.html Ernie Ball, the maker of Music Man instruments, won a trademark infringement case against Earvana, a company producing guitar accessories. The dispute centered on Earvana’s use of a 4+2 tuner configuration and headstock design similar to Music Man’s trademarked designs, resulting in a court ruling in Ernie Ball’s favor and an injunction against Earvana.
• Gibson v. Elger Co. (Ibanez) (1977):
Gibson, through its parent company Norlin, sued Elger, the U.S. distributor of Ibanez guitars, in Philadelphia Federal District Court for trademark infringement over Ibanez’s use of Gibson’s “open book” headstock design on their copies of Gibson models. The case, filed on June 28, 1977, resulted in an out-of-court settlement where Ibanez agreed to stop copying Gibson’s headstock and using similar model names. By 1978, Ibanez ceased production of these copies and redesigned their headstocks. Link: https://acousticmusic.org/ibanez-lawsuit-elger-guitars/
SillyOctpuss
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,270
What the same history books that at school told us how Great Britain was but left out all the bits about Raping Pillaging Murdering And Slavery and fucking up countries & there peoples around the world .
I don’t think they are on display anymore So give them back to where they belong because it’s deffonitely not London
Nurse. He's out of bed again.
SillyOctpuss
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,270
That was about headstock design? I assumed it was about compensated nuts. I had no idea.
Eagle
Rock Star
- Messages
- 6,203
The USA is one of the few places that allows a headstock shape to be a registered trademark.
Dave Lewis
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,719
Yeah yeah Gibson always make a big deal out of these so called Seizures .Example of Seizure of Goods:
U.S. Border Agents Seize $18 Million of Fake Gibson Guitars
U.S. Customs and Border Protection announced it had seized 3,000 fake Gibson guitars, calling it one of the biggest fake instrument busts in history.
YouTube still has lots of new Chibson guitar reviews on there regularly .
They are coming out of the same factories as the Epiphones and Gibson know it .
Dave Lewis
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,719
- Messages
- 11,298
All Behringer have to do with there next production run If they are that bothered ? Is do what Roger Waters did to the giant Pink Floyd Inflatable Pig after he lost his court case .
He added a knob because the original was a female and carried on as normal
View attachment 45675
Not quite. Gilmour added balls to the pig when Waters tried suing them for using it on the '88 tour.
SillyOctpuss
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,270
I'm just reading about the court case now.
- Messages
- 11,298
Dave Lewis
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,719
Oh I knew it was one way or anotherNot quite. Gilmour added balls to the pig when Waters tried suing them for using it on the '88 tour.
The original pig from the Animals album photo shoot at Battersea (That was let go ) came down on a farm near my mother’s place near Canterbury .
A trotter blow out apparently .
D
Deleted member 472
Guest
To be honest, I put about as much work preparing those links as Dave put into his research of the United States legal system.The EBMM could just be a bad response from my prompt.
D
Deleted member 472
Guest
Oh I don't doubt that. But you're still a bully.
Similar threads
