Monster Cable suing rampage

[JBroll]

I guess it's vaguely helpful that they're protecting us against two things having the same name - that time I plugged my guitar into the interface with a Monster energy drink didn't turn out too well, and the Monsters Inc. DVD just killed the transients.

Monster Cable Inc. Corp. Ltd. Conglomerate is utter trash and their lawyers are despicable pieces of shit - how's that for defamation? If their lawyers can get cables mixed up with mini golf, stationery, and children's clothing they should do the world a favor and hang themselves on a pair of socks tied to a sticker-covered children's putter. The fact that Amazon, eBay, Apple, and Virgin have done the same doesn't excuse them - in fact, Apple has gotten into trouble with representatives of a certain British pop group that originally let them use the Apple name only under the condition that they never create music products, so that's a poor example itself - and if they are still a 'family-run business' it's time we hear what Old Man Monster has to say about the importance of not letting his cables get confused with remote-controlled toys... and on top of that they have that little utter bullshit FUD patent lawsuits that would make Microsoft get frivolous-lawsuit envy.

I'm tempted to start selling Monster Coathangers - if nothing else, they won't sound any worse than the cables...

Jeff

 

[BLOODROOT]

I guess it's vaguely helpful that they're protecting us against two things having the same name - that time I plugged my guitar into the interface with a Monster energy drink didn't turn out too well, and the Monsters Inc. DVD just killed the transients.

Monster Cable Inc. Corp. Ltd. Conglomerate is utter trash and their lawyers are despicable pieces of shit - how's that for defamation? If their lawyers can get cables mixed up with mini golf, stationery, and children's clothing they should do the world a favor and hang themselves on a pair of socks tied to a sticker-covered children's putter. The fact that Amazon, eBay, Apple, and Virgin have done the same doesn't excuse them - in fact, Apple has gotten into trouble with representatives of a certain British pop group that originally let them use the Apple name only under the condition that they never create music products, so that's a poor example itself - and if they are still a 'family-run business' it's time we hear what Old Man Monster has to say about the importance of not letting his cables get confused with remote-controlled toys... and on top of that they have that little utter bullshit FUD patent lawsuits that would make Microsoft get frivolous-lawsuit envy.

I'm tempted to start selling Monster Coathangers - if nothing else, they won't sound any worse than the cables...

Jeff

for once i 100% agree with you.

 

[Ben Johnson]

what do you mean 'for once?' Jeff is always right!

 

[Lowberg]

Whirlwind FTW gotta support the locals. I've had the same 10 dollar guitar cable that I got when I bought my first guitar 7 years ago and I've played a ton of gigs with it, got it caught under chairs and rolled over by amps and I've never had a problem with them.

Always hated Monster Cables for somereason, and now I have a good reason.

 

[J.DavisNJ]

Building your own cables for the win!

-Joe

 

[Metaltastic]

Building your own cables for the win!

-Joe

Hear hear!

 

[LydonB]

I guess it's vaguely helpful that they're protecting us against two things having the same name - that time I plugged my guitar into the interface with a Monster energy drink didn't turn out too well, and the Monsters Inc. DVD just killed the transients.

Monster Cable Inc. Corp. Ltd. Conglomerate is utter trash and their lawyers are despicable pieces of shit - how's that for defamation? If their lawyers can get cables mixed up with mini golf, stationery, and children's clothing they should do the world a favor and hang themselves on a pair of socks tied to a sticker-covered children's putter. The fact that Amazon, eBay, Apple, and Virgin have done the same doesn't excuse them - in fact, Apple has gotten into trouble with representatives of a certain British pop group that originally let them use the Apple name only under the condition that they never create music products, so that's a poor example itself - and if they are still a 'family-run business' it's time we hear what Old Man Monster has to say about the importance of not letting his cables get confused with remote-controlled toys... and on top of that they have that little utter bullshit FUD patent lawsuits that would make Microsoft get frivolous-lawsuit envy.

I'm tempted to start selling Monster Coathangers - if nothing else, they won't sound any worse than the cables...

Jeff

You should write them an email.

 

[Corny]

I guess it's vaguely helpful that they're protecting us against two things having the same name - that time I plugged my guitar into the interface with a Monster energy drink didn't turn out too well, and the Monsters Inc. DVD just killed the transients.

Monster Cable Inc. Corp. Ltd. Conglomerate is utter trash and their lawyers are despicable pieces of shit - how's that for defamation? If their lawyers can get cables mixed up with mini golf, stationery, and children's clothing they should do the world a favor and hang themselves on a pair of socks tied to a sticker-covered children's putter. The fact that Amazon, eBay, Apple, and Virgin have done the same doesn't excuse them - in fact, Apple has gotten into trouble with representatives of a certain British pop group that originally let them use the Apple name only under the condition that they never create music products, so that's a poor example itself - and if they are still a 'family-run business' it's time we hear what Old Man Monster has to say about the importance of not letting his cables get confused with remote-controlled toys... and on top of that they have that little utter bullshit FUD patent lawsuits that would make Microsoft get frivolous-lawsuit envy.

I'm tempted to start selling Monster Coathangers - if nothing else, they won't sound any worse than the cables...

Jeff

As much as I agree with everyone's opinion about the behaviour of Monster Cables (I will never buy their cables, sure about that) - you completely miss the point.

Monster Cable pointed out that they sell products in other categories (food for example), NOT only cables. So it's not about confusing cables with drinks or anything else.


I'm shocked and annoyed by Monster cable's behaviour, just like you all. But please keep the discussion at a mature level and don't write senseless posts.

 

[LydonB]

ownage will commence shortly.

 

[JBroll]

As much as I agree with everyone's opinion about the behaviour of Monster Cables (I will never buy their cables, sure about that) - you completely miss the point.

Monster Cable pointed out that they sell products in other categories (food for example), NOT only cables. So it's not about confusing cables with drinks or anything else.


I'm shocked and annoyed by Monster cable's behaviour, just like you all. But please keep the discussion at a mature level and don't write senseless posts.

What foods do they make, and how many Monster products are not advertised as "Monster fucking makes this!" clearly and in neon lights up everyone's ass? Not only did I *not* claim that they didn't make foods, I pointed out three product types (stationary, children's clothing, golf) that they did not list themselves as being involved in but sued for anyway.

They sue people without any risk of actual confusion - they have said themselves that they just suck money out of people for using Monster in their name. Further, monster is far too common a word to have been sensibly trademarked in the first place, and if they actually want to keep the trademark they should shut their traps before it gets yanked away by one of the two-and-a-half *sensible* people who would hear that case.

On top of that, they sue people for violating patents and got their asses handed to them earlier for it. They're not protecting anything, they're just sue-happy and out to get beaten.

Finally, the fact that they're using U.S. law and arguably evading tax payments by having patents under a company based outside the country is pretty hypocritical.

You have a few things to back up yourself, so until you're no longer attacking straw men and considering claims I actually made you can shove your plea for 'mature, sensible' posting straight up your ass.

Jeff

 

[Corny]

Wow, you are very tough, congratulations. Stop bringing a fight into a serious discussion.

I was referring to this:

Monster Cable Inc. Corp. Ltd. Conglomerate is utter trash and their lawyers are despicable pieces of shit - how's that for defamation? If their lawyers can get cables mixed up with mini golf, stationery, and children's clothing they should do the world a favor and hang themselves on a pair of socks tied to a sticker-covered children's putter.

The point is that you claim that Monster Cables would be butthurt because a possible confusion of other products with cables. But actually, they are afraid of confusion with their other products. Monster Cables claim that they have products in the same category in which the Minigolf company fits in.

The name “Monster” are registered trademarks owned by us in the categories of electronics, music, games, food product, entertainment, cleaning products

Tbh, it's obvious that MC is after the money they get out of the fees.


Well, to stress it one more time: I'm against Monster Cables. But the discussion should be rational.

 

[JBroll]

Wow, you are very tough, congratulations. Stop bringing a fight into a serious discussion.

"Internet tough guy"? No, I'm saying you shouldn't pretend you're taking the high ground with a content-free post that makes an attack against a figment of your own imagination.

There are two possibilities with your request for a mature, sensible discussion. First, you are not implying that anyone is stopping this - which means that you've just made a straw man argument to try to pass yourself off as being too pious for the thread. Second, you're implying that someone is interfering with maturity and sensibility - and by the fact that a post of mine was quoted I have sufficient reason to assume that you're accusing me of doing so. This accusation is itself not well-grounded, as my points (although admittedly very sarcastic) are neither immature nor illogical.

After this accusation, you went on to say precisely nothing new and contribute no intelligent points whatsoever, only appearing to fellate yourself and try to imply that someone, existing or not, is immature or irrational.

I have made no threats or references to violence, so I'm not bringing a fight in or acting tough. I'm calling you out on a post that contributed nothing and a claim that hasn't been grounded. Note that there's a difference between "I will stick something up your ass" and "You should stick something up your ass": the former is to be negotiated in private, the latter is what I actually said - and I was saying that because I considered it appropriate for you to let that statement return to the area from which you seem to get all of your arguments.

I was referring to this:

The point is that you claim that Monster Cables would be butthurt because a possible confusion of other products with cables. But actually, they are afraid of confusion with their other products. Monster Cables claim that they have products in the same category in which the Minigolf company fits in.


Well, to stress it one more time: I'm against Monster Cables. But the discussion should be rational.

You might encounter sarcasm on the internet. Be warned.

If they're making the claim and expecting anyone to believe them, they need better grounds for it. The trademark itself was a mistake on the government's part, and there's a big difference between what they can do and what they should do. If they could find ONE person who got the film Monsters Inc. confused with Monster Cable Inc., I'd be damn impressed. The simple fact of the matter, however, is that they have a trademark that they are enforcing in a way entirely contrary to any possible benefits to the market, and with claims that they might be confused with baby clothing and mini golf they're either really grasping for straws or insulting every single person who has ever seen the word Monster more than once. I completely understand the point of a trademark - and they're doing it wrong.

And the discussion is rational - I'm just impolite and straightforward. Also, I was raised by a lawyer, so I speak legalese well enough, and as a graduate math student I have all of the critical thinking and argument components of a lawyer without the whole being-completely-full-of-my-own-shit part.

Jeff

 

[Metaltastic]

 

[Corny]

Second, you're implying that someone is interfering with maturity and sensibility - and by the fact that a post of mine was quoted I have sufficient reason to assume that you're accusing me of doing so. This accusation is itself not well-grounded, as my points (although admittedly very sarcastic) are neither immature nor illogical.

Yes, I meant you. I felt that your post was immature because you started off with an insult followed by an argumentation which is - against the background of the letter by the Monster Cable guy - indeed illogical. Why? Because it claims that the bosses of Monster Cable are actually afraid that people could confuse a Minigolf hall with cables. That's not what MC said.

fellate yourself

I have made no threats or references to violence, so I'm not bringing a fight in or acting tough. (...)

A "fight" is a word which is used often for rude lead discussions, so it was appropriate in that situation, knowing that you indeed insulted me.

You might encounter sarcasm on the internet. Be warned.

Oh really?

If they're making the claim and expecting anyone to believe them, they need better grounds for it. The trademark itself was a mistake on the government's part, and there's a big difference between what they can do and what they should do. If they could find ONE person who got the film Monsters Inc. confused with Monster Cable Inc., I'd be damn impressed. The simple fact of the matter, however, is that they have a trademark that they are enforcing in a way entirely contrary to any possible benefits to the market, and with claims that they might be confused with baby clothing and mini golf they're either really grasping for straws or insulting every single person who has ever seen the word Monster more than once. I completely understand the point of a trademark - and they're doing it wrong.

I agree and maybe I didn't get that you meant the confusion with actual cables only as a deliberate exaggeration.

And the discussion is rational - I'm just impolite and straightforward. Also, I was raised by a lawyer, so I speak legalese well enough, and as a graduate math student I have all of the critical thinking and argument components of a lawyer without the whole being-completely-full-of-my-own-shit part.
Jeff

Nice selfprofiling followed by an accusation without basis if you mean me.

 

[Metaltastic]

Oy, you know when the multiple quotes of the same post come out, things are getting too nitpicky...

 

[Notuern]

A "fight" is a word which is used often for rude lead discussions, so it was appropriate in that situation, knowing that you indeed insulted me.

That, my friend, is called a conflict.

 

[smy1]

Am I the only one annoyed by Jeff's regular condescending bickering and nitpicking if something doesn't suit his worldview?

Jeff: you are old enough to know what they say about arguing on the internet.

 

[JBroll]

You can be annoyed, I just find it amusing.

Especially when people can't read sarcasm, or miss the entire point over nitpicking.

He was pretending a fight existed when it really wasn't there to begin with. We don't disagree on the important part... he just claimed that I missed the point and was illogical and/or immature, which gets on my nerves when it's unfounded.

Jeff

 

[JBroll]

Nice selfprofiling followed by an accusation without basis if you mean me.

I wasn't referring to you with that, I was referring to Monster's lawyers. I may be mean, but I'll never accuse someone of practicing law without justification...

Jeff

 

[Deaf Ear]

I may be mean, but I'll never accuse someone of practicing law without justification...

Jeff

That may very well be the best quote I've ever heard in my entire life.