Everybody boycott Monster Cable!

[jaguars_fan]

Let's not forget Cookie Monster from Sesame Street could be in danger of becoming extinct in the wake of Monster's (can I write their name without the registered trademark symbol and their expressed permission?) lawsuits. And what about Monster.com? Sureley there's an infringement if ever there was one!

[Rycher]

Noel Lee of Monster Cable has already replied to the accusations of them sueing other companies that use the word "Monster". He says it is simply not true. Monster is NOT sueing anyone. These are all just rumors. His response can be read somewhere on this forum, as well as in several other forums. Again, Monster Cable has not sued, or has no intentions of sueing anyone. They are all just rumors.

[Resident Loser]

...if you visit the site ref'd to in the original post, you'll see the words defendent and plaintiff...now I ain't claimin' to be no legal-eagle, but dem sounds like adversarial terms where I come from...even if it's only some sort of objection to trademark/copyright cr@pola...

jimHJJ(...where is Phil Tower when you actually need him...)

[woodman]

Noel Lee of Monster Cable has already replied to the accusations of them sueing other companies that use the word "Monster". He says it is simply not true. Monster is NOT sueing anyone. These are all just rumors. His response can be read somewhere on this forum, as well as in several other forums. Again, Monster Cable has not sued, or has no intentions of sueing anyone. They are all just rumors.

So you think that his denial is all that's needed to dispel all of those horrid rumours? The day that I would believe anything that Mr. Lee says, is the very same day that I'd sit myself down to write a letter to dear old Santa Claus! The man is sorely lacking in ethics, scruples, and morals, IMO.

[Rycher]

I don't know the man personaly, but I've never been one to believe in rumors. Fact is Monster makes a decent product, albeit a pricey one - but so are many other things in our commerce. I choose to stand at the sidelines and with hold my judgement until I know for a fact that these rumors are true. Until that happens I won't waste my time trying to "boycott" or "fight" the Monster. SONY is another big company that ADMITTEDLY does things to detract and screw-over the consumer. They put out a new product (SACD) targeted to replace the aging CD, yet produce a handful of "converted" PCM remasters, and then use scare-tactics and put out false (?) rumors of them pulling out of the SACD market. They also try to stronghold the flash memory market by introducing their own memory stick that can only be used on their products. They did the same thing with the VHS vs. Beta thing, and countless other technologies. If anyone needs to be boycotted, it should be SONY.

[markw]

Actually, Sony had beta on the market for quite some time before VHS hit. Sony sat on Beta technology and, I think the licensing fees were exhorbatent.

VHS technology was the result of several other companies getting together and rather than play Sony's game, in unison, developed and released several players that used this new format to compete with Sony AND had greater playing time than Beta.

Then Sony came out with better sound and this bought them a little time.

I'll forgive the VHS camp for their short lived, stop gap solution of having the linear sound tracks Dolby encoded. Then ALL the VHS manufacturers came out with VHS Hi-Fi. Vhs Hi-Fi rocked! ...and, with DPLs it still does for intents and purposes.

Some still swear that Beta was a better format but, by this time, it worked itself into a marketing corner. Eventually, it dies a quiet, barely mourned death.

Now, had Sony chose to license their Beta technology to other companies at workable figures, I'm sure it would still be around and may well have kicked VHS's butt. Licensing is good. Just ask Ray Dolby and George Lucas.

[risabet]

Actually, Sony had beta on the market for quite some time before VHS hit. Sony sat on Beta technology and, I think the licensing fees were exhorbatent.

VHS technology was the result of several other companies getting together and rather than play Sony's game, in unison, developed and released several players that used this new format to compete with Sony AND had greater playing time than Beta.

Then Sony came out with better sound and this bought them a little time.

I'll forgive the VHS camp for their short lived, stop gap solution of having the linear sound tracks Dolby encoded. Then ALL the VHS manufacturers came out with VHS Hi-Fi. Vhs Hi-Fi rocked! ...and, with DPLs it still does for intents and purposes.

Some still swear that Beta was a better format but, by this time, it worked itself into a marketing corner. Eventually, it dies a quiet, barely mourned death.

Now, had Sony chose to license their Beta technology to other companies at workable figures, I'm sure it would still be around and may well have kicked VHS's butt. Licensing is good. Just ask Ray Dolby and George Lucas.

Absolutely right, I sold both Beta and VHS machines and one day we decided to compare them side by side. We used 2 25' Proton monitors which were set up to look identical and compared two copies of the same film. The fact that everyone agreed that the Beta picture was better simply reinforces the poor marketing and decision making of Sony. The other issue was recording time VHS had more and that's what people wanted. I owned both for years until the Beta died. Unfortunately we are being presented with the same silliness in both video formats Blu-Ray vs DVD-HD and audio formats SACD vs DVD-A. When will they ever learn.

[jaguars_fan]

Sony, Cisco, Monster...They are all guilty of the same thing...appealing to the masses and gaining market share based on name recognition. Yes, each respective company has good, if not great great products (in some respects) but the simple fact is you can get the same quality at lower prices andmost of us know this.

Whether Monster is sueing other companies/people or not, we will never make a dent in their sales when they are all over Wal-Mart, Circuit City, Best Buy, Tweeters, Magnolia Hi Fi, and millions of other A/V stores out there and the masses recognize that name.

Add to that this real scientific test reported in USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/money/indust...-sidebar_x.htm

We are nothing more than a flea on an enormous dog butt!

Still...I don't buy Monster, never have, never will and I will never recommend them to anyone!

[Florian]

So you think that his denial is all that's needed to dispel all of those horrid rumours? The day that I would believe anything that Mr. Lee says, is the very same day that I'd sit myself down to write a letter to dear old Santa Claus! The man is sorely lacking in ethics, scruples, and morals, IMO.

Now while i agree that sueing people over silly crap like that is ridiculous. I have to say "more power to him". He makes tons of money selling products that are average for a high price. Hell, people badmouth BOSE too (incl. me) but they are in the bizz of making money. And it works. I would give almost anything to be in that position.

[Jack N]

I havent visited this site since last summer sometime so this is the first that I have heard of this. I am certainly no legal expert, so Im wondering if somebody can clarify this. The cases listed in the original link are listed under the patent office web site. So are these actual lawsuits to the extent the common person such as myself thinks of them ? Or is it simply an attempt to monopolize the Monster name to gain royalties ? Or is it one in the same?

Regardless of which one, it sounds like a seriously misguided and inappropriate way to conduct a business. It certainly isnt going to win them any fans thats for sure. Its obvious that Monster is aware of this and reads the various A/V forums as the link to www.stopthemonster.com has literally been hijacked. You now get a letter defending Monster Cables actions. This in itself makes me suspicious.

With the A/V cable industry being viewed largely as a snake oil industry praying on the uninformed and/or the gullible, the last thing it needs is lawsuits that sound like something from the National Enquirer or the Jerry Springer Show.

Personally I dont like seeing this type of thing hurting our beloved past time. I think we as A/V enthusiasts owe it to ourselves to find out just what these actions by Monster really mean from a legal perspective, and put them into lay terms that we can understand. Then we will be able to turn this into a much more meaningful forum, and then decide whether a boycott is appropriate. Is there someone out there who can shed some light on this for us ? Or, if you know of someone who can, please have him/her contribute. Are there any volunteers?