They don't need to.
This is actionable by the consumer under standard civil tort laws for fraud.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Pro Behringer!
- Thread starter olds_cool63
- Start date
They don't need to.
This is actionable by the consumer under standard civil tort laws for fraud.
Peavey sues Behringer. Invalid Link Removed We all Know that blowinger wouldn't do anything wrong.
Tit for tat. Someone blows the whistle on Peavey for falsely labeling their products, when they in fact fail said rf interference testing, so they return a lawsuit. Standard procedure. In the computer world, if this was Intel and AMD, the two would end up settling out of court and "cross license each other's technologies".
Well according to the article I linked Peavey said that the behringer lawsuits are retaliatory since Peavey was sueing them. That sounds right to me.
Did you read the article?I read the article. And so what if the lawsuit is retaliatory? Again, Intel and AMD have done this numerous times to each other. One files a lawsuit, the other returns with equal claims of patent infringement. It is quite common for two competitors to cross-sue.
As I wrote, tit for tat.
If Peavey product do in fact fail RF testing, then Behringer was in the right to report them.
Or, is it okay for Peavey to break the law?
As I wrote, tit for tat.
If Peavey product do in fact fail RF testing, then Behringer was in the right to report them.
Or, is it okay for Peavey to break the law?
All cases will get settled out of court. And both sides will make an agree that no public knowledge of the settlements be allowed.
Well the truth is Ulis been sued numerous times. But I'm sure he has done nothing wrong.
And AMD didn't do anything wrong. And Intel didn't do anything wrong. Yet, I think you are using a computer based on an Intel or AMD CPU right now. Since you have such a problem with companies that are accused to stealing designs and get sued, I expect you to avoid the image of hypocrisy and swear off any Intel or AMD-based computer, since they stole each other's designs.
eSmith said:
Hi e. How are you today? Glad I'm still in your thoughts. Btw, I think behringer gear, based on my experience with it, is crap. Have a good evening!
Oh, p.s...... questioning the mods is a violation, much like your political post a few days ago.
I'm guessing you may earn a vacation from TB soon. Once again, enjoy your evening friend!
Were talking musical gear on music forum. If they stole each others designs then I guess they are both crooks.
Does not look like we're talking about any bass gear lawsuits.
I'd say that if someone didn't try to sue you, then you're not making enough money.
I'd say that if someone didn't try to sue you, then you're not making enough money.
Were talking musical gear on music forum. If they stole each others designs then I guess they are both crooks.
But, you have moral issues with using stolen designs/products. I guess your morals only come in to play when it is convenient and easy, then.
Well post some links about your computer examples. If I can see your point then I will take it into consideration next time I buy a computer. I use to own about 8 pieces of Behringer gear IIRC. When I found out what a bunch of crooks they are I made the moral choice to quit buying from them.
Fine, I'll bite. Here is the most recent lawsuit settlement between Intel and AMD:
Invalid Link Removed
The first two paragraphs of the article summarize the entire web page:
Patent infringement. That is a fancy phrase for "copied someone else's designs". $1.25B, that is a lot of cash for someone to pay that is innocent.
Invalid Link Removed
The first two paragraphs of the article summarize the entire web page:
Patent infringement. That is a fancy phrase for "copied someone else's designs". $1.25B, that is a lot of cash for someone to pay that is innocent.
Fine, I'll bite. Here is the most recent lawsuit settlement between Intel and AMD:
Invalid Link Removed
The first two paragraphs of the article summarize the entire web page:
Patent infringement. That is a fancy phrase for "copied someone else's designs". $1.25B, that is a lot of cash for someone to pay that is innocent.
Looking at my computer it has a AMD processor. From reading your link it looks like intel is the bad guy. I seriously know very little about computers and did not know about the lawsuit. I will do some research next time I buy a computer.
My point in all of this is that the morality argument doesn't hold any water. Anyone disliking Behringer pedals, needs to admit that they simply don't like Behringer pedals, and stop trying to justify it with "morality", because it is too easy to point out where they are using a piece of technology to post to an internet forum that is guilty of patent infringement. Even Apple has been sued and has settled, AMD. It is a common thing in the computer world. It is electronics.
I see the music world no differently. It is a circuit board. In the end, there are only so many ways to accurately make a distortion pedal distort. The market for variations reduce down to the few designs that work in a cost-effective manner. Because of the laws of that govern electricity, all of the pedals are going to end up looking alike on the PCB, because that is the way it simply has to be. Just like with computers.
Companies like Behringer have a place in this world. They aren't putting anyone out of business. If anything, the existence of a Behringer or Digitech, Biyang or Artec has bolstered the marked for effects pedals. These cheapy pedals have given access to a whole new group of people that could not afford $100+ pedals. It is easy enough to retort to "those people" that want to start with cheapy pedals to just save up for the expensive ones, but this ignores the facts that they may not really know what they want, or that you yourself didn't follow that advice.
New people should buy the cheapy pedals, or a multi-effect. Learn. Try. Play. When they know they really want, they can step up to something that better serves their needs.
Do some Behringer pedals break less than month after purchase? Yes. Do some survive for years without any issue? Yes. This is true for all assembly line pedals-- Asia or America.
My UCA202 has worked beautifully for years, along my Eurorack 1002. It is my laptop's sound system, since the integrated sound sucks. 5 years now and not one single problem, used on a daily basis.
My experiences with the much-vaunted Boss have not been so successful.
I see the music world no differently. It is a circuit board. In the end, there are only so many ways to accurately make a distortion pedal distort. The market for variations reduce down to the few designs that work in a cost-effective manner. Because of the laws of that govern electricity, all of the pedals are going to end up looking alike on the PCB, because that is the way it simply has to be. Just like with computers.
Companies like Behringer have a place in this world. They aren't putting anyone out of business. If anything, the existence of a Behringer or Digitech, Biyang or Artec has bolstered the marked for effects pedals. These cheapy pedals have given access to a whole new group of people that could not afford $100+ pedals. It is easy enough to retort to "those people" that want to start with cheapy pedals to just save up for the expensive ones, but this ignores the facts that they may not really know what they want, or that you yourself didn't follow that advice.
New people should buy the cheapy pedals, or a multi-effect. Learn. Try. Play. When they know they really want, they can step up to something that better serves their needs.
Do some Behringer pedals break less than month after purchase? Yes. Do some survive for years without any issue? Yes. This is true for all assembly line pedals-- Asia or America.
My UCA202 has worked beautifully for years, along my Eurorack 1002. It is my laptop's sound system, since the integrated sound sucks. 5 years now and not one single problem, used on a daily basis.
My experiences with the much-vaunted Boss have not been so successful.
As a former Intel employee - I approve this message.
(Except the case would probably end up involving AMD, Intel, Integraph, and IBM in some weird twisted cross-licensing mess)
In which case, they would need to prove, among other things, an intentional misrepresentation, reasonable reliance on that misrepresentation, and damages, which in this are likely to be nominal or non-existent. Regardless, the article indicates that the suit avers "false advertising, false patent marking and unfair competition," not common law fraud.
With that said, here is a link to a decent article about false advertising claims under the Lanham Act which addresses the circumstances under which a private cause of action exists: [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 prohibts the filing of lawsuits that are "presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation" and requires that "the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law." In other words, there needs to be some good faith basis for the claims presented in the suit. If the purpose of the suit is purely retaliatory, Behringer would be subject to Rule 11 sanctions.
