GJW
Flashlight Enthusiast
Wasn't sure where else to put this but has anyone else noticed that SureFire is now placing their lettering around the head circumference (KL series).
Tail circumference too (Z57).
Tail circumference too (Z57).
MagLite Alert...
- Thread starter GJW
- Start date
- Status
James S
Flashlight Enthusiast
Interesting, and really good news!
So, if Mag doesn't defend their trademark against surefire, their lawsuits against other companies will have to be dropped. You can't pick and choose who you're going to defend it against. If they do defend it and loose then they have to drop the other suits as well. Course, they might sue Surefire and win I suppose.
It's also possible that they would license it to them? Ha, I don't think so...
Going to be keeping an eye on this one!
So, if Mag doesn't defend their trademark against surefire, their lawsuits against other companies will have to be dropped. You can't pick and choose who you're going to defend it against. If they do defend it and loose then they have to drop the other suits as well. Course, they might sue Surefire and win I suppose.
It's also possible that they would license it to them? Ha, I don't think so...
Going to be keeping an eye on this one!
batterystation
Enlightened
That is very interesting. I got a reply from Mag that listed that as a main point in their beef with Arc. I don't think they have a case but they have a big wallet.
hawkhkg11
Enlightened
If Maglite doesn't sue SF, couldn't Arc sue Mag for being inconsistent?
Lebkuecher
Flashlight Enthusiast
I’m surprised Surefire is backing down. It’s time someone takes out the trash, It smells!
GJW
Flashlight Enthusiast
[ QUOTE ]
Lebkuecher said:
I’m surprised Surefire is backing down. It’s time someone takes out the trash, It smells!
[/ QUOTE ]
Backing down?
Circumferential lettering is new for SureFire.
They're doing exactly what Arc got in trouble for.
Lebkuecher said:
I’m surprised Surefire is backing down. It’s time someone takes out the trash, It smells!
[/ QUOTE ]
Backing down?
Circumferential lettering is new for SureFire.
They're doing exactly what Arc got in trouble for.
![Pampers Sensitive Baby Wipes, Clinically Proven, Fragrance Free, Unscented, Water Based, Hypoallergenic, Multi-Use, Hand Wipes 336 Wipes Total (6X Flip-Top Packs) [Packaging May Vary]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41KLBHu9CAL._SL500_.jpg)
Lebkuecher
Flashlight Enthusiast
Hey GJW, your right
For some reason I was thinking the opposite. This has been one long day. Thank god I’m not in the north east.
For some reason I was thinking the opposite. This has been one long day. Thank god I’m not in the north east.
Well, I'm not so sure that mag won't get to choose wether or not they pursue this. I can imagine their argument: they sued arc for imitating mag products, "tricking" people into thinking that the arc aaa was a mag solitaire, and the lettering was only one of the complaints. I know it is stupid, but I'm sure that is what they would say if confronted. "The KL series looks nothing like a solitaire." /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smoker5.gif
tylerdurden
Flashlight Enthusiast
The KL1, 2 and 3 have always had cicumferential lettering.
js
Flashlight Enthusiast
Sorry to say it, but the-company-which-must-not-be-named actually can pick and choose whom they sue regarding their patent. They are not held to any standards of consistency. Not only that! Legally they MUST pick and choose, as having a patent does not mean that it will be enforced by the government. Each company is responsible for enforcing its own patents, and obviously does not have infinite resources.
Also, whether the patent does or does not actually hold water in court does not matter. As long as they have it they can base a suit upon it.
Fellow CPFers, might I suggest that we refrain from waving this around? We do NOT want a suit brought against any of the companies we support. This is not a Steven Segal movie. This is the world of lawyers and legalese. Take heed people. GJW, perhaps you could edit the title of this thread?
Also, whether the patent does or does not actually hold water in court does not matter. As long as they have it they can base a suit upon it.
Fellow CPFers, might I suggest that we refrain from waving this around? We do NOT want a suit brought against any of the companies we support. This is not a Steven Segal movie. This is the world of lawyers and legalese. Take heed people. GJW, perhaps you could edit the title of this thread?
James S
Flashlight Enthusiast
Thats very interesting... To those that missed the initial conversation about this, or who don't know about trademarks, you don't get to pick and choose.
Their trademark isn't on the hollow tube, it's on circumferential lettering. Just because the rest of it might look different, it is still important.
If you don't defend a trademark, you loose it. That simple.
Course, the ARC folks must have known about this, so there must be a good reason why they didn't bring this up. But the more MAG allows their trademark to be diminished, the more difficult it would be for them to actually defend it in court...
As I said, I'm going to enjoy watching what happens with this /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
[EDIT] yea, we did say we weren't going to talk about this so much anymore didn't we.
But it's my understanding that it was a trademark and not a patent issue. Trademarks are different, you have to defend them as far as I know or they loose their value.
Their trademark isn't on the hollow tube, it's on circumferential lettering. Just because the rest of it might look different, it is still important.
If you don't defend a trademark, you loose it. That simple.
Course, the ARC folks must have known about this, so there must be a good reason why they didn't bring this up. But the more MAG allows their trademark to be diminished, the more difficult it would be for them to actually defend it in court...
As I said, I'm going to enjoy watching what happens with this /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
[EDIT] yea, we did say we weren't going to talk about this so much anymore didn't we.
But it's my understanding that it was a trademark and not a patent issue. Trademarks are different, you have to defend them as far as I know or they loose their value.
js
Flashlight Enthusiast
James S,
Thanks for correcting me. Could you refer me to the discussions you mentioned, because I'm getting my info from my sister's boyfriend who is a practicing lawyer. He told me pretty much what I posted. Are you sure they have a trademark and not a patent? [EDIT] A trademark? Great. I hope for the best.
Anyway, thanks again.
Thanks for correcting me. Could you refer me to the discussions you mentioned, because I'm getting my info from my sister's boyfriend who is a practicing lawyer. He told me pretty much what I posted. Are you sure they have a trademark and not a patent? [EDIT] A trademark? Great. I hope for the best.
Anyway, thanks again.
SilverFox
Flashaholic
A funny thing happened to me the other day.
I have a good friend that has watched my interest in flashlights grow over the last couple of years. We are both involved with the Boy Scouts and have ample opportunity to test lights out on camp outs. We both find LED lights very interesting. When I get a new light, I show it to him and visa versa.
We were talking about progress in our generation and comparing it to the current generation when the topic of "over active lawyers" came up. I mentioned the trademark suit and all of us had a good laugh.
I purchased a SureFire L4 and decided that my friend just had to see this light. I handed it to him and he looked it over, then pointed it in his face and turned it on. Oh, my eyes, he said. I think I am going blind... I may have to sue you... I saw the writing around the bezel and thought it was only a Mag Lite!!!
He was joking of course. We had a good laugh.
He has borrowed my ARC AAA and LSH-P several times on camping trips and is leaning towards the AAA because of the long run time. I keep telling him that he should wait until the ARC LS4 comes out, but then realize that he might be better off with all three lights.
I overheard his wife saying something about "Boys and their toys."
Tom
I have a good friend that has watched my interest in flashlights grow over the last couple of years. We are both involved with the Boy Scouts and have ample opportunity to test lights out on camp outs. We both find LED lights very interesting. When I get a new light, I show it to him and visa versa.
We were talking about progress in our generation and comparing it to the current generation when the topic of "over active lawyers" came up. I mentioned the trademark suit and all of us had a good laugh.
I purchased a SureFire L4 and decided that my friend just had to see this light. I handed it to him and he looked it over, then pointed it in his face and turned it on. Oh, my eyes, he said. I think I am going blind... I may have to sue you... I saw the writing around the bezel and thought it was only a Mag Lite!!!
He was joking of course. We had a good laugh.
He has borrowed my ARC AAA and LSH-P several times on camping trips and is leaning towards the AAA because of the long run time. I keep telling him that he should wait until the ARC LS4 comes out, but then realize that he might be better off with all three lights.
I overheard his wife saying something about "Boys and their toys."
Tom
MichiganMan
Enlightened
Is it possible that Surefire's recent change is a tacit show of defiance against mag's heavyhanded tactics and support for Arc's position?
BTW, Silverfox, any man that's ever seen his formally intelligent, sophisticated wife suddenly goo-ing and gaga-ing as they gleefully dress their three month old baby up in three piece suits, sailor uniforms and Nike running shoes, while estatically accumulating an incredible amount of rattles, toys, mobiles, and other glorified doll accessories can tell you that "boys and their toys" doesn't remotely approach girls and their dolls. After seeing a new mother and her child, can one really say there is really that much difference between it and the "Baby-wet-pants" she just had to have as a girl?
All in all, our toys are cheaper and much less problematic. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
BTW, Silverfox, any man that's ever seen his formally intelligent, sophisticated wife suddenly goo-ing and gaga-ing as they gleefully dress their three month old baby up in three piece suits, sailor uniforms and Nike running shoes, while estatically accumulating an incredible amount of rattles, toys, mobiles, and other glorified doll accessories can tell you that "boys and their toys" doesn't remotely approach girls and their dolls. After seeing a new mother and her child, can one really say there is really that much difference between it and the "Baby-wet-pants" she just had to have as a girl?
All in all, our toys are cheaper and much less problematic. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Bernhard
Newly Enlightened
I would love to see MgLt has to drop the charge to Peter because their arrogantly choose to sue SF and finally lost. Praying for that to happened, can't wait to see those lovely event unfold between my eyes /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
jtice
Flashaholic
[ QUOTE ]
Correct me if I"m wrong, but on the Macs and Arcs the lettering goes all the way around the head.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sabby..... got MAC on the mind as ussual? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif
Correct me if I"m wrong, but on the Macs and Arcs the lettering goes all the way around the head.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sabby..... got MAC on the mind as ussual? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif
- Status
