Echo1 banned from ShotShow

SuperHog · January 24th, 2012, 21:18

Are A.C.M. and Element paying their license fees for the rails they make?

Jcotter · January 24th, 2012, 21:28

you're joking right?

SuperHog · January 24th, 2012, 21:50

Of course I am joking. Just making a point here.

People have a choice to buy Madbull who licenses their trades, but choose to buy ACM and Element to save the 20%. They are just as much to blame putting $$$ into the cloner pockets so they can R&D more clones.

All of my M4's are Madbull rails for a reason.

I got flamed in an Element wish list thread for standing up to cloning Haley's light mounts by another ASM member.

Styrak · January 24th, 2012, 22:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperHog

Of course I am joking. Just making a point here.

People have a choice to buy Madbull who licenses their trades, but choose to buy ACM and Element to save the 20%. They are just as much to blame putting $$$ into the cloner pockets so they can R&D more clones.

All of my M4's are Madbull rails for a reason.

I got flamed in an Element wish list thread for standing up to cloning Haley's light mounts by another ASM member.

Buying a clone airsoft rail does nothing to hurt makers of real steel rails. It's not like people with real AR's are going to buy a clone/chinese rail.

Also, Element and other clone companies don't pay for licensing because trying to enforce copyright in China/area is like trying to fuck a brick.

ViR · January 24th, 2012, 22:06

I love the excellent Apple vs IBM comparison.
Licensing designs and suing companies for copyrights kills progress..

Cybergun should only be able to license trademark names. So if they buy license to call their guns "H&K", sure that name shouldn't be used.. but "shape"? Really?

SuperHog · January 24th, 2012, 22:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Styrak

Buying a clone airsoft rail does nothing to hurt makers of real steel rails. It's not like people with real AR's are going to buy a clone/chinese rail.

Also, Element and other clone companies don't pay for licensing because trying to enforce copyright in China/area is like trying to fuck a brick.

Clone rails hurt Madbull because they paid to license the trades from real steel rail companies. So hurting Madbull is OK?? Does the real steel rail maker also hurts? Yes.

I am sure that at the end of the year, sales losses incurred by Madbull are factored into the annual license fees and the real steel rail companies also take a loss as well. I don't think Madbull pays for the full annual fees if half of their sales went to the cloners.

MadMax · January 25th, 2012, 01:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by ViR

I love the excellent Apple vs IBM comparison.
Licensing designs and suing companies for copyrights kills progress..

Cybergun should only be able to license trademark names. So if they buy license to call their guns "H&K", sure that name shouldn't be used.. but "shape"? Really?

Sure. The characteristic shape of a Coke bottle is covered by trade dress. The shape of a Glock is too. I think the intent of trade dress law (or design patent for that matter) is to make it possible for a party to own rights to a sizable investment in the design of a shape and furthermore invest in marketing said shape. An applicant must describe to the trademark office how their shapes are unique.

It's frustrating to us that these rules are being applied to our toys, made to replicate the look of a particular firearm. Our airsoft guns don't really compete with real steel, but we find ourselves right in the middle of the headlights of trademark law that very clearly covers our aims to have an airsoft gun that replicates a firearm. We are in essence copying the refined and marketed appearance of products produced by multi billion dollar juggernauts like HK, FN, and Glock. We specifically want to infringe upon the IP of something that someone else has made extremely cool in our eyes. It is naive to think that we can get away with it without handing over a fee.

Hate Cybergun or Umarex as much as you like. They're just playing chess with some pieces that the manufacturers we love never grew up with. It's not like they're getting anything for free though. Word on the street is that Umarex dropped $3mil to acquire the HK license.

ViR · January 25th, 2012, 08:10

But I dont think HK would have went after Umarex if they didnt buy that license as long as they didnt use their exact logo...
Use Hackler & Kroch instead of Heckler & Koch and KZ instead of CZ and everyone would have been happy

Trader rating · January 25th, 2012, 08:37

Actually TM and others did that for years to get away from trade violations.

Let me put it to you folks another way, without all the "trademark" and "patent" laws. Lets say YOU make widgets. They're the best widgets on the market. You spent a lot of money designing your widgets, testing your widgets, marketting your widgets, to the point that they're generally regarded as "the best widgets on the market".

Some asshole in China takes a piece of animal shit, and shapes it like your widget. Then he stamps YOUR name on it, and sells it to people. Now people are buying polished turds with your name on them. Some people know they're turds and don't care...others don't really know, but they're buying them because it's YOUR name, and they know your widgets are top 'o the line.

So now that Chinese asshole is making money off your investment, AND potentially damaging your name.

Here's something you might not know. Madmax knows all about this. I know all about this. Both of us have had our investments and IP stolen and reproduced, trademarks, patents and copyright be damned, by unscrupulous Chinese clone shops. It costs US money. It's OUR investment. And we lose, but you lose too, because eventually we stop making super-cool widgets, and all you have left is the polished turds.

ILLusion · January 25th, 2012, 08:57

Best analogy ever. Morb' wins thread.

I love my polished turd addiction...

kalnaren · January 25th, 2012, 09:01

Yup, could have all been avoided if E1 paid the licensing.

I have no love of Cybergun, but in this case they're legally in the right.

ViR · January 25th, 2012, 11:06

But this is why all products are made in China now anyways, even if its designed in US.

Trademarking a name or a logo, sure.. I just don't agree with copyrighting everything like "shape" of a gun. Let me copyright a color.. no more black guns for anyone?

Trader rating · January 25th, 2012, 11:18

A trademark is typically a name, word, phrase, logo, symbol, design, image, or a combination of these elements. Can a shape be a trademark? Is the shape unique? Does the shape uniquely identify the product or manufacturer?

Consider this:

That's the letter "M". It's a shape. It's also a logo, as the particular color and style of the "M" represents a corporation. You don't need to see "McDonalds" to know that's who it represents...just as an FN SCAR doesn't need to be labeled to identify it. Not so with any AR variant, incidentally, of which there are hundreds, and there are hundreds because Colt failed to safeguard the trademark implicit in the appearance of the firearm.

.

Jcotter · January 25th, 2012, 11:30

ok, trades are one thing; I completely agree and understand using a companies name without their permission is wrong. What about the shape? If I decide to make sell plain t shirts, should I have to pay a license fee?

lets make the example more relevant,lets say I make plain t shirts for dolls, should I have to pay fruit of the loom license fee's for using something that replicates the form of a t shirt? How would fruit of the loom loose money by me selling doll shirts?

m102404 · January 25th, 2012, 11:33

It's very difficult to trademark things that are freely available to everyone. Colours/numbers/etc...

i.e.
IBM Blue
Ferrari Red
BBKeyboard

Trademarking not usually done willy nilly...and resolutions in court are not the shortest things most times. If you think you can...go trademark the shape of a sock...let me know how that goes.

A lot of "stuff" is made overseas because of labour costs, less legal/environmental/oversight/regulation requirements, etc... Stealing someone elses design is possible because of the issues with pursuing it legally internationally. The only reason a corporate entity does not pursue legal action against trademark infringement is that the costs of doing so exceed whatever benefit they would derive from it.

i.e. (making up an example) I can't see LaRue pursuing a knock off shop in Asia for making ACM clones of thier mounts. They certainly might send a cease and desist letter...but chasing it through the international legal system is probably a non-starter. However...if KAC ripped off their designs and started producing it, there'd certainly be a court case.

Home	Forums	Register	Gallery	FAQ	Calendar
Retailers	Community	News/Info	International Retailers	IRC	Today's Posts

British Columbia	Alberta
BCAC	EAR
Op-For	JOC
Northern Arms Airsoft	Skunkworx Airsoft
Airsoft Kelowna	RAAT
Prince George Airsoft	Manitoba
Saskatchewan	MAA
SK Airsoft	Ontario
PDW	Airsoft Ottawa
South Sask Mercs	Snow Dragons
Quebec	1st Ranger Platoon
PQAC	Wolfpack Tactical
1st Pathfinders Regiment	TTAC3
Quebec Airsoft
MTX Airsoft	Atlantic
FAQc	Atlantic Airsoft

January 24th, 2012, 21:18	#46
SuperHog Trader rating Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Toronto, Ontario	Are A.C.M. and Element paying their license fees for the rails they make? Last edited by SuperHog; January 24th, 2012 at 21:27..

January 24th, 2012, 21:28	#47
Jcotter Trader rating Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Brookfield NS	you're joking right? __________________ "A Bullet may have your name on it, but a grenade is addressed to whom it may concern."

January 24th, 2012, 21:50	#48
SuperHog Trader rating Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Toronto, Ontario	Of course I am joking. Just making a point here. People have a choice to buy Madbull who licenses their trades, but choose to buy ACM and Element to save the 20%. They are just as much to blame putting $$$ into the cloner pockets so they can R&D more clones. All of my M4's are Madbull rails for a reason. I got flamed in an Element wish list thread for standing up to cloning Haley's light mounts by another ASM member. Last edited by SuperHog; January 24th, 2012 at 21:54..

January 24th, 2012, 22:06	#50
ViR Trader rating Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Milton	I love the excellent Apple vs IBM comparison. Licensing designs and suing companies for copyrights kills progress.. Cybergun should only be able to license trademark names. So if they buy license to call their guns "H&K", sure that name shouldn't be used.. but "shape"? Really?

January 25th, 2012, 08:10	#53
ViR Trader rating Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Milton	But I dont think HK would have went after Umarex if they didnt buy that license as long as they didnt use their exact logo... Use Hackler & Kroch instead of Heckler & Koch and KZ instead of CZ and everyone would have been happy

January 25th, 2012, 08:37	#54
MadMorbius Guest Trader rating	Actually TM and others did that for years to get away from trade violations. Let me put it to you folks another way, without all the "trademark" and "patent" laws. Lets say YOU make widgets. They're the best widgets on the market. You spent a lot of money designing your widgets, testing your widgets, marketting your widgets, to the point that they're generally regarded as "the best widgets on the market". Some asshole in China takes a piece of animal shit, and shapes it like your widget. Then he stamps YOUR name on it, and sells it to people. Now people are buying polished turds with your name on them. Some people know they're turds and don't care...others don't really know, but they're buying them because it's YOUR name, and they know your widgets are top 'o the line. So now that Chinese asshole is making money off your investment, AND potentially damaging your name. Here's something you might not know. Madmax knows all about this. I know all about this. Both of us have had our investments and IP stolen and reproduced, trademarks, patents and copyright be damned, by unscrupulous Chinese clone shops. It costs US money. It's OUR investment. And we lose, but you lose too, because eventually we stop making super-cool widgets, and all you have left is the polished turds. Last edited by MadMorbius; January 25th, 2012 at 08:40..

January 25th, 2012, 08:57	#55
ILLusion GBB Whisperer Trader rating Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Toronto	Best analogy ever. Morb' wins thread. I love my polished turd addiction... __________________ *Advanced Airsoft Armaments and Enhancements* Quick to the gun, sure of your grip. Quick to the threat, sure of your shot. Diligentia, Vis, Celeritas Accuracy, Power, Speed

January 25th, 2012, 11:06	#57
ViR Trader rating Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Milton	But this is why all products are made in China now anyways, even if its designed in US. Trademarking a name or a logo, sure.. I just don't agree with copyrighting everything like "shape" of a gun. Let me copyright a color.. no more black guns for anyone?

January 25th, 2012, 11:18	#58
MadMorbius Guest Trader rating	A trademark is typically a name, word, phrase, logo, symbol, design, image, or a combination of these elements. Can a shape be a trademark? Is the shape unique? Does the shape uniquely identify the product or manufacturer? Consider this: That's the letter "M". It's a shape. It's also a logo, as the particular color and style of the "M" represents a corporation. You don't need to see "McDonalds" to know that's who it represents...just as an FN SCAR doesn't need to be labeled to identify it. Not so with any AR variant, incidentally, of which there are hundreds, and there are hundreds because Colt failed to safeguard the trademark implicit in the appearance of the firearm. .

January 25th, 2012, 11:30	#59
Jcotter Trader rating Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Brookfield NS	ok, trades are one thing; I completely agree and understand using a companies name without their permission is wrong. What about the shape? If I decide to make sell plain t shirts, should I have to pay a license fee? lets make the example more relevant,lets say I make plain t shirts for dolls, should I have to pay fruit of the loom license fee's for using something that replicates the form of a t shirt? How would fruit of the loom loose money by me selling doll shirts? __________________ "A Bullet may have your name on it, but a grenade is addressed to whom it may concern."

January 25th, 2012, 11:33	#60
m102404 Tys Trader rating Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Toronto	It's very difficult to trademark things that are freely available to everyone. Colours/numbers/etc... i.e. IBM Blue Ferrari Red BBKeyboard Trademarking not usually done willy nilly...and resolutions in court are not the shortest things most times. If you think you can...go trademark the shape of a sock...let me know how that goes. A lot of "stuff" is made overseas because of labour costs, less legal/environmental/oversight/regulation requirements, etc... Stealing someone elses design is possible because of the issues with pursuing it legally internationally. The only reason a corporate entity does not pursue legal action against trademark infringement is that the costs of doing so exceed whatever benefit they would derive from it. i.e. (making up an example) I can't see LaRue pursuing a knock off shop in Asia for making ACM clones of thier mounts. They certainly might send a cease and desist letter...but chasing it through the international legal system is probably a non-starter. However...if KAC ripped off their designs and started producing it, there'd certainly be a court case.

Echo1 banned from ShotShow

General