# Monster Cable suing Blue Jeans Cable



## Anthony (Oct 5, 2006)

Came across this on the Audioholics site today.

Straight from BJC: http://www.bluejeanscable.com/legal/mcp/index.htm

It looks like the Tartan brand is what they're going after, not their main cable line.

I guess they are pursuing the Bose model of income generation 

The owner of BJC is apparently a lawyer by trade, so this may get interesting.


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

I hope that they know law better than audio.

Last time I called BJC wanting a custom subwoofer cable, the guy that I talked to just couldn't understand to save my life, why I would want to make a "Y" cable coming out of my LFE, splitting into both inputs on my EP2500. (suggesting instead to run into one channel of the amp, despite the subs being wired in stereo) :huh:


----------



## superchad (Mar 7, 2008)

Who knows if BJC broke any law or not?, who also knows if Monster is bringing a petty lawsuit in attempt to squash the little guy gaining a competitive strength? Let the court settle it. Its Lawyer VS Lawyer so let the best bottom feeder win!


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

solid7 said:


> I hope that they know law better than audio.
> 
> Last time I called BJC wanting a custom subwoofer cable, the guy that I talked to just couldn't understand to save my life, why I would want to make a "Y" cable coming out of my LFE, splitting into both inputs on my EP2500. (suggesting instead to run into one channel of the amp, despite the subs being wired in stereo) :huh:


Umm, if you flip the #4 and #5 dip switches to the right, it puts the amp in parallel mode. “Parallel mode” means a single input will drive both channels. See pg. 7 of the manual... :whistling:

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> Umm, if you flip the #4 and #5 dip switches to the right, it puts the amp in parallel mode. “Parallel mode” means a single input will drive both channels. See pg. 7 of the manual...


That's fair enough - but no mention was ever made of this, despite them having been given the model number, and me being given an assurance that they were *very* familiar with the EP2500. Also, despite the fact that I mentioned wanting to add another EP2500 amp down the road for 2 more subs, for which a split would be absolutely needed.

Enough on that...


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

> I mentioned wanting to add another EP2500 amp down the road for 2 more subs, for which a split would be absolutely needed.


Not reallly. All you had to do was jump a cable between the vacant input on Amp #1 to an input on Amp #2. See pg. 7 of the manual... :hide:

But as you said, enough of that. I notice that the Tarant cables's connectors seem to have a resemblance to the Monster, but it should be easy enough to settle this. Unless Tarant’s connectors are exactly identical to Monster’s, they have no case. Courts have ruled for years that any change to a patented design will usually negated a patent case.

Googling monster cable sues will get you 7-8 pages of hits. It’s pretty stupid to pull this kind of stuff in the Internet age, when people can fight back and reach thousands of people with a free publicity campaign.

Here’s how one company fought back.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## thxgoon (Feb 23, 2007)

Ya it's amazing how sue happy Monster is. I remember when they sued the Monster House and Monster Garage TV shows. Oh well, I guess when their product relies mostly on reputation and marketing there's not much else to do :hide::duck:


----------



## WmAx (Jan 26, 2008)

solid7 said:


> That's fair enough - but no mention was ever made of this, despite them having been given the model number, and me being given an assurance that they were *very* familiar with the EP2500. Also, despite the fact that I mentioned wanting to add another EP2500 amp down the road for 2 more subs, for which a split would be absolutely needed.
> 
> Enough on that...


It is widely reported on many forums that if you use the ep2500 in DIP mode that sends a single input to both amps internally - that the level will not be equal on both channels. While I have an Ep2500, I have never tried this mode. It may be prudent to check if this is true/false if using this mode, due to this claim.

-Chris


----------



## willy-be (Nov 15, 2006)

Who does Monster sue? 

Everyone....there 18 pages of legal action.

http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?...ameop=&propname=&pop=&pn=&pop2=&pn2=&cop=&cn=

Aloha,
WB


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

WOW. I guess we now know why Monster Cable charges such high prices for their stuff. They have lots of overhead - probably more lawyers than R&D people...

Monster Cable Products vs. Monster Mini Golf, LLC - gotta love it!


Regards,
Wayne


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> will get you 7-8 pages of hits. It’s pretty stupid to pull this kind of stuff in the Internet age, when people can fight back and reach thousands of people with a free publicity campaign.
> 
> Here’s how one company fought back.
> 
> ...


Im surprised they didn't try to sue Disney for the movie Monster's INC:hide:


----------



## Anthony (Oct 5, 2006)

Wow! I had no idea they were so litigious. I make my own cables now, but at least I have a reason to tell people to avoid Monster Cable.

Funny, of all the things I was looking for there, I'm surprised they didn't sue Monster.com job search engine. That would seem like a nice deep-pocket target. Certainly more profitable than Monster Mini Golf 

Edit:
I didn't find it at the USPTO site, but there were a few google links that mention suing Monster.com.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

They go after the little guys because they have less chance of winning or don't have the funds to put up a good fight in court.
This is a big reason for my avoiding Monster cable at all costs.


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

Anthony said:


> I'm surprised they didn't sue Monster.com job search engine. That would seem like a nice deep-pocket target. Certainly more profitable than Monster Mini Golf



Yes, but higher reward comes with higher risk - but I don't think they're after the money - it's just a territorial thing. (like what your dog does when you take him for a walk)

There is almost zero risk in challenging a small company. Most of them don't have the resources to fight a lawsuit of any size, so a company like Monster Cable looks to win by default. The more territory they acquire, the more profitable both branding and litigation may become later.

You won't see them taking on the giants, though. People/companies who know how to play the games, and have the resources to stand up to it, wouldn't let them get away with it. Anyway, it would be a loser for both parties in that case. (they'd just bleed each other in the litigation process, with no favorable outcome, at the end of the day)


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

Anthony said:


> I'm surprised they didn't sue Monster.com job search engine.


Oh, but they have! They even took on Disney over the _Monsters Inc._ movie.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## Anthony (Oct 5, 2006)

I find the Disney vs. Monster lawsuit funny, I just picture wave after wave of lawyers from both sides battling like a scene from Braveheart.

Well good to know all this. Hopefully someone that comes here looking for advice on Monster Cable will find this and make their own judgments. 

Now the Blue Jeans case is obviously different -- but it would be tough to patent just the shape of a connector. Patents are usually about technical features so merely resembling something wouldn't be enough. The captain of my hockey team works at the USPTO as an examiner. I'll ask him how hard stuff like this is to prove.


----------



## DougMac (Jan 24, 2008)

Anthony said:


> I find the Disney vs. Monster lawsuit funny, I just picture wave after wave of lawyers from both sides battling like a scene from Braveheart.


Who do you think lifted their kilts first? If Monster cable, I willing to bet the product was *way* overrated.

Doug


----------



## avaserfi (Jul 5, 2007)

This is quoted from the Audioholics forums - a post by the owner of BJC about what is going on and their planned response. I thought everyone else might be interested as well.



KurtBJC said:


> Howdy, all; Kurt from Blue Jeans Cable here.
> 
> First, my thanks for all the supportive comments. If you want to lend further support to the cause, the best thing you can do for us is to spread the word by talking about this online; make sure that people here and elsewhere know what's going on. As for the offer of financial donations: that's very, very kind, but we're going to be just fine here, and we're happy to carry on the fight on our own dime.
> 
> ...


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> Oh, but they have! They even took on Disney over the _Monsters Inc._ movie.
> 
> Regards,
> Wayne


Looks like I spoke too soon. I definitely stand corrected. (and extremely stupified by the audacity!)


----------



## Anthony (Oct 5, 2006)

DS-21 said:


> (After all, what's to "patent" in a silly wire?)


Cryogenic nano-assembled superconducting solder and hyper magnetic quantum connectors. Duh!


----------



## chas (Jan 28, 2007)

This is getting interesting:
http://www.audioholics.com/news/industry-news/blue-jeans-strikes-back


----------



## thxgoon (Feb 23, 2007)

I got a kick out of the first paragraph, lol! This is not the kind of media attention any company wants. If Blue Jeans is innocent in this matter then good for them!


----------



## Vader (Jul 8, 2006)

To quote the guy on the streets of Metropolis from Superman II...

"Man, this is gonna be good!"

Personally, I'm looking forward to seeing Kurt put those Monster(tm) morons :coocoo: in their places (Did I just use the word 'Monster' in a sentence?...Uh Oh...:bigsmile

Edit: I just read Kurt's response, and I think the first paragraph did just that...:rofl:


----------



## cixelsid (Mar 6, 2007)

http://monstercableworkers.blogspot.com/2008/02/workers-state-and-city-officials.html


----------



## superchad (Mar 7, 2008)

Man thats a great letter.........brilliant!


----------



## superchad (Mar 7, 2008)

On a fun note when you look at the Monster issue link posted a few back about the company and its questionable treatment of workers, when you look at the boycott list it appears Monster is in real trouble.......... I mean how can Monster survive with the "Harvey Milk Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Democratic Club" against them!!!???:rofl:


----------



## Anthony (Oct 5, 2006)

Read the whole thing. He not only picks apart their patent and IP arguments, he also goes into great detail as to how this is a lose-lose proposition for Monster (without even mentioning publicity).

Also, there is a great paragraph where he calls them out for being based out of Bermuda or some other island as a tax shelter -- putting them on notice that if this goes to trial that factoid will be brought up in open court and if there are any shenanigans going on they could be in big trouble. I don't even pretend to understand the law in this regard, but I bet Kurt does! 

We need a popcorn smiley for this


----------



## Vader (Jul 8, 2006)

This is classic. Kurt, please keep us apprised as to Monster's response to your letter. As I see it (and I am the poster child for legal ignorance), your letter puts Monster between a PR rock and a hard place: If they continue with the litigation, they will be toast (not to mention the bad PR that comes with it), and if they back down their MO will be laid out plain for all to see... As the office "Home Theater Geek", I am the "goto guy" at work for all things relating to AV (kinda sad really, when you realize just how little I know about this stuff), so I am telling anybody that asks for cable advice (more often than you might think) to avoid Monster like the plague, and to take a look at BJC...

On a side note, all of my component cables for both HD and SD are Beldon 1694A, which I got from you guys. Best cables I have ever bought!


----------

