I did some research on the Mackie/Behringer lawsuit

Rossi said:
And even if the circuits are identical, that could also mean that both are OEM-designs by some Chinese company like all those OEM microphones. If Behringer did rip them off, they could sue them, why not? At least for copying the design of their box.
Click to expand...

Actually, the company that made that cable tester is on record as saying that Behringer ripped them off, but that they don't have the resources to challenge them in a lawsuit (which would likely be expensive enough to put the company out of business, even if they won).
 
Yeah well, that's what they say. But if you're offering a product like theirs at their price, I guess you have to be prepared for competition and/or ripp offs. Which means they should have gotten patents on stuff they invented provided they did invent something. You know, a cable tester is not rocket science.

BTW. Someone asked BPM on their internet board if they cooperated with Behringer because the B2 looks similar to their microphones. BPM's reply was something like "Hell, no! They must have ripped us off!" The truth, however, was that both microphones were fabricated by 797 Audio. BPM just didn't want to admit that their supposedly German microphones were in fact Chinese made.

So I guess, generally speaking, you have to be careful with information from anyone directly involved. That's not to say the Swiss Army guys are lying, but it's possible they don't give you all the information to judge the case objectively. There *might* be other reasons why they don't pusue legal action.
 
Rossi said:
There *might* be other reasons why they don't pusue legal action.
Click to expand...

I don't think they're lying. There was a long thread about this on another forum quite some time ago. The SwizzArmy guy was right pissed off.

Even if they did have a lot of money, it's not guaranteed that they would win anyway. I doubt they have a patent and it would be pretty tough to win a copyright claim on these facts. They might be able to argue "passing off" or come up with some other claim. If they had a lot of cash, they could probably put up enough of a fight that they'd end-up getting some kind of out-of-court settlement. But they don't, so they can't. That doesn't mean they weren't copied though.

BTW, you can also flip that "why didn't they sue" argument around. The company that makes that Swizz Army tester has said in print that Behringer stole thier design. So, why doesn't Behringer sue them for defamation if its untrue? Either it's because it's true or Behringer is so big that Swizz Army couldn't possibly make a dent in their sales with their allegations.

Personally, I'm positive that thing was copied. Maybe it's not the most technically inovative product in the world, but they copied absolutely everything - both functional and cosmetic. They didn't even try to hide that. It was like Behringer was saying "Hey Swizz Army, were copying you and know you won't do shit about it because you're small and we're big! Ha!"
 
Not to be too snotty here, since the facts might be different from what they obviously seem to be, but:

How much sympathy are we supposed to have for someone who rips off the "Swiss Army" trademark by changing "ss" to "zz"?
 
How much sympathy are we supposed to have for someone who rips off the "Swiss Army" trademark by changing "ss" to "zz"?
Click to expand...

Are you equating blatantly copying a product to making up a somewhat goofy name that sounds like something else? Do you really think Victorinox has lost any sales to Ebtech? Someone goes out to get a knife for someone for their birthday and comes home with a cable tester? And do you think Victorinox (or Wenger) cares?

On the other hand, has Ebtech lost any sales to Behringer? Absolutely. And why not? It's just a cable tester, right? No actual quality difference. Do you think Ebtech cares? Absolutely.

Yeah well, that's what they say. But if you're offering a product like theirs at their price, I guess you have to be prepared for competition and/or ripp offs.
Click to expand...

Competition, sure. Ripoffs, maybe...but not as blatant as this one.

-Duardo
 
I thought another key aspect of the lawsuit was the Behringer/Sam Ash price slashing agreement or something. I can't remember the details, but I know Sam Ash was included in the lawsuit.
 
Although I condemn the ways that Behringer uses to reduce costs, I kind of agree with Rossi here...

Since this is an American board (but frequented by a lot of foreigners), most people get their underwear in a wrinkle when a US made product is hurt. Especially if they own the gear themselves (I wonder how many people would be upset, if someone copies CAD mics, I doubt many...).

I own 1 Behringer piece, a Tube Composer, which I got 2nd handed for $140. I like it so far, but I can agree that the build quality could be better, there are lights BEHIND the tubes and occasionally there is some crosstalk. I'm thinking of adding 2 more Behringer products in the not-so-far-away-future; their cable-tester and their DI box.
I've had good results with their ACTIVE DI box in live-sound jobs and when I was soldering my own cables, I used the CT100. Feels fine, does its job... and what IS its job? To check cables. And is it a hard job? No... Should I pay someone who doesn't do a hard job, a lot of money (eg $349 for the Swizz Army CT)? NO!

Now, if Swizz Army indeed uses very high quality components and or circuits, they're fair to ask around $100-120 maybe, but not $349 for a fuckin' cable tester! I mean, $349 buys me a Behringer cable tester, a Belden cable, a AT3035 and an Audiobuddy.

Sorry if I seem short-sighted, but to me, Swizz Army seems short-sighted for having the NERVE to charge that kind of money for a fuckin' cable tester! :mad:
 
I bought mine from Guitar Center a year or so ago for about $90. So i guess i wouldn't want to spend $350 either. of course, if i was argentinian...

but anyway, i've never seen the behringer version, but the ebtech is built like the proverbial tank. a little box not much bigger than a pack of cigarettes, yet it feels like it weighs about a kilogram.
 
I thought another key aspect of the lawsuit was the Behringer/Sam Ash price slashing agreement or something. I can't remember the details, but I know Sam Ash was included in the lawsuit.
Click to expand...

Sam Ash was Behringer's US distributor at the time.

Since this is an American board (but frequented by a lot of foreigners), most people get their underwear in a wrinkle when a US made product is hurt.
Click to expand...

I don't care who they rip off, I get my underwear in a wrinkle when any product is ripped off. Behringer has also ripped off Focusrite (British) and AKG (Austrian...and I think they were sued and lost on that one).

-Duardo
 
Not for nothing, but the gear we buy is WAY overpriced. What a company like Behringer is going to do is force all companies to cut prices and stop ripping us off.

Behringer might be getting away with not doing a little R&D, maybe not, I don’t know. But it’s my opinion that the cost of R&D doesn’t make up for the huge markup these companies are putting on the equipment. Remember, we are talking about proven technology here, there’s not much ‘new’ tech in a mixer. It’s the same crap put in a different box with a different gimmick. I’m looking at my $200 m-audio dmp 3, the f**kin thing probably costs less than $20 to make.

Let mackie worry about itself, not my prob… I hope Behringer drives the price down on all gear. That’s capitalism at its best, baby
 
Gunther said:
There’s not much ‘new’ tech in a mixer. It’s the same crap put in a different box with a different gimmick...

Let mackie worry about itself, not my prob… I hope Behringer drives the price down on all gear. That’s capitalism at its best, baby
Click to expand...

One could argue that with the new generation of digital mixers, there's not much "old" tech in them any more.

From a strictly Marxist perspective, one might agree with your tenet that there is no difference between capitalism and theft, but some capitalists might want to draw a distinction.

It is easy to be cavalier about intellectual property, as long as it's not your own. I suppose you will have no objection when your hit CD gets released if everyone downloads it for free instead of buying it through some channel that will give you a return on your artistic (and financial) investment. After all, that's your problem, not anyone else's...
 
Gunther said:
Not for nothing, but the gear we buy is WAY overpriced. What a company like Behringer is going to do is force all companies to cut prices and stop ripping us off.
Click to expand...

Oh ya, the money was just piling up at Mackie. I hear they had rooms full of it. Oh, their stock price just went into the toilet and they were delisted from NASDAQ? Maybe that's a bad example. Alesis, though. Now there's a company that's flying high. Oh, wait, they recently went into bankrupty and had to parcel out the company in a fire sale? Maybe that's a bad example too. I'm confused. Which of these manufacturers are ripping us off again? I'm guessing it's those guys who came up with that "Swizz Army" thing. They're probably rich beyond their wildest dreams.

:rolleyes:
 
jslator said:
I'm guessing it's those guys who came up with that "Swizz Army" thing. They're probably rich beyond their wildest dreams.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Slator, I see where you're coming from, and ofcourse Behringer has no right whatsoever to be stealing things. But, suppose Behringer did put some R&D into creating their cable tester... how much 'tech' does it involve to come up with a cable-tester circuit? Probably not much. So a huge company like them spends what $5k on a scientist who makes one, and then they can go in production for $50 a pop... This is the half price of the Swizz Army version. I cannot for all the sake of the world believe that it's NESCESSARY to ask $99 for a cable-tester, when the circuitry isn't very hard... Like I said before, if they're using really high quality components, I can imagine a higher price...
 
Speeddemon said:
I cannot for all the sake of the world believe that it's NESCESSARY to ask $99 for a cable-tester, when the circuitry isn't very hard...
Click to expand...

It's nice that people recognize that there is R&D cost to this. Usually people just add up what they figure the components cost and think a company should charge that amount for their product. But there is a lot more than just R&D and component costs that go into it too. There's labour, cost of machinery, rent, debt servicing, administrative salaries and expenses, legal expenses, heating and power, shipping, etc., etc., etc. The fact is that a large company like Behringer can do things like ship their manufacturing to China, thereby significantly reducing labour costs. They can negotiate lower rent and lower interest charges. They can afford to purchase larger and more efficient machinery. There are many, many things that they can do to reduce the per-unit costs of a cable tester.

On the other hand, a small company often can't do these things. On top of that, Behringer will have much better distribution channels than this Swizz Army company, and therefore move much, much more product. That again results in lower per-unit costs. Even at current pricing levels, I wouldn't be suprised if Behringer was making more profit per unit that this Swizz Army company. Similarly, I wouldn't be suprised if matching Behringer's prices would force Swizz Army into a negative bottom line, and ultimately put it out of business.

So, it's certainly discouraging to a smaller company to have a large company like Behringer wait for it to come up with something, swipe the design, and then start selling massive amounts of product at a price that the smaller company can't possibly compete with. If you look at all of the facts, I think the complaint essentially becomes not one of "Swizz Army is gouging us", but one of "A small company like Swizz Army shouldn't try to compete with a large company like Behringer". That may actually be a legitimate point. If a small company can't compete with a big one on some basis (product quality, price, service, etc.), then they probably shouldn't be in business. But when the big one is capitalizing on a design swiped from the smaller one, knowing full well that the smaller one can't afford to do anything about it, that's not really a level playing field.
 
I am not interested in paying the operating costs for a small company. Behringer will force the price point on gear down. It will force cost cutting and efficiency from all companies in this industry, big or small.

Behringer takes a $400 piece of gear, makes something that is 90% as good, and charges $125. What I would like to see is that $400 gear drop to $200 to compete. I want the big name companies to bust their ass to figure out how to save me money, and I hope Behringer forces them to do this.

Behri may be blamed for mimicking other company’s products (as if other companies don’t try to mimic, how many Neumann clones are there?) Then again, buyers and sellers of high priced gear may be defending their stuff by trying to knock Behringer down a few pegs… but that’s not an issue I care about. As a home recorder, I am interested in more performance for less money, so I see Behringer as helpful force.

Maybe I shouldnt be so vocal, I might get labeled a Behri lover, or something worse :D
 
I have nothing against fair competition. If Stephen Paul comes out with a $1200 mic with an innovative design and manufacturing process that allows it to essentially blow away everything from Neumann, AKG, Audio Technica, Soundeluxe, and BLUE that costs up to 3x that price, I say we all benefit.

But when a company does no innovation whatsoever, merely ripping off another company's design, and then manufacturing it with a lesser standard of quality control and lower quality components, that is a different story.

The end result in the short term is it drives innovative companies out of business. In the long run, we all suffer because there is little incentive for anyone to do innovative designs or research, as they know that they will not be able to profit from their intellectual property because Behringer is waiting in the wings to steal it (and sell their inferior version at a price that you will never be able to compete with.)
 
Gunther said:
I am not interested in paying the operating costs for a small company.
Click to expand...

That's fine, but its nonsense to suggest that the small company is "ripping you off" because they can't afford to produce products for the same low costs that Behringer is able to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top