The problem with Alan Hyatt

  • Thread starter Thread starter ozraves
  • Start date Start date
I don't know who is the biggest dick, but I do think that this thread is a bit disrespectful. I mean, Alan is a person too.
Even if you guys think he's the crap, posting it all over a public forum is a bit overkill.... I don't know. Maybe I missed something.

I feel that legal and private issues between individuals shouldn't be blown out in public....no matter who's involved.
 
Maybe Ted should use another trademark with different initials.....like "FAH Pro".

He could release the "FAH Pro, Eat-My-Shit Compressor" or something like that....although it's not as catchy as "Edward".

Strange Leaf...I realize that Sweden is neutral but in America, you GOTTA TAKE SIDES BABY!!!! As Dubya says, you're either with us or against us. ;)
 
A1A2 said:
I don't see how those red boxes appeal more to you than meeks.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that. I\m saying the have a different look.

these 2 designs and tell me the only similarity they share is the square meter (btw, if Iam breaking any laws by posting these pics, please let me know or deleate it)
Click to expand...

You are confusing two completely different issues. That Ted Fletcher is selling joemeek designs under the TFPro name is a copyright issue. The issue the lawyers mentioned above is a trademark infringement.

Are you telling me that you think THIS product
p8big.jpg

looks like it's made by the same company as these products:
vc1q.jpg

mq3.JPG

mq1anglebig.jpg

but these
mercenary-audio_1761_14851593

mercenary-audio_1761_19541447

do not?
 
regebro said:
Are you telling me that you think THIS product
p8big.jpg

looks like it's made by the same company as these products:
vc1q.jpg

mq3.JPG

mq1anglebig.jpg

but these
mercenary-audio_1761_14851593

mercenary-audio_1761_19541447

do not?
Click to expand...


Dooood... if you can't tell the difference between an 'Eddie' a 'Joe' and a fucking D.W. Fearn, please grab both your ears with both hands and pull your head out of your ass.

This is worse than fuckin' "Judge Judy" around here.

Here's a concept for y'all... Steve redesigns the ad without the questionable product drawing [which is all Alan can piss and moan about]... TFPro gets a banner ad... Alan shuts the fuck up... Steve/Mojopie continue their income stream... and we can all get back to making demos.

Whadda we got? Pragmatism?
 
Fletcher said:
Dooood... if you can't tell the difference between an 'Eddie' a 'Joe' and a fucking D.W. Fearn, please grab both your ears with both hands and pull your head out of your ass.
Click to expand...

Of course I can. That's my whole point. They don't look very much the same. The only actual similarities in look between an "Eddie" and a "Joe" is that the use the same brand of buttons. That is not illegal, to my knowledge. :)

However, I have now seen that the other TFPro ad is not for the Edward but for the P2. The P2 is definitely an exact copy of a joemeek product and is therefore questionable. Drop that banner, and they should have nothing on you. To be safe, erase that little Ted Fletcher signature too, even if it's just a blur...
 
darrin_h2000 said:
Geez, whenever Behringer does that shit every self rightious one of us jumps on the Kill Behringer Bandwagon. why not some support for the victim here.
Click to expand...

So, if Alan is a victim of Ted Fletcher's deeds, that justifies him attacking Steve? That's such bullshit!

Maybe I just get more upset about this kind of crap than other people do because I see it so often. There's very little that gets under my skin as much as someone threatening a frivilous, baseless lawsuit against someone just to shut them up. The underlying message is: "I know I have no case against you, but I'm going to use the legal system as a weapon to do as much financial harm to you as I can if you don't do exactly what I want you to." It's done all the time, but it's unethical and immoral. And I can't believe that it doesn't piss off EVERYBODY who sees it occuring.

Maybe some of the armchair lawyers could explain one single thing Steve has done that would serve as the grounds for a lawsuit against him. I certainly don't see any. And if there are no grounds, Alan and his lawyers sure as hell shouldn't be threatening a suit. That's just plain wrong. And anyone who does it is no better than a schoolyard bully, regardless of whether they might have a legitimate claim against someone else. And, I'll tell you, the one thing that pisses me off nearly as much as someone doing it is someone who jumps to the defense of someone who does it. I just don't understand that at all.
 
jslator said:
So, if Alan is a victim of Ted Fletcher's deeds, that justifies him attacking Steve? That's such bullshit!

Maybe I just get more upset about this kind of crap than other people do because I see it so often. There's very little that gets under my skin as much as someone threatening a frivilous, baseless lawsuit against someone just to shut them up. The underlying message is: "I know I have no case against you, but I'm going to use the legal system as a weapon to do as much financial harm to you as I can if you don't do exactly what I want you to." It's done all the time, but it's unethical and immoral. And I can't believe that it doesn't piss off EVERYBODY who sees it occuring.

Maybe some of the armchair lawyers could explain one single thing Steve has done that would serve as the grounds for a lawsuit against him. I certainly don't see any. And if there are no grounds, Alan and his lawyers sure as hell shouldn't be threatening a suit. That's just plain wrong. And anyone who does it is no better than a schoolyard bully, regardless of whether they might have a legitimate claim against someone else. And, I'll tell you, the one thing that pisses me off nearly as much as someone doing it is someone who jumps to the defense of someone who does it. I just don't understand that at all.
Click to expand...

It might help if you actually toned down the rhetoric, and explained to people that you are an actual lawyer with actual legal opinions. You might also want to explain the source of your animus against Alan, which has a long and colorful history on this and other boards.
 
freshmattyp said:
The First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I'm not a lawyer, but I don't see anything in there about accepting advertising from a company that may be guilty of trademark infringement, although I'm sure there is case law to support both sides. IMO, your freedom of the press is not being trampled. You are still free to write editorial or news content on your site. You might also want to address the clear conflict of interest in accepting advcertising dollars from a company and then reviewing their gear. In regards to Alan's claims about ownership of trademarks, he doesn't have to show any of us anything. If you sue, maybe you can make that part of the discovery process.

Maybe we can move this to the cave where it belongs.

I will now stand back and accept the inevitable flames.
Click to expand...

You are so mistaken. Alan is going after the wrong party here. I cannot believe that people are defending what Alan's lawyer has done over some cheap $79 mics and copied/repackaged preamps. This guy is screwing a website owner over advertising that has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual problem. The lawyers for Alan charge by the hour. So, they can make FAR MORE $$$$ working on the advertisers than sending exactly 1 (one) letter to Ted Fletcher with a court date. How many advertisers are currently "wrongdoing" Alan? Let's see, as the lawyers for Alan, we have to do an exhaustive search to find the advertisers on the internet (40 billable hours). After that, send letters (8 billable hours or whatever....).


OR...

Send 1 (one) letter to Ted Fletcher (2 billable hours) + 37cents postage.

Maybe Alan is listening to the wrong people. Maybe give him the benefit of the doubt?
 
acorec said:
You are so mistaken. Alan is going after the wrong party here. I cannot believe that people are defending what Alan's lawyer has done over some cheap $79 mics and copied/repackaged preamps. This guy is screwing a website owner over advertising that has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual problem. The lawyers for Alan charge by the hour. So, they can make FAR MORE $$$$ working on the advertisers than sending exactly 1 (one) letter to Ted Fletcher with a court date. How many advertisers are currently "wrongdoing" Alan? Let's see, as the lawyers for Alan, we have to do an exhaustive search to find the advertisers on the internet (40 billable hours). After that, send letters (8 billable hours or whatever....).


OR...

Send 1 (one) letter to Ted Fletcher (2 billable hours) + 37cents postage.

Maybe Alan is listening to the wrong people. Maybe give him the benefit of the doubt?
Click to expand...

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you just haven't read through all the posts, but I admitted I was mistaken about this after an actual lawyer pointed out some things I did not take into consideration. Look near the top of this page.
 
freshmattyp said:
You might also want to explain the source of your animus against Alan, which has a long and colorful history on this and other boards.
Click to expand...

That's easy, in chronological order:

1. Harmony Central had been a pretty good community until Alan started spamming it with claims about how his new VTB-1 preamp was "just as good as any Neve or API at a fraction of the price". HC essentially turned from a discussion board into a PMI sales floor. Every second topic somehow involved Alan hawking his products. That annoyed me somewhat.

2. Somebody posted on HC about how he hadn't been happy with the service he received from Alan. Alan threated to sue him if he didn't retract his statements (which were absolutely in no way defamatory). The guy got scared and deleted them. That really pissed me off. The fact that the moderator of HC came to Alan's defense in that incident rather than standing up for a member's right to express his views led me to leave HC for good.

3. A few months back, here in HomeRec, when I said that I trust my own ears to tell me what I like more than I trust celebrity endorsements, Alan told me that I was full of shit and not qualified to judge what various mic's sounded like because I don't have gold records on my wall. Frankly, that confounded me more than it pissed me off.

4. Alan threatened to sue Steve for publishing a TFPro advertisement. In my view, his threats are completely baseless and merely intended to intimidate (as is consistant with his past practice).

That about sums it up. Any other minor skirmishes essentially flow directly or indirectly out of one of those four incidents (particularly #2 and #4).

Hey, you asked.
 
I did indeed. Context is always helpful in uderstanding why people take the positions they do.

I am also remembering a skirmish over your use of the name joemeek.org, but I can't remember exacly what became of that.
 
freshmattyp said:
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you just haven't read through all the posts, but I admitted I was mistaken about this after an actual lawyer pointed out some things I did not take into consideration. Look near the top of this page.
Click to expand...

I have read all the posts. I am not a practicing lawyer, but one of my degrees is in law. So, I am out of actual current case law. However, it is logical to assume that you don't sue the storeowner for advertising a product . If the basic foundation of what Alan's lawyer said is truthful, then all advertisers would have to have a research dept to track all advertisers and know about all possible or future lawsuits/patent infringments/trademark infringments etc.

The burden is on Alan to show harm from Ted Fletcher. I am pretty sure that a judge would throw any civil action out based on this. My sister (who IS a judge on civil cases) looked at the original letter from the lawyers and laughed. She said this kind of bullying happens all the time and all it does is cost both sides $$$. The real point here, at this time is, IF Alan is really behind this, he cannot be trusted to play fair in any way. Hence the usual people who distrust Alan to begin with. Their fears seem to be confirmed by this somewhat underhanded action.

You have to look at both sides. And, remember this, the law is not about finding the truth. The law is about finding A truth.
 
acorec said:

The real point here, at this time is, IF Alan is really behind this, he cannot be trusted to play fair in any way. Hence the usual people who distrust Alan to begin with. Their fears seem to be confirmed by this somewhat underhanded action.

You have to look at both sides. And, remember this, the law is not about finding the truth. The law is about finding A truth.
Click to expand...

That's why I now think that this incident is part of the overall strategy with regards to TFPro, right or wrong. I really hope that it's not out of spite.

I try to be as even handed as possible, sometimes failing spectacularly.
 
jslator said:
1. Harmony Central had been a pretty good community until Alan started spamming it . . .
Click to expand...

Yea, he kinda' trashed that board pretty good, didn't he. I remember a big flame war he started on gearslutz regarding ADK mics, but Jules would have nothing to do with it.

2. Somebody posted on HC about how he hadn't been happy with the service he received from Alan. Alan threated to sue him if he didn't retract his statements.
Click to expand...


That was a classic one. :D One of the few ones I wasn't involved in, though, so you can't blame me.

3. A few months back, here in HomeRec, when I said that I trust my own ears to tell me what I like more than I trust celebrity endorsements, Alan told me that I was full of shit and not qualified to judge what various mic's sounded like because I don't have gold records on my wall.
Click to expand...


I remember that one, too. That was just basically Alan being a cock.

4. Alan threatened to sue Steve for publishing a TFPro advertisement. In my view, his threats are completely baseless and merely intended to intimidate (as is consistant with his past practice).
Click to expand...


Ladies and gentleman of the jury, have you reached a verdict?

We have, your honor, and we find the defendant, Alan J Hyatt, GUILTY on four counts of being A COMPLETE COCK.
 
ozraves, contact PMI's competitors for financial assistance with your lawsuit against PMI... I wouldn't be surprised if some were pissed-off at PMI and more than willing to help. ;)
 
Oh, and I especially like the part where Alan says the guys at ADK are his friends on page one, and then.............. says they are not his friends on page 3. (I feel like I'm back in kindergarten just typing that one.)
 
Alan has come undone like that in dozens of threads I've seen.

Warren
 
What does him being an asshole have to do with the legal case? If I only did business with people I liked I would have a very short list of partners. From what I can tell the people complaining about Alan are all assholes in their own right but I try not to hold that against them. From what I can tell the people who hated Alan before hate him still and those of us who don't give a fuck still don't.

Ozraves is not being sued. He was informed of the situation in a clear and legal matter so that PMI can cover their ass. They don't have to prove anything to any of you and if they were to start talking about the suit or evidence in a specific manner that would be monumentally stupid.

My company is involved in a similar lawsuit right now and it's not always fun being a dick but you do what you have to do. The legal system is a cold, harsh bitch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top