- Thread starter mrpackerguy
- Start date
- Status
carpedebass
Well-known member
Hmmm the offending link has apparently been removed...interesting....
Big Poppa
Well-known member
Thats because I sued them
Grey Goose
New member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2008
- Messages
- 2
Sterling, remember how you felt when Micorsoft did this to you?
Business must be slow for you... Dont you think a simple call or letter would have worked? Its obvious to someone who isnt as passionate (level headed) about YOUR needs that this is not a company trying to rip you off. They are merchants of musical instruments... I would also guess that given the fact that almost every guitar or bass guitar pictured has a different name on the headstock, that they are not the manufacturer, but only a retailer.
But given your run in with Microsoft in 2000, I guess you are just trying to get your piece of the American Pie. Or have you already forgotten how it felt to be attacked by them? You made one statement , Humiliated by the experience, Ball told his IT department he wanted Microsoft products out of his business within six months. "I said, 'I don't care if we have to buy 10,000 abacuses,'" recalled Ball, who recently addressed the LinuxWorld trade show. "We won't do business with someone who treats us poorly."
Yet here YOU are treating a small business the same way...
Congratulations Sterling!
And for those that werent aware of the big guys run in with Microsoft, here is the info. Its particularly interesting because as I read this article about your run in with Microsoft, you say over and over again how poorly you were treated. And how it effected you and your family. And here you are doing the EXACT same thing to someone elses family.
Now before anyone goes saying that I am a representative of 2kool4skool, I assure you I am not. I actually found this while looking to buy a bass guitar. But after reading how you and your supporters act, I WILL contact 2kool4skool and buy a bass from them. Im not that impressed with your bass guitars anyway!
ARTICLE
Sterling Ball, a jovial, plain-talking businessman, is CEO of Ernie Ball, the world's leading maker of premium guitar strings endorsed by generations of artists ranging from the likes of Eric Clapton to the dudes from Metallica. But since jettisoning all of Microsoft products three years ago, Ernie Ball has also gained notoriety as a company that dumped most of its proprietary software--and still lived to tell the tale.
In 2000, the Business Software Alliance conducted a raid and subsequent audit at the San Luis Obispo, Calif.-based company that turned up a few dozen unlicensed copies of programs. Ball settled for $65,000, plus $35,000 in legal fees. But by then, the BSA, a trade group that helps enforce copyrights and licensing provisions for major business software makers, had put the company on the evening news and featured it in regional ads warning other businesses to monitor their software licenses.
Humiliated by the experience, Ball told his IT department he wanted Microsoft products out of his business within six months. "I said, 'I don't care if we have to buy 10,000 abacuses,'" recalled Ball, who recently addressed the LinuxWorld trade show. "We won't do business with someone who treats us poorly."
Ball's IT crew settled on a potpourri of open-source software--Red Hat's version of Linux, the OpenOffice office suite, Mozilla's Web browser--plus a few proprietary applications that couldn't be duplicated by open source. Ball, whose father, Ernie, founded the company, says the transition was a breeze, and since then he's been happy to extol the virtues of open-source software to anyone who asks. He spoke with CNET News.com about his experience.
Q: Can you start by giving us a brief rundown of how you became an open-source advocate?
A: I became an open-source guy because we're a privately owned company, a family business that's been around for 30 years, making products and being a good member of society. We've never been sued, never had any problems paying our bills. And one day I got a call that there were armed marshals at my door talking about software license compliance...I thought I was OK; I buy computers with licensed software. But my lawyer told me it could be pretty bad.
The BSA had a program back then called "Nail Your Boss," where they encouraged disgruntled employees to report on their company...and that's what happened to us. Anyways, they basically shut us down...We were out of compliance I figure by about 8 percent (out of 72 desktops).
How did that happen?
We pass our old computers down. The guys in engineering need a new PC, so they get one and we pass theirs on to somebody doing clerical work. Well, if you don't wipe the hard drive on that PC, that's a violation. Even if they can tell a piece of software isn't being used, it's still a violation if it's on that hard drive. What I really thought is that you ought to treat people the way you want to be treated. I couldn't treat a customer the way Microsoft dealt with me...I went from being a pro-Microsoft guy to instantly being an anti-Microsoft guy.
Did you want to settle?
Never, never. That's the difference between the way an employee and an owner thinks. They attacked my family's name and came into my community and made us look bad. There was never an instance of me wanting to give in. I would have loved to have fought it. But when (the BSA) went to Congress to get their powers, part of what they got is that I automatically have to pay their legal fees from day one. That's why nobody's ever challenged them--they can't afford it. My attorney said it was going to cost our side a quarter million dollars to fight them, and since you're paying their side, too, figure at least half a million. It's not worth it. You pay the fine and get on with your business. What most people do is get terrified and pay their license and continue to pay their licenses. And they do that no matter what the license program turns into.
What happened after the auditors showed up?
It was just negotiation between lawyers back and forth. And while that was going on, that's when I vowed I was never going to use another one of their products. But I've got to tell you, I couldn't have built my business without Microsoft, so I thank them. Now that I'm not so bitter, I'm glad I'm in the position I'm in. They made that possible, and I thank them.
So it was the publicity more than the audit itself that got you riled?
Nobody likes to be made an example of, but especially in the name of commerce. They were using me to sell software, and I just didn't think that was right. Call me first if you think we have a compliance issue. Let's do a voluntary audit and see what's there. They went right for the gut...I think it was because it was a new (geographical) area for them, and we're the No. 1 manufacturer in the county, so why not go after us?
So what did swearing off Microsoft entail?
We looked at all the alternatives. We looked at Apple, but that's owned in part by Microsoft. (Editor's note: Microsoft invested $150 million in Apple in 1997.) We just looked around. We looked at Sun's Sun Ray systems. We looked at a lot of things. And it just came back to Linux, and Red Hat in particular, was a good solution.
So what kind of Linux setup do you have?
You know what, I'm not the IT guy. I make the business decisions. All I know is we're running Red Hat with Open Office and Mozilla and Evolution and the basic stuff.
I know I saved $80,000 right away by going to open source.
We were creating the cocktail that people are guzzling down today, but we had to find it and put it together on our own. It's so funny--in three and half years, we went from being these idiots that were thinking emotionally rather than businesslike...to now we're smart and talking to tech guys. I know I saved $80,000 right away by going to open source, and each time something like (Windows) XP comes along, I save even more money because I don't have to buy new equipment to run the software. One of the great things is that we're able to run a poor man's thin client by using old computers we weren't using before because it couldn't handle Windows 2000. They work fine with the software we have now.
How has the transition gone?
It's the funniest thing--we're using it for e-mail client/server, spreadsheets and word processing. It's like working in Windows. One of the analysts said it costs $1,250 per person to change over to open source. It wasn't anywhere near that for us. I'm reluctant to give actual numbers. I can give any number I want to support my position, and so can the other guy. But I'll tell you, I'm not paying any per-seat license. I'm not buying any new computers. When we need something, we have white box systems we put together ourselves. It doesn't need to be much of a system for most of what we do.
But there's a real argument now about total cost of ownership, once you start adding up service, support, etc.
What support? I'm not making calls to Red Hat; I don't need to. I think that's propaganda...What about the cost of dealing with a virus? We don't have 'em. How about when we do have a problem, you don't have to send some guy to a corner of the building to find out what's going on--he never leaves his desk, because everything's server-based. There's no doubt that what I'm doing is cheaper to operate. The analyst guys can say whatever they want.
The other thing is that if you look at productivity. If you put a bunch of stuff on people's desktops they don't need to do their job, chances are they're going to use it. I don't have that problem. If all you need is word processing, that's all you're going to have on your desktop, a word processor. It's not going to have Paint or PowerPoint. I tell you what, our hits to eBay went down greatly when not everybody had a Web browser. For somebody whose job is filling out forms all day, invoicing and exporting, why do they need a Web browser? The idea that if you have 2,000 terminals they all have to have a Web browser, that's crazy. It just creates distractions.
Have you heard anything from Microsoft since you started speaking out about them?
I got an apology today from a wants-to-be-anonymous Microsoft employee who heard me talk. He asked me if anyone ever apologized, because what happened to me sounded pretty rough to him, and I told him no. He said, "Well, I am. But we're nice guys." I'm sure they are. When a machine gets too big, it doesn't know when it's stepping on ants. But every once in a while, you step on a red ant.
Ernie Ball is pretty much known as a musician's buddy. How does it feel to be a technology guru, as well?
The myth has been built so big that you can't survive without Microsoft.
I think it's great for me to be a technology influence. It shows how ridiculous it is that I can get press because I switched to OpenOffice. And the reason why is because the myth has been built so big that you can't survive without Microsoft, so that somebody who does get by without Microsoft is a story.
It's just software. You have to figure out what you need to do within your organization and then get the right stuff for that. And we're not a backwards organization. We're progressive; we've won communications and design awards...The fact that I'm not sending my e-mail through Outlook doesn't hinder us. It's just kind of funny. I'm speaking to a standing-room-only audience at a major technology show because I use a different piece of software--that's hysterical.
You've pretty much gotten by with off-the-shelf software. Was it tough to find everything you needed in the open-source world?
Yeah, there are some things that are tough to find, like payroll software. We found something, and it works well. But the developers need to start writing the real-world applications people need to run a business...engineering, art and design tools, that kind of stuff...They're all trying to build servers that already exist and do a whole bunch of stuff that's already out there...I think there's a lot of room to not just create an alternative to Microsoft but really take the next step and do something new.
Any thoughts on SCO's claims on Linux?
I don't know the merits of the lawsuit, but I run their Unix and I'm taking it off that system. I just don't like the way it's being handled. I feel like I'm being threatened again.
They never said anything to me, and if I was smart, I probably wouldn't mention it. But I don't like how they're doing it. What they're doing is casting a shadow over the whole Linux community. Look, when you've got Windows 98 not being supported, NT not being supported, OS/2 not being supported--if you're a decision maker in the IT field, you need to be able to look at Linux as something that's going to continue to be supported. It's a major consideration when you're making those decisions.
What if SCO wins?
There are too many what-ifs. What if they lose? What if IBM buys them? I really don't know, and I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. But I can't believe somebody really wants to claim ownership of Linux...it's not going to make me think twice.
You see, I'm not in this just to get free software. No. 1, I don't think there's any such thing as free software. I think there's a cost in implementing all of it. How much of a cost depends on whom you talk to. Microsoft and some analysts will tell you about all the support calls and service problems. That's hysterical. Have they worked in my office? I can find out how many calls my guys have made to Red Hat, but I'm pretty sure the answer is none or close to it...It just doesn't crash as much as Windows. And I don't have to buy new computers every time they come out with a new release and abandon the old one.
Has Microsoft tried to win you back?
Microsoft is a growing business with $49 billion in the bank. What do they care about me? If they cared about me, they wouldn't have approached me the way they did in the first place...And I'm glad they didn't try to get me back. I thank them for opening my eyes, because I'm definitely money ahead now and I'm definitely just as productive, and I don't have any problems communicating with my customers. So thank you, Microsoft.
Business must be slow for you... Dont you think a simple call or letter would have worked? Its obvious to someone who isnt as passionate (level headed) about YOUR needs that this is not a company trying to rip you off. They are merchants of musical instruments... I would also guess that given the fact that almost every guitar or bass guitar pictured has a different name on the headstock, that they are not the manufacturer, but only a retailer.
But given your run in with Microsoft in 2000, I guess you are just trying to get your piece of the American Pie. Or have you already forgotten how it felt to be attacked by them? You made one statement , Humiliated by the experience, Ball told his IT department he wanted Microsoft products out of his business within six months. "I said, 'I don't care if we have to buy 10,000 abacuses,'" recalled Ball, who recently addressed the LinuxWorld trade show. "We won't do business with someone who treats us poorly."
Yet here YOU are treating a small business the same way...
Congratulations Sterling!
And for those that werent aware of the big guys run in with Microsoft, here is the info. Its particularly interesting because as I read this article about your run in with Microsoft, you say over and over again how poorly you were treated. And how it effected you and your family. And here you are doing the EXACT same thing to someone elses family.
Now before anyone goes saying that I am a representative of 2kool4skool, I assure you I am not. I actually found this while looking to buy a bass guitar. But after reading how you and your supporters act, I WILL contact 2kool4skool and buy a bass from them. Im not that impressed with your bass guitars anyway!
ARTICLE
Sterling Ball, a jovial, plain-talking businessman, is CEO of Ernie Ball, the world's leading maker of premium guitar strings endorsed by generations of artists ranging from the likes of Eric Clapton to the dudes from Metallica. But since jettisoning all of Microsoft products three years ago, Ernie Ball has also gained notoriety as a company that dumped most of its proprietary software--and still lived to tell the tale.
In 2000, the Business Software Alliance conducted a raid and subsequent audit at the San Luis Obispo, Calif.-based company that turned up a few dozen unlicensed copies of programs. Ball settled for $65,000, plus $35,000 in legal fees. But by then, the BSA, a trade group that helps enforce copyrights and licensing provisions for major business software makers, had put the company on the evening news and featured it in regional ads warning other businesses to monitor their software licenses.
Humiliated by the experience, Ball told his IT department he wanted Microsoft products out of his business within six months. "I said, 'I don't care if we have to buy 10,000 abacuses,'" recalled Ball, who recently addressed the LinuxWorld trade show. "We won't do business with someone who treats us poorly."
Ball's IT crew settled on a potpourri of open-source software--Red Hat's version of Linux, the OpenOffice office suite, Mozilla's Web browser--plus a few proprietary applications that couldn't be duplicated by open source. Ball, whose father, Ernie, founded the company, says the transition was a breeze, and since then he's been happy to extol the virtues of open-source software to anyone who asks. He spoke with CNET News.com about his experience.
Q: Can you start by giving us a brief rundown of how you became an open-source advocate?
A: I became an open-source guy because we're a privately owned company, a family business that's been around for 30 years, making products and being a good member of society. We've never been sued, never had any problems paying our bills. And one day I got a call that there were armed marshals at my door talking about software license compliance...I thought I was OK; I buy computers with licensed software. But my lawyer told me it could be pretty bad.
The BSA had a program back then called "Nail Your Boss," where they encouraged disgruntled employees to report on their company...and that's what happened to us. Anyways, they basically shut us down...We were out of compliance I figure by about 8 percent (out of 72 desktops).
How did that happen?
We pass our old computers down. The guys in engineering need a new PC, so they get one and we pass theirs on to somebody doing clerical work. Well, if you don't wipe the hard drive on that PC, that's a violation. Even if they can tell a piece of software isn't being used, it's still a violation if it's on that hard drive. What I really thought is that you ought to treat people the way you want to be treated. I couldn't treat a customer the way Microsoft dealt with me...I went from being a pro-Microsoft guy to instantly being an anti-Microsoft guy.
Did you want to settle?
Never, never. That's the difference between the way an employee and an owner thinks. They attacked my family's name and came into my community and made us look bad. There was never an instance of me wanting to give in. I would have loved to have fought it. But when (the BSA) went to Congress to get their powers, part of what they got is that I automatically have to pay their legal fees from day one. That's why nobody's ever challenged them--they can't afford it. My attorney said it was going to cost our side a quarter million dollars to fight them, and since you're paying their side, too, figure at least half a million. It's not worth it. You pay the fine and get on with your business. What most people do is get terrified and pay their license and continue to pay their licenses. And they do that no matter what the license program turns into.
What happened after the auditors showed up?
It was just negotiation between lawyers back and forth. And while that was going on, that's when I vowed I was never going to use another one of their products. But I've got to tell you, I couldn't have built my business without Microsoft, so I thank them. Now that I'm not so bitter, I'm glad I'm in the position I'm in. They made that possible, and I thank them.
So it was the publicity more than the audit itself that got you riled?
Nobody likes to be made an example of, but especially in the name of commerce. They were using me to sell software, and I just didn't think that was right. Call me first if you think we have a compliance issue. Let's do a voluntary audit and see what's there. They went right for the gut...I think it was because it was a new (geographical) area for them, and we're the No. 1 manufacturer in the county, so why not go after us?
So what did swearing off Microsoft entail?
We looked at all the alternatives. We looked at Apple, but that's owned in part by Microsoft. (Editor's note: Microsoft invested $150 million in Apple in 1997.) We just looked around. We looked at Sun's Sun Ray systems. We looked at a lot of things. And it just came back to Linux, and Red Hat in particular, was a good solution.
So what kind of Linux setup do you have?
You know what, I'm not the IT guy. I make the business decisions. All I know is we're running Red Hat with Open Office and Mozilla and Evolution and the basic stuff.
I know I saved $80,000 right away by going to open source.
We were creating the cocktail that people are guzzling down today, but we had to find it and put it together on our own. It's so funny--in three and half years, we went from being these idiots that were thinking emotionally rather than businesslike...to now we're smart and talking to tech guys. I know I saved $80,000 right away by going to open source, and each time something like (Windows) XP comes along, I save even more money because I don't have to buy new equipment to run the software. One of the great things is that we're able to run a poor man's thin client by using old computers we weren't using before because it couldn't handle Windows 2000. They work fine with the software we have now.
How has the transition gone?
It's the funniest thing--we're using it for e-mail client/server, spreadsheets and word processing. It's like working in Windows. One of the analysts said it costs $1,250 per person to change over to open source. It wasn't anywhere near that for us. I'm reluctant to give actual numbers. I can give any number I want to support my position, and so can the other guy. But I'll tell you, I'm not paying any per-seat license. I'm not buying any new computers. When we need something, we have white box systems we put together ourselves. It doesn't need to be much of a system for most of what we do.
But there's a real argument now about total cost of ownership, once you start adding up service, support, etc.
What support? I'm not making calls to Red Hat; I don't need to. I think that's propaganda...What about the cost of dealing with a virus? We don't have 'em. How about when we do have a problem, you don't have to send some guy to a corner of the building to find out what's going on--he never leaves his desk, because everything's server-based. There's no doubt that what I'm doing is cheaper to operate. The analyst guys can say whatever they want.
The other thing is that if you look at productivity. If you put a bunch of stuff on people's desktops they don't need to do their job, chances are they're going to use it. I don't have that problem. If all you need is word processing, that's all you're going to have on your desktop, a word processor. It's not going to have Paint or PowerPoint. I tell you what, our hits to eBay went down greatly when not everybody had a Web browser. For somebody whose job is filling out forms all day, invoicing and exporting, why do they need a Web browser? The idea that if you have 2,000 terminals they all have to have a Web browser, that's crazy. It just creates distractions.
Have you heard anything from Microsoft since you started speaking out about them?
I got an apology today from a wants-to-be-anonymous Microsoft employee who heard me talk. He asked me if anyone ever apologized, because what happened to me sounded pretty rough to him, and I told him no. He said, "Well, I am. But we're nice guys." I'm sure they are. When a machine gets too big, it doesn't know when it's stepping on ants. But every once in a while, you step on a red ant.
Ernie Ball is pretty much known as a musician's buddy. How does it feel to be a technology guru, as well?
The myth has been built so big that you can't survive without Microsoft.
I think it's great for me to be a technology influence. It shows how ridiculous it is that I can get press because I switched to OpenOffice. And the reason why is because the myth has been built so big that you can't survive without Microsoft, so that somebody who does get by without Microsoft is a story.
It's just software. You have to figure out what you need to do within your organization and then get the right stuff for that. And we're not a backwards organization. We're progressive; we've won communications and design awards...The fact that I'm not sending my e-mail through Outlook doesn't hinder us. It's just kind of funny. I'm speaking to a standing-room-only audience at a major technology show because I use a different piece of software--that's hysterical.
You've pretty much gotten by with off-the-shelf software. Was it tough to find everything you needed in the open-source world?
Yeah, there are some things that are tough to find, like payroll software. We found something, and it works well. But the developers need to start writing the real-world applications people need to run a business...engineering, art and design tools, that kind of stuff...They're all trying to build servers that already exist and do a whole bunch of stuff that's already out there...I think there's a lot of room to not just create an alternative to Microsoft but really take the next step and do something new.
Any thoughts on SCO's claims on Linux?
I don't know the merits of the lawsuit, but I run their Unix and I'm taking it off that system. I just don't like the way it's being handled. I feel like I'm being threatened again.
They never said anything to me, and if I was smart, I probably wouldn't mention it. But I don't like how they're doing it. What they're doing is casting a shadow over the whole Linux community. Look, when you've got Windows 98 not being supported, NT not being supported, OS/2 not being supported--if you're a decision maker in the IT field, you need to be able to look at Linux as something that's going to continue to be supported. It's a major consideration when you're making those decisions.
What if SCO wins?
There are too many what-ifs. What if they lose? What if IBM buys them? I really don't know, and I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. But I can't believe somebody really wants to claim ownership of Linux...it's not going to make me think twice.
You see, I'm not in this just to get free software. No. 1, I don't think there's any such thing as free software. I think there's a cost in implementing all of it. How much of a cost depends on whom you talk to. Microsoft and some analysts will tell you about all the support calls and service problems. That's hysterical. Have they worked in my office? I can find out how many calls my guys have made to Red Hat, but I'm pretty sure the answer is none or close to it...It just doesn't crash as much as Windows. And I don't have to buy new computers every time they come out with a new release and abandon the old one.
Has Microsoft tried to win you back?
Microsoft is a growing business with $49 billion in the bank. What do they care about me? If they cared about me, they wouldn't have approached me the way they did in the first place...And I'm glad they didn't try to get me back. I thank them for opening my eyes, because I'm definitely money ahead now and I'm definitely just as productive, and I don't have any problems communicating with my customers. So thank you, Microsoft.
bovinehost
Administrator
I'm pretty level-headed. Perhaps you missed the part where those merchants were selling a design that was stolen. That bit must have escaped you. Is it okay if I come to your house and steal some stuff then sell it? Let me know if you have a time that would be convenient for both of us.
Ah. In the law and order business, we call that a "fence".
Well, I'm not a member of the EBMM Legal Department or anything, but I would imagine they got a cease and desist order. No big "example" to be made of them, no fine large enough for every member of the Ball Family Empire to retire to that summer home in Italy.....
I think I'll just wait the rest of this out. I'm sure BP has a comment or two and no doubt has much more info.
Thanks for stopping by, though.
Big Poppa
Well-known member
Nice try Grey Goose...
Name yourself after booze. It is fitting.
Im glad that you took the time to try and find something that made me look like a hypocrite.....
Is the person knowingly selling rip offs or counterfeits hurting his or her family or is the company that protects their intellectual property the one hurting the family? So I guess to extend the argument which you seem to have a knack for...if a person knowingly robs a bank and gets caught is it the robber that hurt his family or is it the bank pressing charges? I am not calling this customer a bank robber to make things clear....I think they knew what they were doing, if not we will find out. That is what the process is all about.
For what looks to be a surface thinker the microsoft issue makes sense. I didnt like microsoft raiding me and putting press releases out after we were closed. But I took it., I responded that they came for bear and got squirrel. Three bad things happened. They were misled and we weren't the guilty pirates....and I fought back. I fought back not because they were protecting their stuff. I fought back when they sent a fourcolor mailing featuring their raid on us to each and every registered Microsoft customer in my country offering a free audit with no fines or penalties and a 25% discount.
I think that there is a distinct difference between using a poorly investigated and ill timed raid on a customer.....CUSTOMER....operative word here as a marketing campaign and a small company that is a competitor that is selling inferior knockoffs of protected intellectual property. The company we sued is not a customer of mine and I believe was not only profiting on our hard work but selling a product that is misleading to the public and potentially damaging our hard work.
Please support whoever you see fit. I did not treat a customer how MS treated me. I didnt hurt a family. I am protecting my trademarks and patents and will continue to do so.
Name yourself after booze. It is fitting.
Im glad that you took the time to try and find something that made me look like a hypocrite.....
Is the person knowingly selling rip offs or counterfeits hurting his or her family or is the company that protects their intellectual property the one hurting the family? So I guess to extend the argument which you seem to have a knack for...if a person knowingly robs a bank and gets caught is it the robber that hurt his family or is it the bank pressing charges? I am not calling this customer a bank robber to make things clear....I think they knew what they were doing, if not we will find out. That is what the process is all about.
For what looks to be a surface thinker the microsoft issue makes sense. I didnt like microsoft raiding me and putting press releases out after we were closed. But I took it., I responded that they came for bear and got squirrel. Three bad things happened. They were misled and we weren't the guilty pirates....and I fought back. I fought back not because they were protecting their stuff. I fought back when they sent a fourcolor mailing featuring their raid on us to each and every registered Microsoft customer in my country offering a free audit with no fines or penalties and a 25% discount.
I think that there is a distinct difference between using a poorly investigated and ill timed raid on a customer.....CUSTOMER....operative word here as a marketing campaign and a small company that is a competitor that is selling inferior knockoffs of protected intellectual property. The company we sued is not a customer of mine and I believe was not only profiting on our hard work but selling a product that is misleading to the public and potentially damaging our hard work.
Please support whoever you see fit. I did not treat a customer how MS treated me. I didnt hurt a family. I am protecting my trademarks and patents and will continue to do so.
RobertB
Well-known member
Gee, I wonder if Grey Goose is in some way affiliated with the offending retailer.
To be fair to Grey Goose, I realize I may be off on that, and that he or she may just be someone who is sympathetic to the woes of the sued patent/trademark infringer, and who has large amounts of idle time on his or her hands. But if I'm not way off, I'd suspect a true statement could be formed by removing the italicized parts of that first sentence.
As BP said, "nice try".
To be fair to Grey Goose, I realize I may be off on that, and that he or she may just be someone who is sympathetic to the woes of the sued patent/trademark infringer, and who has large amounts of idle time on his or her hands. But if I'm not way off, I'd suspect a true statement could be formed by removing the italicized parts of that first sentence.
As BP said, "nice try".
Grey Goose
New member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2008
- Messages
- 2
First and foremost, I thought that I had made it very clear that I am not associated with the "offending merchant". But just for the simpletons, let me state it again "for the record", I am not associated with, employed by, or in communication with the merchant in question.
I made my thoughts known in this forum because I simply thought that the statements and comments of the "posse" were inconsistent with what I saw as the underlying issue. I am not an attorney (or I would have already thrown myself off a bridge after my divorce), and my knowledge of trademark law is minimal. But I have always felt that guitars and bass guitars were basically a copy of some Greek or Roman instrument. It took me less than 30 minutes to find a COPY of an Ernie Ball bass guitar that actually had the ERNIE BALL name printed on it. The web page also had GIBSONS, FENDERS and OVATIONS. ALL MADE IN CHINA, all for under $250 (with hard shell case).
IMHO, THOSE are the people that Mr. Ball and the rest of you should be going after. Not someone who sells a guitar that kinda looks like something that you hold dear to your heart. Look on Ebay for guitars that look like Fenders and Gibsons... DO you thing Fender goes after all of them? Some of them even use the Fender or Gibson names in the description.
Unfortunately, by the time I came across this topic the offending item had already been removed from the offenders web site (didnt get to see it). But Im sure if I had, I would have thought, "Yeah it looks like an Ernie Ball bass..."
I understand that you have the right to go after whomever you like. But looking at the time line of when this thread began, when Sterling became involved, and when the case was filed (the records are already available online), there is no way that Sterling or any one from his legal department attempted to make contact with the merchant. There was no C&D, no phone call (well maybe they had the time to call, but it appears they didnt)... Just a trip to the court house to file some papers.
Read the ABOUT US page on Discount Musical Instruments - 2kool4skool. They all seem like a pretty nice bunch of guys. The owner is a professional musician with some nice credits to his name. I doubt highly that he woke up one morning and said, "How can I screw Ernie Ball today..." It truly appears to me that a wholesaler approached him with a line of guitars and he said he would take them all.
I guess my entire point is, and take it for what its worth... There are alot of people losing their homes, losing their jobs, and going under right now. The merchant is obviously already aware of this, (item off website) so I think a simple phone call would have had the same effect. BUT, Ernie Ball Inc. wants to make a few bucks, and didnt feel that simple call was necessary.
Now if the guy loses, loses his business, has to fire a few employees... Will it all have been worth it?
And as I said Mr. Ball, I think that this thread put YOUR company and its followers in a very bad light. Maybe your rights have been offended upon, but YOU of all people know how it feels to be attacked... and you have simply now done the same to someone else.
I made my thoughts known in this forum because I simply thought that the statements and comments of the "posse" were inconsistent with what I saw as the underlying issue. I am not an attorney (or I would have already thrown myself off a bridge after my divorce), and my knowledge of trademark law is minimal. But I have always felt that guitars and bass guitars were basically a copy of some Greek or Roman instrument. It took me less than 30 minutes to find a COPY of an Ernie Ball bass guitar that actually had the ERNIE BALL name printed on it. The web page also had GIBSONS, FENDERS and OVATIONS. ALL MADE IN CHINA, all for under $250 (with hard shell case).
IMHO, THOSE are the people that Mr. Ball and the rest of you should be going after. Not someone who sells a guitar that kinda looks like something that you hold dear to your heart. Look on Ebay for guitars that look like Fenders and Gibsons... DO you thing Fender goes after all of them? Some of them even use the Fender or Gibson names in the description.
Unfortunately, by the time I came across this topic the offending item had already been removed from the offenders web site (didnt get to see it). But Im sure if I had, I would have thought, "Yeah it looks like an Ernie Ball bass..."
I understand that you have the right to go after whomever you like. But looking at the time line of when this thread began, when Sterling became involved, and when the case was filed (the records are already available online), there is no way that Sterling or any one from his legal department attempted to make contact with the merchant. There was no C&D, no phone call (well maybe they had the time to call, but it appears they didnt)... Just a trip to the court house to file some papers.
Read the ABOUT US page on Discount Musical Instruments - 2kool4skool. They all seem like a pretty nice bunch of guys. The owner is a professional musician with some nice credits to his name. I doubt highly that he woke up one morning and said, "How can I screw Ernie Ball today..." It truly appears to me that a wholesaler approached him with a line of guitars and he said he would take them all.
I guess my entire point is, and take it for what its worth... There are alot of people losing their homes, losing their jobs, and going under right now. The merchant is obviously already aware of this, (item off website) so I think a simple phone call would have had the same effect. BUT, Ernie Ball Inc. wants to make a few bucks, and didnt feel that simple call was necessary.
Now if the guy loses, loses his business, has to fire a few employees... Will it all have been worth it?
And as I said Mr. Ball, I think that this thread put YOUR company and its followers in a very bad light. Maybe your rights have been offended upon, but YOU of all people know how it feels to be attacked... and you have simply now done the same to someone else.
Psychicpet
Well-known member
Grey Goose.
The guy knows that he is selling items that infringe upon copyrights. What is it about a business practice like that that is a good thing??
He knows that the only way his cheaper instruments sell is because of the name and reputation of those instruments that they are copying.
It is obviously a risk that he is willing to take and as it so happens one of the companies that are getting ripped off is getting him to stop ripping off their items.
The manufacturer of the knock-offs is equally an idiot but that gets into a whole lot of int'l law and that kind of stuff. So, as it lands on your soil and a dist. is silly enough to think it a good decision to sell these items. They're the ones that get stung. And rightly so.
Times are rough for everyone, have always been, will continue to be. That doesn't excuse poor decisions or all of a sudden turn everything to 'shades of gray', there still are some definitive laws.
The guy knows that he is selling items that infringe upon copyrights. What is it about a business practice like that that is a good thing??
He knows that the only way his cheaper instruments sell is because of the name and reputation of those instruments that they are copying.
It is obviously a risk that he is willing to take and as it so happens one of the companies that are getting ripped off is getting him to stop ripping off their items.
The manufacturer of the knock-offs is equally an idiot but that gets into a whole lot of int'l law and that kind of stuff. So, as it lands on your soil and a dist. is silly enough to think it a good decision to sell these items. They're the ones that get stung. And rightly so.
Times are rough for everyone, have always been, will continue to be. That doesn't excuse poor decisions or all of a sudden turn everything to 'shades of gray', there still are some definitive laws.
Slingy
Well-known member
He'd be better off selling officially liscensed products than unofficially unliscened knock offs. Most of the major brands have cheap products available, maybe even cheaper, that do not infringe on copyrights. Heck you can get a Dean, Epiphone, or Squier for $100.
your idol
Well-known member
Goose. im not gonna dog you out or swap bouts of deep vocabulary. BP handed down his computer he paid for within his own company and the window-beast came ain and took money from him for something that he was not even entirely aware was a problem and surely would have fixed over just having money taken from him for
THAT WAS THE APPLES..HERE COMES THE ORANGES.
If i take a song ..a popular song that everyone is quite aware of, lets say a michale jackson tune . make a very bad cover of it, and dont pay MJ's ass. im not only tarnishing his hard work but im getting paid off it...MY ASS IS GETTING SUED.
If i draw the mona lisa with crayons sell it for profit and put leonardo davinci's name in the description.. MY ASS IS GETTING SUED.
Vanilla Ice took the hook from under pressure and threw a snare in it and called it his..HIS ASS GOT SUED
it's not bullying. but BP's claim is that he and several family members and business partners , who just didnt start making money on this gear over night and actually have and will keep spending that profit on bettering for our sake, have earned the legacy surrounding theire product. they cant say you cant reproduce it in your own way but there are proper channels to go through. you you ignore those channels you're being shady
long and short of it all is if you don't stomp out a roach when you see it youre gonna end up with a hell of an infestation eventually.
THAT WAS THE APPLES..HERE COMES THE ORANGES.
If i take a song ..a popular song that everyone is quite aware of, lets say a michale jackson tune . make a very bad cover of it, and dont pay MJ's ass. im not only tarnishing his hard work but im getting paid off it...MY ASS IS GETTING SUED.
If i draw the mona lisa with crayons sell it for profit and put leonardo davinci's name in the description.. MY ASS IS GETTING SUED.
Vanilla Ice took the hook from under pressure and threw a snare in it and called it his..HIS ASS GOT SUED
it's not bullying. but BP's claim is that he and several family members and business partners , who just didnt start making money on this gear over night and actually have and will keep spending that profit on bettering for our sake, have earned the legacy surrounding theire product. they cant say you cant reproduce it in your own way but there are proper channels to go through. you you ignore those channels you're being shady
long and short of it all is if you don't stomp out a roach when you see it youre gonna end up with a hell of an infestation eventually.
Big Poppa
Well-known member
Grey goose is full of bull
He says he doesnt really like our basses but has taken the time to read this thread, Google me, make his first post in a detailed and judgemental attack and then admits that he NEVER saw the offending bass because it was removed.....thanks for the benefit of the doubt....If this inst a neighbor relative or signifigant other ......
Now he has called us simpletons because of all the causes he could fight for like the people who have lost their homes he decides that attacking here is the right use of his intellect.
Basically you have no horse in the race (if we are to believe you) Why dont you help out humanity in a little more useful manner...
Oh yeah I supposed to worry about losing a customer that doesnt like our stuff anyway.....
He says he doesnt really like our basses but has taken the time to read this thread, Google me, make his first post in a detailed and judgemental attack and then admits that he NEVER saw the offending bass because it was removed.....thanks for the benefit of the doubt....If this inst a neighbor relative or signifigant other ......
Now he has called us simpletons because of all the causes he could fight for like the people who have lost their homes he decides that attacking here is the right use of his intellect.
Basically you have no horse in the race (if we are to believe you) Why dont you help out humanity in a little more useful manner...
Oh yeah I supposed to worry about losing a customer that doesnt like our stuff anyway.....
bovinehost
Administrator
Sterling might give you a long leash. I'm not so inclined. It appears to me that you signed up to the forum to have a go at the "simpletons". I'm not amused, nor do I think we're overrun with simpletons, although you've certainly increased the probabilities.
In other words, unless someone else overrules me, you're done.
I hope it was as much fun as you thought it would be, but if your motivation is to stir things up, it's not as interesting as you imagined it would be.
Wave bye-bye.
Jack
Big Poppa
Well-known member
Jack good choice........
You know you can claim whatever you want but this was way fishy
You know you can claim whatever you want but this was way fishy
Aussie Mark
Well-known member
I don't suppose the Grey Goose's IP address is from Arizona?
RobertB
Well-known member
Hey, simpletons aren't supposed to know about IP addresses, that Jack now has the one Grey Goose was transmitting from, or that they have geographical significance.
Big Poppa
Well-known member
but we dont need to waste time on it.
To summarize
A player that doesnt like our basses spends a lot of time here investigating one particular thread
he then researches me again a lot of time
he then researches the lawsuit on the internet
he knows that i sued the online dealer and didnt send a warning letter or make a phone call ( sometimes we do sometimes we dont) How did he know that? He claims that I wouldn't have had time for a phone call
He claims to not know these people
he admits to never seeing the offending bass
he is full of bull....
A key point here is that this person has his thong real tight because I didn't send the alleged offending party a box of chocolates or give him a get out of jail free card. Some that infringe on others hard work and design assume that they can profit from others work and then wait for the property owner to have to go to the expense of defending himself with a expensive letter from legal staff.....You know what? If we are horrible people that are groundlessly picking on an innocent party we will get whacked in court.
To summarize
A player that doesnt like our basses spends a lot of time here investigating one particular thread
he then researches me again a lot of time
he then researches the lawsuit on the internet
he knows that i sued the online dealer and didnt send a warning letter or make a phone call ( sometimes we do sometimes we dont) How did he know that? He claims that I wouldn't have had time for a phone call
He claims to not know these people
he admits to never seeing the offending bass
he is full of bull....
A key point here is that this person has his thong real tight because I didn't send the alleged offending party a box of chocolates or give him a get out of jail free card. Some that infringe on others hard work and design assume that they can profit from others work and then wait for the property owner to have to go to the expense of defending himself with a expensive letter from legal staff.....You know what? If we are horrible people that are groundlessly picking on an innocent party we will get whacked in court.
Last edited:
GHWelles
Well-known member
It is virtually an exact copy. Not "kind of".
They certainly try to. Trademark owners must make efforts to protect their trademarks or they lose them.
Then you probably should not be talking about this.
We move fast to stop counterfeits. Should we move slowly and let more be sold?
If he is a professional musician then he should know something about the industry and know he is selling counterfeits.
It looks like the item was taken off the website in an attempt to conceal the infringement. It is not unusual for infringers to attempt to cover-up their illegal activities.
Sorry we are trying to protect a company that employs hundreds of workers. Should we do nothing, let the counterfeiters erode the market and have to lay off employees ourselves?
Big Poppa
Well-known member
Wonder dog!
- Status
