[flagged]
What does this add to the conversation?
Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)
71–80 of 210 posts
Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)
#72>> developed an intense frustration with insurance carriers who would settle meritless claims for nuisance value when the better long-term view would have been to fight against vexatious litigation as a matter of principle
I got let out of 2-3 months of jury duty on an asbestos case by saying basically the same thing. Voir dire is fun, particularly if you manage to scare the bejezus out of both sides.
Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)
#73The complete story: https://www.bluejeanscable.com/legal/mcp/index.htm
In particular, I'd recommend looking at the full response. While the original article covers the plain-language juicy-sounding excerpts, the full letter to Monster also contains some artful legalese that even I as layman can appreciate:
It starts with several pages worth of requests for information. I'm pretty sure those aren't actually requests for information - they're a threat. If Monster were to actually sue, he'd be entitled to these documents as part of discovery, so he's essentially saying "if you sue me, you'll spend a lot of money on discovery (and be forced to reveal stuff you'd rather not)".
Sprinkled in are some suggestions of ethics violations on the side of Monster's lawyers, a hint at Monster's likely corporate tax evasion scheme (and the requirement to produce the material that proves the tax evasion in discovery), and the threat to break their racket in the last paragraph that kopirgan already pointed out.
All this is even more impressive than the quoted part, and sadly omitted in the original blog post.
Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Monster's counsel had made a horrible mistake, and probably caused lasting harm to the company, by sending me that ridiculous letter This sort of thing always reminds of the Jack Daniels cease and desist letter[0], which, at least for me, had the exact opposite effect. 0. https://brokenpianoforpresident.wordpress.com/2012/07/19/jac...
Hadn't seen this before. What a nicely written letter. Explained why they have to do this, outlined a reasonable action step, and even offer to help said action. Moreover, it didn't contain a single threat. I wish all companies took such an approach. You catch more flies with honey, and all that.
I used to be the webmaster for my parent's HOA[0], and I bought their .com domain name when it became available (a realtor had owned it originally). They eventually hired a firm to run the site, and I pointed the domain at their nameservers, and forgot about it (paying the ~$20/year in renewals, because that's not a lot of money & I have fond memories of living there).
15 years later, I get a registered letter from a law firm – counsel to the HOA – claiming that I was violating their trademark by owning the domain name, demanding that I turn it over to the HOA, etc.
If an actual human had reached out to me, I would have happily transferred the domain. Instead, they paid a lawyer to be a dick about it – so I ignored the letter, they registered the .net, and everyone moved on.
I still keep the domain up, and redirect it to their new URL, because as long as the .com domain works, people will be using it. Which means they will still want it, and I'm not giving it to them. At least not until they ask nicely, and catch me with honey instead of vinegar.
[0]Despite this incident, their HOA is normally perfectly reasonable. It's a few hundred dollars per year to keep up with road repairs, signage, community facilities upkeep, etc.
Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)
#75I remember buying audio gear (think receiver, amplifier, cd player) and being the focus of the upsell for 2-5x more expensive monster cables. Once I patiently explained that a cable shouldn't matter for digital as long as the bits got there, and seeing the young sales guy pause and then "get it". And I got the (relatively) cheap cables. Also speaker wire. You can get perfectly good copper cables for less, probably in…
> Once I patiently explained that a cable shouldn't matter for digital as long as the bits got there . Emphasis mine. As someone that sold AV equipment, including cables, in the late ‘00s / early ‘10s, nerds that misunderstood the nuances of this were the single worst group of customers to work with. You could see them coming a mile away. By the time “gold-plated HDMI cables are a scam” gets down to their level of ps…
> as long as the bits got there.
Let me just clarify that this was really not something outside the range of common sense.
I recall it was merely overpriced but decent $29 cables vs $129 monster cables. This was pre-hdmi probably 2000 or earlier and it was at the Good Guys.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Guys_(American_company)
That said, yeah hdmi and say 4k is confusing. Thank goodness for unconfusing standards like USB-C. (kidding!)
Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)
#76I had no idea Monster sold anything other than over priced guitar cables... About 15 yeard ago, I knew a guy who exclusively bought Monster... well he had two of them, one from the guitar to the pedal board and another from the board to the amp. But it wasn't because of their alleged improved sound quality or whatever, it was because they had a lifetime warranty. Dude had bought two monster 1/4inch cables and gotten…
if anyone wants to block the annoying troll spammer that invaded hackernews today, please put this rule on your personal filters on ublock origin: ##.comtr.athing:has-text('bschmidt')
Seems someone thinks they're being super clever when really they're just childish and annoying. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)
#77The complete story: https://www.bluejeanscable.com/legal/mcp/index.htm
For anybody who’s wondering what happened next, this is from the above link: “Monster's counsel had made a horrible mistake, and probably caused lasting harm to the company, by sending me that ridiculous letter. But he, and Monster, did apparently know the first rule of holes: "If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging." The end, therefore, of the story was a bit anticlimactic. Knowing that I was able to defend my…
Is there any way to file a (real) countersuit against someone, just to punish them for having wasted your time and energy with a threat of legal action that never materialized?
Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)
#78Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Once I patiently explained that a cable shouldn't matter for digital as long as the bits got there . Emphasis mine. As someone that sold AV equipment, including cables, in the late ‘00s / early ‘10s, nerds that misunderstood the nuances of this were the single worst group of customers to work with. You could see them coming a mile away. By the time “gold-plated HDMI cables are a scam” gets down to their level of ps…
I wish HDMI would die as a standard. The TV folk won't that happen though, controlling HDMI allows them to control the ecosystem by extension. Would be nice if the EU could step in an make DisplayPort the required connection and protocol like they did for the USB-C port for charging.
Especially since the HDMI people have made open-source video drivers effectively impossible.
Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
if anyone wants to block the annoying troll spammer that invaded hackernews today, please put this rule on your personal filters on ublock origin: ##.comtr.athing:has-text('bschmidt')
Seems someone thinks they're being super clever when really they're just childish and annoying. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
most hacker thing I've seen here in years