Monster Cable suing Blue Jeans Cable

[Anthony]

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]

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)

[superchad]

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]

solid7 wrote:

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)

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...

Regards,
Wayne

[solid7]

Wayne A. Pflughaupt wrote:

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]

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...

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]

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

[WmAx]

solid7 wrote:

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]

Who does Monster sue?

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

http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?q...&pn2=&cop=&cn=

Aloha,
WB

[Wayne A. Pflughaupt]

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