DUMBLE Trade Mark
Moderators: pompeiisneaks, Colossal
-
- Posts: 721
- Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 12:24 pm
- Location: Delft, The Netherlands
1 others liked this
Re: DUMBLE Trade Mark
Something I don't get: the message on dumble.com goes a lot further than simple usage of names like Andy talks about. I'm certainly no expert on American law about copyright infringements, but would taking action against usage of schematics, parts of ideas of Dumble be even remotely possible based on American law?
-
- Posts: 1059
- Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:04 am
- Location: Santa Cruz, CA
2 others liked this
Re: DUMBLE Trade Mark
rootz wrote: ↑Sun Apr 23, 2023 9:10 pm Something I don't get: the message on dumble.com goes a lot further than simple usage of names like Andy talks about. I'm certainly no expert on American law about copyright infringements, but would taking action against usage of schematics, parts of ideas of Dumble be even remotely possible based on American law?
Similar case study for reference:
In June 1997, the Mackie company (now LOUD Technologies) accused Behringer of trademark and trade dress infringement, and brought suit seeking $327M in damages.[33][34] The claims were later rejected by the court. In their suit, Mackie said that Behringer had had a history of copying products by other manufacturers and selling them as their own.[35] The Mackie suit detailed an instance, in which Behringer was sued by Aphex Systems for copying the Aural Exciter Type F. In that case Aphex Systems won DM690,000.[35] The Mackie suit also mentioned similar cases filed by BBE, dbx and Drawmer.[35] On 30 November 1999, the U.S. District Court in Seattle, Washington, dismissed Mackie claims that Behringer had infringed on Mackie copyrights with its MX 8000 mixer, noting that circuit schematics are not covered by copyright laws.[36][37][38]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behringer
Charlie
-
- Posts: 721
- Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 12:24 pm
- Location: Delft, The Netherlands
1 others liked this
Re: DUMBLE Trade Mark
Yeah that’s what I thought. If it were even remotely possible to protect schematics as intellectual property it would have happened long ago and Two Rock and many other companies would not be what they are today.
Re: DUMBLE Trade Mark
I can see visual things such as the look of the headshell as "art" and other things, like how Vox was going after a few commercial D-Style amp builders for using their grill cloth. It would be a stretch but the dimensions and look of a headshell could be considered art as far as I can tell. I can also see this going the way of Nintendo shutting down forums that were reverse engineering their gaming consoles/games. Although there is no copywriting "Dumble-code" here, just schematics. I really hope not but I agree that the Dumble.com language is stronger than I expected.
I also just remembered how circuit board PCBs are protected as "art" so I'm curious if copying layouts would compromise that.
I also just remembered how circuit board PCBs are protected as "art" so I'm curious if copying layouts would compromise that.
Ryan
https://www.thetonegeek.com/
https://www.thetonegeek.com/
-
- Posts: 1059
- Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:04 am
- Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Re: DUMBLE Trade Mark
All it takes is enough deviation in layout to negate any circuit “copyright”.
If you are Fender in the 60’s and 70’s with a foothold on the market you can easily send Dumble a cease and desist letter for cloning fender amplifiers …true story quoted from the man himself …
It’s a much bigger world nowadays. All of the mainstream amplifier manufacturers carrying on the dumble topology and circuitry do so with considerable liberty of design. Love it or hate it , even Dumble couldn’t say anything or else you know he would have .
Thieving trademarked names is one thing , and arguably the most disrespectful action one could commit. Essentially riding coat tails is generally frowned upon , rather then let your work speak for itself. But it’s 2023; there are five million clones of every amplifier. Plagiarized ripoffs left and right. Might as well be trying to shutdown illegal music streaming…
If you stop to throw rocks at every dog barking you will never get to where you are going. Save the stones for the vicious pooches running off leash
Beyond that, Iam still stuck on the “new products” statement …this goes against everything I have ever heard concerning Dumbles wishes for his legacy…
Charlie
- Reeltarded
- Posts: 9960
- Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:38 am
- Location: GA USA
1 others liked this
Re: DUMBLE Trade Mark
Except for scaring people with big letter cease and desist, the only thing actionable is the name.
Umm if the court sees you selecting three of thousands, the court punishes you and says that isn't how it works.
Kleenex
Umm if the court sees you selecting three of thousands, the court punishes you and says that isn't how it works.
Kleenex
Signatures have a 255 character limit that I could abuse, but I am not Cecil B. DeMille.
- FUCHSAUDIO
- Posts: 1241
- Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 2:48 pm
- Location: New Jersey (you got a problem with that ?)
- Contact:
1 others liked this
Re: DUMBLE Trade Mark
At this point, I must purposefully limit my comments, but I've had interactions with the folks who took things over, and they appear to be solid people. They include Drew Berlin, Dumble's brother, and a few other people who were close friends Dumble asked to take care of his affairs upon his passing. In my case, we came to an understanding on the domain ownership. The estate now holds the domain.
They have won the right hold onto the US trademarks, despite an attempt by those English guys to try and take the US marks, based on Dumble's passing. They gave up, flat out, and stopped paying their US attorneys and the case was dropped.
They own any and all Dumble trademarks. I don't doubt they may file for marks he never completed filings on, or never filed at all. He was an odd guy, and sometimes he did things, sometimes he didn't, some things took forever.
It's likely securing the Euro marks will be the next step, as there are known pedals and amps being made and sold freely with the name on them. I guess the question is how much money the people over there have to actually fight for names they basically have zero right to own.
Over 40 amps have been returned to many clients (repairs, mods etc). He had multiple storage units around California that are being gone-through and cleaned out.
I expect that those making amps or pedals using the known Dumble product names will get C & D letters at some point.
As far as actually making anything, your guess is as good as mine. Honestly, to own and maintain a trademark, you must DO something with it. If you can't or don't you could lose it. They do have to find something to use the marks for, to maintain them. I have no idea what it might consist of or include at this point.
That's all I got kids...
They have won the right hold onto the US trademarks, despite an attempt by those English guys to try and take the US marks, based on Dumble's passing. They gave up, flat out, and stopped paying their US attorneys and the case was dropped.
They own any and all Dumble trademarks. I don't doubt they may file for marks he never completed filings on, or never filed at all. He was an odd guy, and sometimes he did things, sometimes he didn't, some things took forever.
It's likely securing the Euro marks will be the next step, as there are known pedals and amps being made and sold freely with the name on them. I guess the question is how much money the people over there have to actually fight for names they basically have zero right to own.
Over 40 amps have been returned to many clients (repairs, mods etc). He had multiple storage units around California that are being gone-through and cleaned out.
I expect that those making amps or pedals using the known Dumble product names will get C & D letters at some point.
As far as actually making anything, your guess is as good as mine. Honestly, to own and maintain a trademark, you must DO something with it. If you can't or don't you could lose it. They do have to find something to use the marks for, to maintain them. I have no idea what it might consist of or include at this point.
That's all I got kids...
Proud holder of US Patent # 7336165.
- martin manning
- Posts: 13324
- Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 12:43 am
- Location: 39°06' N 84°30' W
4 others liked this
Re: DUMBLE Trade Mark
They could just make and sell Dumble stickers. I'd put one on my rear window.FUCHSAUDIO wrote: ↑Tue Apr 25, 2023 6:36 pmThey do have to find something to use the marks for, to maintain them. I have no idea what it might consist of or include at this point.
-
- Posts: 1059
- Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:04 am
- Location: Santa Cruz, CA
1 others liked this
Re: DUMBLE Trade Mark
Why stop there? T shirts, jackets, ball caps , keychains, lighters…perhaps a commemorative craft brewery beer… or maybe a signature bandana?martin manning wrote: ↑Tue Apr 25, 2023 7:28 pmThey could just make and sell Dumble stickers. I'd put one on my rear window.FUCHSAUDIO wrote: ↑Tue Apr 25, 2023 6:36 pmThey do have to find something to use the marks for, to maintain them. I have no idea what it might consist of or include at this point.
Charlie
- FUCHSAUDIO
- Posts: 1241
- Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 2:48 pm
- Location: New Jersey (you got a problem with that ?)
- Contact:
2 others liked this
Re: DUMBLE Trade Mark
I made the joke about bumper stickers and baseball caps, and they laughed and said "yeah, no"...martin manning wrote: ↑Tue Apr 25, 2023 7:28 pmThey could just make and sell Dumble stickers. I'd put one on my rear window.FUCHSAUDIO wrote: ↑Tue Apr 25, 2023 6:36 pmThey do have to find something to use the marks for, to maintain them. I have no idea what it might consist of or include at this point.
I don't know the inside skinny on what the will actually contained. There are already people online claiming they were given things in the will, or claiming they should be in the will, and people handling the estate saying their full of shit.
There are also people claiming they sent him amps for repairs or mods or "research", that they never got back. I'm sure it's a daunting task to sort through the bullshit and riff-raff.
Despite his eccentricities, it seems he was somewhat organized. Much of the storage-unit unit stuff was labeled.
Proud holder of US Patent # 7336165.
-
- Posts: 1059
- Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:04 am
- Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Re: DUMBLE Trade Mark
“Dumble.com is maintained by the successor to Mr. Dumble’s business, who owns all intellectual property rights associated with DUMBLE® amplifiers, including trademarks, schematics and other trade secrets, together with records and databases of all authentic DUMBLE® amplifiers ever in existence sufficient to verify authenticity.”FUCHSAUDIO wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 4:07 pm Despite his eccentricities, it seems he was somewhat organized. Much of the storage-unit unit stuff was labeled.
That sure would imply that the guy was pretty well organized… that’s quite the catalog …
Charlie
Re: DUMBLE Trade Mark
lets see how good will be new dumble! will it be better (or different?) than all other cloners?
Re: DUMBLE Trade Mark
i'm interested to see who will buy the new D No. 001!
-
- Posts: 1059
- Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:04 am
- Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Re: DUMBLE Trade Mark
Just gimme the drink Koozies already
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Charlie
Re: DUMBLE Trade Mark
it would seem that, past the Atlantic, the action of the lawyers is not having a great effect!? ...and also that, Reverb doesn't care much about this kind of "counterfeiting" (or they only act if we tell them?) and so it continues...
... anyway it's sad
https://reverb.com/fr/item/66704433-dum ... ew-release
... anyway it's sad
https://reverb.com/fr/item/66704433-dum ... ew-release