[chesebert]

lol...great letter; granted, most attorneys would not send c/d letter unless there is at least one somewhat real claim, unless the attorney and his/her client is looking to get their @#$!@# handed to them by the judge via one or more of the sanction rules

IMO it's unethical to file merit less claims.

on the other hand blue jeans should almost now be practically certain that monster will file a compliant in the forum of Monster's choosing; not the wisest decision on bluejean's end IMO...

gotta lov litigation in the public opinion forum

 

[The Actual]

Interesting letter, very readable and easy to follow even from a normal audiophile perspective.

 

[Spareribs]

I've decided to throw out my 3 sets of Monster cables and will replace them with Blue Jeans.

 

[xnothingpoetic]

That letter was, quite frankly, very poorly written.

Grammar was great, sentence structure, very nice. But he kept repeating himself over, and over, and over! I got frustrated and almost stopped reading. So in that sense, it is poorly written.

He should have sent it to a few people to get input before sending it to Monster.

 

[chesebert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by xnothingpoetic /img/forum/go_quote.gif That letter was, quite frankly, very poorly written. Grammar was great, sentence structure, very nice. But he kept repeating himself over, and over, and over! I got frustrated and almost stopped reading. So in that sense, it is poorly written. He should have sent it to a few people to get input before sending it to Monster.

he is trying to teas out a number of legal issues, there is a reason to this madness of a writing style...don't worry, most of these letters are not meant for normal human to read with all their hidden messages and attacks

 

[Demix500]

that was enjoyable.

 

[MP3guy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert /img/forum/go_quote.gif IMO it's unethical to file merit less claims.

Don't be silly- lawyers filing meritless claims and using unethical tactics?

Perish the thought!

 

[mojo]

This case could be very interesting. In order to claim patent infringement, Monster must think that BGC's cable have some patented functionality similar to their own.

The key word there is functionality. Patents only cover function, not style, sound, shape etc. In order to prove this, Monster will have to identify exactly what function is being infringed on, and explain how it works. If BGC can show that the functionality does not exist (e.g. material A does not affect sound, mechanism B does not improve audio etc) they would be able to win.