The M Company you shouldn't talk about

I don’t want to get into to much bashing, but thought I would give some people that are not aware some other perspectives. Some of these stories are a little old but it makes you think twice.

What’s your perspective?

Keep it tame!

Monster fiercely protects its name, Cable products company sues those who use M-word

A monster by any other name might get you sued by Monster Cable Products Inc.

The Brisbane maker of electronics accessories has filed lawsuits and trademark infringement claims against dozens of companies for using "monster’’ in names, products or services.

Monster Cable Litigation Correspondence Vs Blue Jeans Cable


Monster Cable recently (March 28, 2008) wrote to us claiming that we had infringed various design patents and trademarks owned by it or by its intellectual property holding company in Bermuda, Monster Cable International, Ltd. We reviewed the patent and trademark filings submitted by Monster Cable, and found that Monster’s claims were completely frivolous–so frivolous, in fact, that there was something amusingly appropriate about the fact that Monster’s letter had arrived in our mailbox on April Fools Day.

We wrote back to Monster’s counsel on April 14, 2008, to demand that if Monster wishes to convince us that we have infringed its intellectual property, it at least take the trouble to identify the correct patents and trademark registrations on which it relies, and explain its position in a way that identifies some plausible, nonfrivolous claim. Along the way, we also let Monster know that we have no intention of being bullied by anyone, no matter the size. To our surprise and delight, our long and (to our eyes) boring six-page letter became the focus of a great deal of positive attention from our customers, the online audio/video community, and others concerned with the abuse of the intellectual property laws.

As of this writing, there has not been a further peep from Monster Cable. If this is the end of the matter, well–good riddance, Monster. If it is not, we will be sure to update this page from time to time to give our customers and others interested the blow-by-blow account of any ongoing conflict with Monster Cable.
*Note - The President of Blue Jeans cable is a former lawyer.

Here, in Adobe .pdf form, are copies of all of the correspondence to date:

Initial Letter from Monster Cable, 3/28/08 (missing exhibits)


Exhibits to Letter from Monster Cable of 3/28/08


Our Response to Monster Cable, 4/14/08


Monster Cable Sues Monster Mini Golf For, You Guessed It, Name Confusion

If people ever decide to wake up and stop paying the huge markups for Monster Cable for technology that’s not even here yet, Monster can go into another business: selling balls. They’ve sure got an excess, seeing as they’re following up a suit against another cable company because the connectors are too similar with a suit against a MINI GOLF COMPANY because their NAMES ARE TOO SIMILAR.


I’m guessing there are no humans working at the M company, only monsters?! :smiley:

Next they’ll be claiming ownership of the word “cable”.

A reputable Audio Magazine did a est with M cables and plain old high quality lampshade wire. It found that there were no noticeable diferences. I [ersonally havenever noticed any difference and have tried them side by side. I don’t waste money on it. There may be some difference but I don’t own the kind of system that can apparently detect it. I tried it on Scott LC290 tube amplifier and matching pre-amp. I used a pair of electrostatic speakers I had made. I initially heard a 60hz. hum but it turned out to be a fluorescent light on the same circuit. Once that was removed I could not detect any difference. I am not saying that there isn’t one, I just couldn’t hear it. That was about 8 years ago, maybe something changed?

/me wonders if they’ve filed a case against Sully & Mikey’s Monsters Inc, and Sesame Streets’ Cookie Monster :stuck_out_tongue: