Callaway Seeks Permanent Injunction Against Titleist

kemaukemau Members Posts: 5,148
edited Jan 20, 2008 in Golf Balls #1
No More ProV1 Use on Tour or Sale at end of 2008
Can you imagine if this goes through???



Full Article Here



Select paragraphs taken from proposed order.....



"1. Acushnet’s professional golfers currently under contract are permitted to play ProV1 products through the end of the 2008 calendar year. However, in addition to the notice required below in paragraph 4, Acushnet shall notify in writing all professional golfers affiliated with Acushnet that ProV1 products will no longer be available after December 31, 2008.



2. Distributors and retailers of Acushnet’s products, and Acushnet customers may dispose of remaining ProV1 product inventory in their physical possession by sale or otherwise, but Acushnet shall not further supply any distributors, retailers and/or customers with ProV1 products as of the date of this Order."
Post edited by Unknown User on
9* Synchron Revolver
14* Dynacraft Avatar
2-PW Titleist 690MB
56* & 60* Nike SV
Bobby Grace DCT Sunset
Innovex V Motion Tour
«13456710

Comments

  • jjc2257jjc2257 Members Posts: 384 ✭✭
    Is there any real chance that this could actually happen?
  • SakmanSakman @ryansako Marshals Posts: 6,291 mod
    ****, talk about kicking someone while they're down...



    IMO, this will be settled out of court for an undisclosed amount of $$$. Guess we'll just have to wait to see what happens.



    Nice find.
  • TM golf guyTM golf guy Members Posts: 9,985
    This could be very interesting. I agree though, I think it will just be settled for a large amount of money.
  • woodlandsgolfer woodlandsgolfer Members Posts: 904 ✭✭
    jjc2257 wrote on Jan 20 2008, 07:34 PM:
    Is there any real chance that this could actually happen?




    It is very real that this could happen. The key with the wording is that injunctive relief means that money can't solve all the problems. The damage goes beyond financial matters. But then again, with patents in general, this stuff happens all the time. Companies are constantly suing to protect their patents. And many times they settle and no one really ever hears about it.
    TaylorMade M2 9.5 Diamana Ahina 70X
    TaylorMade M6 15* Tensei White 70X
    Ping i500 3-UW Project X LZ 6.0
    Ping Glide 2.0 Stealth 54 ES, 58 ES Project X LZ 6.0
    Odyssey White Hot Pro CSM 400g
  • BEND OF THE RIVER GCBEND OF THE RIVER GC Charter Members Posts: 6,559
    edited Jan 20, 2008 #6
    Sakman wrote on Jan 20 2008, 08:43 PM:
    ****, talk about kicking someone while they're down...



    IMO, this will be settled out of court for an undisclosed amount of $$$. Guess we'll just have to wait to see what happens.



    Nice find.




    I highly doubt it as Callaway surely wants a large slice of Titleist's already huge market share in the golf ball industry.



    Titleist will release something they call "better" to replace the Pro V1 line.



    Strart stocking up on the V1 and V1x people!



    They will also want to stop making thembecause they won't want to pay out all the royalty monies to B-Stone and Callaway forever.
    TM M1 Kurokage shaft
    TM RBZ 3 wood stock Ozik shaft
    TM R11 4 wood Fujikura Rombax 6X07
    TM RBZ with Oban Revenge shaft
    Ping G irons 4-UW
    Nike VR 56*
    Nike VR 60*
    Black Lab oil can 350g custom grind by Geo
    Ping 4 Under carry bag
  • rtk90 rtk90 Members Posts: 455
    i doubt it will matter it will prob be tied up in courts forever and nothing will ever be heard of it again... if it does go through however i guess i wont have an alternate to the B330-S... lol
  • bogeykbogeyk Members Posts: 990 ✭✭
    edited Jan 20, 2008 #8
    They could settle for stock and Callaway could let another company go to pot as they did with Hogan. Just kidding. This could really kill Titleist where the ball is their money maker. I would have to guess a settlement is unlikely. Callaway isn't hurting for money and it would be a cash cow to eliminate the number one competition. I would bet that Bridgestone, Nike, and Srixon are interested in the outcome as well.
  • QueenCityGolferQueenCityGolfer Pin Seeker Extraordinaire Members Posts: 69
    The real question is...Would Callaway be pushing this lawsuit if they were the undisputed leader in the industry? Doubt it.



    There isn't a company in the world that doesn't look at new products and try to improve on them. Callaway is acting like Titleist stole their recipe or something. How many inovations has Titleist made over the last 50+ years that Callaway benefits from today?



    Callaway Golf: A better game by design. If you can't beat em', sue em'.
  • SakmanSakman @ryansako Marshals Posts: 6,291 mod
    BEND OF THE RIVER GC wrote on Jan 20 2008, 08:57 PM:
    Sakman wrote on Jan 20 2008, 08:43 PM:
    ****, talk about kicking someone while they're down...



    IMO, this will be settled out of court for an undisclosed amount of $$$. Guess we'll just have to wait to see what happens.



    Nice find.




    I highly doubt it as Callaway surely wants a large slice of Titleist's already huge market share in the golf ball industry.



    Titleist will release something they call "better" to replace the Pro V1 line.



    Strart stocking up on the V1 and V1x people!



    They will also want to stop making thembecause they won't want to pay out all the royalty monies to B-Stone and Callaway forever.




    I agree, which OEM doesn't want a piece of the Titleist pie? The problem is that I cannot see the golf industry without the Pro V1. This is why I think it's going to be settled differently.



    FWIW, I'm not a Pro V player either...
  • kemaukemau Members Posts: 5,148
    QueenCityGolfer wrote on Jan 20 2008, 09:08 PM:
    The real question is...Would Callaway be pushing this lawsuit if they were the undisputed leader in the industry? Doubt it.



    There isn't a company in the world that doesn't look at new products and try to improve on them. Callaway is acting like Titleist stole their recipe or something. How many inovations has Titleist made over the last 50+ years that Callaway benefits from today?



    Callaway Golf: A better game by design. If you can't beat em', sue em'.




    the real answer is......yes Callaway would be pushing a lawsuit and that would be regardless of their position in the industry. this is the 2nd time Titleist has infringed upon the disputed patents in question. therefore Callaway is indeed acting like Titleist stole their recipe because they did. you're not innovating something if you're stealing from two companies to do it
    9* Synchron Revolver
    14* Dynacraft Avatar
    2-PW Titleist 690MB
    56* & 60* Nike SV
    Bobby Grace DCT Sunset
    Innovex V Motion Tour
  • woodlandsgolfer woodlandsgolfer Members Posts: 904 ✭✭
    QueenCityGolfer wrote on Jan 20 2008, 08:08 PM:
    The real question is...Would Callaway be pushing this lawsuit if they were the undisputed leader in the industry? Doubt it.



    There isn't a company in the world that doesn't look at new products and try to improve on them. Callaway is acting like Titleist stole their recipe or something. How many inovations has Titleist made over the last 50+ years that Callaway benefits from today?



    Callaway Golf: A better game by design. If you can't beat em', sue em'.




    Sure they would be. You have to protect your products. If you aren't actively protecting it, someone will be actively trying to duplicate and make it better without you knowing. That's how manufacturers work.



    And according to the jury, Callaway should be acting like Titleist stole their recipe. Because according to the jury, they did. It really doesn't matter how many things Titleist has done over the last 50+ years. Based on this ruling, they infringed on Callaway's patents and Callaway is seeking injunctive relief. When seeking injunctive relief, you've got have a really, really, really good case. Apparently, they do. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.



    Maybe Titleist should come up with the ProV2 or something, because by this time next year, they may be needing.
    TaylorMade M2 9.5 Diamana Ahina 70X
    TaylorMade M6 15* Tensei White 70X
    Ping i500 3-UW Project X LZ 6.0
    Ping Glide 2.0 Stealth 54 ES, 58 ES Project X LZ 6.0
    Odyssey White Hot Pro CSM 400g
  • MR MIZUN0MR MIZUN0 Members Posts: 564
    This looks like a good case if you ask me......in the future there may be no Pro V's (if titleist stopped producing Pro V's, how much do you think their stock would go down, their stock has been slowly receding over the month.)
  • strapper22strapper22 Members Posts: 8
    Callaway would not go to court for the fun of it.They definately feel they have an issue!

    Cally purchased Topflite and Hogan (owned by Topflite at the time) for their ball business - Patents and research department. Callaway balls are built by the better patents developed by Toplfite research.



    Amazing that the guy who developed the Titleist Pro V left the company a couple of years ago, and is now responsible for the development of the Taylormade Reds & Blacks.... Interesting, do you think he knew something!
  • woodlandsgolfer woodlandsgolfer Members Posts: 904 ✭✭
    MR MIZUN0 wrote on Jan 20 2008, 09:16 PM:
    This looks like a good case if you ask me......in the future there may be no Pro V's (if titleist stopped producing Pro V's, how much do you think their stock would go down, their stock has been slowly receding over the month.)




    How much do you think their stock would go down? It probably wouldn't put a huge dent in Fortune Brands, Acushnet's parent company. But as far as Titleist, unless they can come up with something quick and do some great PR, it could be the end of the road. Are they going to live off their clubs? Hardly, Titleist is a ball company that makes clubs.
    TaylorMade M2 9.5 Diamana Ahina 70X
    TaylorMade M6 15* Tensei White 70X
    Ping i500 3-UW Project X LZ 6.0
    Ping Glide 2.0 Stealth 54 ES, 58 ES Project X LZ 6.0
    Odyssey White Hot Pro CSM 400g
  • skinkmanskinkman Banned Posts: 953
    i hate patent thieves image/black eye.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />



    slime balls..
  • Ace In The HoleAce In The Hole What blocks growth is ignorance. Members Posts: 1,562
    edited Jan 20, 2008 #17
    Pro-V's will not be taken off the shelf ever, but I can tell you that Callaway will have there hands in the pocket of Acushnet for a large percentage of sales till the end of time, the Pro-v1 name is to big for Callaway to take off the market it would be in their best interest to settle out of court to get a percentage of the Acushnet sales from the Pro-v1 Callaway may hold the patent on the Tech but Titleist holds all rights on the name. Just my two cents, me thinks the consumer will never know/see the difference.
  • stpstp Members Posts: 981
    edited Jan 20, 2008 #18
    quote from queencitygolfer



    "The real question is...Would Callaway be pushing this lawsuit if they were the undisputed leader in the industry? Doubt it.



    There isn't a company in the world that doesn't look at new products and try to improve on them. Callaway is acting like Titleist stole their recipe or something. How many inovations has Titleist made over the last 50+ years that Callaway benefits from today?



    Callaway Golf: A better game by design. If you can't beat em', sue em'."







    Your argument is ridiculous. Titleist/achushnet has lost significant patent infringement lawsuits to Callaway and Bridgstone. They have stolen intellectual property from those two companies. If you steal you go to jail. In the corporate world you lose money or are prohibited form doing something. In this case not continuing to produce a ball with stolen technology.
  • bambooluvbambooluv Members Posts: 1,273
    Ace In The Hole wrote on Jan 20 2008, 09:40 PM:
    Pro-V's will not be taken off the shelf ever, but I can tell you that Callaway will have there hands in the pocket of Acushnet for a large percentage of sales till the end of time, the Pro-v1 name is to big for Callaway to take off the market it would be in their best interest to settle out of court to get a percentage of the Acushnet sales from the Pro-v1 Callaway may hold the patent on the Tech but Titleist holds all rights on the name. Just my two cents, me thinks the consumer will never know/see the difference.






    Good point, but coming off the heels of the bridgestone loss ( which no one really knows how much bridgestone is getting) this will be the deciding hit on them.
  • kemaukemau Members Posts: 5,148
    Ace In The Hole wrote on Jan 20 2008, 10:40 PM:
    the Pro-v1 name is to big for Callaway to take off the market it would be in their best interest to settle out of court




    the ProV1 name is too big for Callaway to take off the market?!?! it would be in their best interest to settle out of court?!?! i hope you seriously don't believe that.....but somehow i think you do.
    9* Synchron Revolver
    14* Dynacraft Avatar
    2-PW Titleist 690MB
    56* & 60* Nike SV
    Bobby Grace DCT Sunset
    Innovex V Motion Tour
  • ChrisM84ChrisM84 Members Posts: 414
    Titleist will just bring out a new ball.



    And probably still out sell Callaway.
  • wardogatcwardogatc Members Posts: 219
    They should refer to the case of Callahan Auto Parts vs. Zalinsky Auto Parts. In a landmark ploy, Callahan avoided a buyout by selling their product to Zalinsky, thus making the necessary capital to avoid a bank forclosure. Zalinsky had planned to buy out Callahan, close the production factory, and sell the Callahan product as a premium name in Zalinsky stores. Maybe Acushnet should try this with Callaway.



    Just an idea...shut up Richard!
  • kemaukemau Members Posts: 5,148
    ChrisM84 wrote on Jan 20 2008, 10:57 PM:
    Titleist will just bring out a new ball.




    and the point being this is what they should've done in the first place back then......but since they had nothing they took from others and called it their own
    9* Synchron Revolver
    14* Dynacraft Avatar
    2-PW Titleist 690MB
    56* & 60* Nike SV
    Bobby Grace DCT Sunset
    Innovex V Motion Tour
  • scubusscubus Members Posts: 194 ✭✭
    ChrisM84 wrote on Jan 20 2008, 10:57 PM:
    Titleist will just bring out a new ball.



    And probably still out sell Callaway.


    If they had the ability to bring out a new ball with similar or improved performance, don't you think they would have done that rather than steal patents and risk this very scenario?
  • BD57BD57 Members Posts: 256 ✭✭
    Some of you guys - yes, you, QC - ought to read a bit before posting.



    The premise of the Callaway's suit is 1) the Pro V1 steals patent technology owned by Callaway; 2) Titleist stole the technology because it feared its clock was about to be cleaned by the Rule 35 golf ball; 3) but for Titleist's theft of Callaway's technology, Titleist's clock would've been cleaned.



    If the information available is correct, prior to trial, Titleist admitted it was using the patented technology; it didn't answer by saying "We didn't do it," its response was "the patents never should've been issued in the first place." The jury resolved that question against Titleist on 8 of the 9 patent claims.



    So .... Titleist stole the technology other people spent their own money to develop & that's "ok?"



    The central premise of patent law is that inventors must benefit from their inventions or else they won't pay the price they pay in terms of time, money, etc. to invent. Patent law does this by giving the inventor the right to control (and profit from) his/her invention for a set period of time, after which the public at large can use the technology freely.



    Based on the current status of the case, the Pro V1's are based on stolen technology. If it stands up, Titleist ought to have its nose bloodied.
  • StugyGolfStugyGolf PING Player Members Posts: 669
    I want to get this thing straight as some of the lingo is confusing me...



    Callaway wants to force Titleist to stop production of the ProV1/ProV1x for reasons of copywrite infringement by the end of 08?



    ****... I dont wana play Callaways, they suck...



    I'm guna have to tell my coach to start stocking up...
  • scubusscubus Members Posts: 194 ✭✭
    Cdn_golfer wrote on Jan 20 2008, 11:40 PM:
    I want to get this thing straight as some of the lingo is confusing me...



    Callaway wants to force Titleist to stop production of the ProV1/ProV1x for reasons of copywrite infringement by the end of 08?



    ****... I dont wana play Callaways, they suck...



    I'm guna have to tell my coach to start stocking up...


    I think it is actually patent infringement, but essentially, yes.
  • QueenCityGolferQueenCityGolfer Pin Seeker Extraordinaire Members Posts: 69
    edited Jan 21, 2008 #28
    Callaway specifically says in that document that they seek to "level the playing field." They further state that the Pro V1 golf ball has boosted the sales of other Titleist equipment, and seem to suggest that compensation/penalties of some kind is just for that as well, because it has caused Callaway "irreparable harm." Callaway believes that Titleist is not entitled of any of their success in any area (clubs, apparel, Footjoy shoes/gloves) because of one semi-similar golf ball, despite the fact that Titleist was the leader in the industry long before the Pro V1, or even Callaway Golf itself came along. So they are basically saying, anything Titleist has earned since the Pro V was released, is partially Callaway's. Sorry, but that argument is absurd.



    It's especially absurd because is comes from Callaway, the same company which has produced countless non-conforming metal woods over the last decade, which have definitely boosted their position in the marketplace. The public was/is largely unaware of that. People just gravitated to these clubs because balls flew off these clubs like rockets. People didn't know, or care why. Should Titleist be able to seek damages for that? Callaway woods out-sell Titleist woods like 3-1 don't they? Why? Did glowing reviews, recommendations, praise and awards for the non-conforming Callaway products from every major golf media outlet in the world, result in mass profit, and subsequent industry domination for Callaway? I would say it played a **** of a big part, yeah. And has the perception/assumption of their products performance charactaristics changed in the minds of consumers? Absolutely not. So what's the difference here? Callaway broke rules/laws/a code of ethics, to attain an unfair advantage in the marketplace, which is exactly the same thing they accuse Titleist of doing. Sorry, but I have no sympathy for Callaway. They are equally as guilty as Titleist if we are talking about fairness and "infringement."



    Now if they just sought to have the Pro V in it's current form, pulled from production, I might, and it's a strong "might", see some legitimacy in their argument, but what they are seemingly seeking is absurd.
  • gibbygibby Members Posts: 325
    Let's be realistic.........if we have this conversation in one or two years, nothing will have changed! so this is all wasted conversation!!!!!!
  • Cameron Circle TCameron Circle T The Doc Junior Mod Squad Posts: 2,210 ✭✭
    probly file for some sort of licensing agreement, get titleist to give them a share of the profits of every sale.





    if the prov1 doesnt exist it doesnt guarantee cally more money. if they have a portion of all sales of pro v's its guaranteed money.





    they'll have some exorbitant licensing agreement or something, and make a killing...
  • BFCBFC Lefty Boomers Posts: 589
    Quenn your funny. You get bent out of shape because a company has produced non-conforming clubs but yet back up a company that has ADMITED to stealing patents. They are no LAWS against no conforming clubs, just rules to this stupid game we play. As of last year so did Cobra (who owns Cobra again?) and Nike. Did they too gain an unfair advantage in the market place?



    Stealing intelectual property however is against real (ie civil/criminal) laws.
«13456710
This discussion has been closed.