Callaway Seeks Permanent Injunction Against Titleist

[golferdb-pro]

Unfortunately not, but Mis-June is a HONEY

[mat562]

Wasn't Mis-July played by Erika Eleniak?

[ej002]

When the rule 35 ball came out it was by far superior to most balls, it did not spin nearly as much as the professional. It was definately a great ball. With that said IMO, the 2005 Pro V1 is the best ball ever made. Just my opinion. I try and buy them on ebay if i could find them. For some reason I think that ball out performs 330, HX, etc. But the close second would be Nike Platinum. JMO.


[quote name='withdrew' post='880774' date='Jan 24 2008, 06:14 PM']I could care less about Titleist vs. Callaway. Competition is GOOD people! That's the backbone of capitalism or a free market economy, THEY duke it out and we get cheaper and better golf balls.

If you want to be brand loyal, that's cool. I like to stick to a few special brands too. BUT- if you tell me that Callys are better than Tittys and they are cheaper, for something that I'll probably [i]fade[/i] (slice is such an ugly word) into the woods anyway, I'll take the Cally.

Just my humble opinion.[/quote]

Exactly, this is America. We are not all driving FORD's are we? Should we be? Every invention (for the most part) is an improvement on the previous one. What if these were medical devices that may save lives? Progress is GOOD. Even if Titleist flat out stole the technology with Ninjas, who cares? They made a superior product in the eyes of many (not all). If that is the case, let them pay thier fair share. But I highly doubt that there will be a permant injunction, the ball is different. And injuntion is a creature of EQUITY - to prevail in a court of equity, you need to come with clean hands. It is clear that Callaway infringed on patents in the creation of thier own balls, thus they have dirty hands. At anyrate, there may be some sort of financial settlement, but I highly doubt the V1 line will die away. But if it did, that would be a waste of 8+ years of marketing. It would be a jugular blow.

But if there is an injunction, I believe that injunction would remain while the case is on appeal. Remember the judgment is final until overturned. Again, I doubt an injunctin would occur anyways.

And as far as drivers go, I dont know what the issue is but drivers are not very different across the industry. It is not like Titleist is selling square drivers.

I could care less either way, because my favorite ball is not on the market anyways. But if you skeletons in the closet like Callaway does, it does not make sense to me to start a fight, because it will come back. Karma's a B*TCH.

What would be funny is if Titleist made a lobby on the USGA and the Royal and Ancient Golf Club to REDUCE the distance of the Golf Ball across the board. IMO that would be the Ultimate Revenge. But seriously, even if TITLEIST does get nailed, they will survive because technology has to change to accommodate the new grove rules in 2010 (i believe that is the date).

Either way Titleist will survive with the hard core, especially among Vokey and Scotty users.

JMO

[psygolf]

[quote name='jwfgolfpro' post='880054' date='Jan 24 2008, 10:53 AM']From a very reputable "Tour Source"

The Titleist Pro V and Pro V X have amassed $100 million in sales since the introduction of the ball. Callaway is going after royalties from every dime. When this is all said and done Titleist will be finacially crippled. Look for Fortune Brands to dump them. The ball is what carries Titleist.
Cobra outsells Titleist in the club department.

This has been a known fact on Tour for quite some time.

John[/quote]
$100 mil seems low to me...they were the first billion dollar a year golf company a few years ago -a majority to wit had to be the ball.

[ianh]

regardless of how excited everyone is about this, there is no way callaway wants the prov to go away. They and their products would be boycotted by everyone who ever played a titleist and certainly by 90 %of the tour. Callaway would actually shrink in the mkt if they caused titleist's demise.

They would actually become the "hated", nothe winners here.

[psygolf]

[quote name='ianh' post='882954' date='Jan 25 2008, 08:16 PM']regardless of how excited everyone is about this, there is no way callaway wants the prov to go away. They and their products would be boycotted by everyone who ever played a titleist and certainly by 90 %of the tour. Callaway would actually shrink in the mkt if they caused titleist's demise.

They would actually become the "hated", nothe winners here.[/quote]
Most wouldn't care & loyal Titleist consumers already hate Callaway.

[psygolf]

How much do you hate the Romans? (a lot) ...o.k. you're in!

[ianh]

not regarding titleis tmy friend, they would be hated and their mkt share would shrink. they already build a generally inferior product with the exception of their wedges.

[QueenCityGolfer]

[quote name='mat562' post='882811' date='Jan 25 2008, 06:12 PM']Similar technology or not, Titleist seem to have sprinkled magic dust over the ball that they created and made a good job of making it a staple diet in golf bags worldwide from a marketing standpoint.

Call me cynical, but I'm seeing a smidgeon of jealousy from the Callaway camp because they ended up second-best in the golf ball stakes. A case of 'if you can't beat 'em.. sue.' And the only way they got into a position to be able to do that was via some shady practices themselves when it came to buying up the Top Flite patents to legitimise their own plagiarism.[/quote]

That's a good summary of my opinion on the topic.

And those players mentioned earlier didn't all leave Titleist, and those who did, didn't do it because they were unhappy with the equipment. It's always a business decision. Titleist dropped Tiger, not the other way around. They couldn't justify the millions they were giving him, when they only had partial rights to his likeness. The clothing endorsement Nike made with Tiger, was clearly Step 1 in their plan to acquire exclusive rights to his name and image.

[Night train]

[quote name='psygolf' post='882948' date='Jan 25 2008, 06:14 PM'][quote name='jwfgolfpro' post='880054' date='Jan 24 2008, 10:53 AM']From a very reputable "Tour Source"

The Titleist Pro V and Pro V X have amassed $100 million in sales since the introduction of the ball. Callaway is going after royalties from every dime. When this is all said and done Titleist will be finacially crippled. Look for Fortune Brands to dump them. The ball is what carries Titleist.
Cobra outsells Titleist in the club department.

This has been a known fact on Tour for quite some time.

John[/quote]
$100 mil seems low to me...they were the first billion dollar a year golf company a few years ago -a majority to wit had to be the ball.
[/quote]


I think the billion was Acushnet and not Titleist.........it included Titleist, Cobra, Foot-Joy, and Pinnacle.

.......but their is little doubt that a huge amount of Titleist's profits come from the Pro V1

[golferdb-pro]

Well said,

When Sergio left Titty for TM it was a straight swap for Ernie, so it was no mas- migration.
Ernie has now moved again, but he`s traditionally been a mover, he`s been with Lynx, TM, Titty now Cal.
Come contract talks, Money shouldn`t be important to these Multi-Millionaires but it is, i`d put a lot down to Ego, if Ernie thinks Phil`s getting $5m per yr more, then he aint gonna like it.
Just like anyone at work, if the guy at the next desk is doing the same job and getting paid more, you`re going to feel pissed

[hogans71]

[quote name='golferdb-pro' post='883002' date='Jan 25 2008, 06:43 PM']Well said,

When Sergio left Titty for TM it was a straight swap for Ernie, so it was no mas- migration.
Ernie has now moved again, but he`s traditionally been a mover, he`s been with Lynx, TM, Titty now Cal.
Come contract talks, Money shouldn`t be important to these Multi-Millionaires but it is, i`d put a lot down to Ego, if Ernie thinks Phil`s getting $5m per yr more, then he aint gonna like it.
Just like anyone at work, if the guy at the next desk is doing the same job and getting paid more, you`re going to feel pissed[/quote]


Excellent point- They sing the praises of the equipment they play, move on to bigger and better bank accounts, then proceed to sing the praises of their newest equipment provider...

[sapguy]

[quote name='golferdb-pro' post='882905' date='Jan 25 2008, 06:52 PM']Cally shouldn`t make a dime out of it.[/quote]

Cally will make a few dimes off of Titty once the dust settles, make that quite a few dimes

[scubus]

[quote name='golferdb-pro' post='882905' date='Jan 25 2008, 06:52 PM']You did say that because you said it WOULD be right because Callaway PAID for the patents !

They Paid for the patents after they had stolen them from Spalding and have avoided litigation by buying them out, that doesn`t make it right, both companies were equally in the wrong when the mis-justice happened !

Cally shouldn`t make a dime out of it.

Like i said this is why MJ is a free man[/quote]
The patent holders were fairly compensated for the use of their patent. Because the patents were unfairly used, it cost Callaway more than if they had sought licensing to begin with. Spalding et. al. felt that they had reasonable compensation or they would not have settled.

Had the patents been infringed and Callaway continued to profit and Spalding et. al. received no compensation, then that would be wrong.

Are you suggesting that litigation be [i]forced[/i]? To what end?

Bridgestone is receiving compensation in the form of licensing fees from the sale of ProV's. If Titleist was not allowed to make a profit, they would not sell ProV's and Bridgestone then receives nothing for their patent. That works our swell for the patent holder.

Misusing the patents to begin with was improper, more so if it was not accidental. However, once a mutually agreed upon compensation (or court ordered) is reached, then the issue is dead. After that, if there is a licensing agreement, the licensee should make a profit, and normalyl has to for the patent holder to see rewards.

As for MJ, yes, he paid hush money so he wouldn't go to jail. Personally, if I were the victim, I'd rather have the hush money. MJ in jail really doesn't do much for me.

Breaking the law is wrong. I never said otherwise.

[18th Legion]

Is it just me, or did anyone else find the news of the Callaway -v- TaylorMade settlement interesting:

[size=1][b]Callaway Golf Settles Suit with TaylorMade[/b]

Callaway Golf Company and TaylorMade Golf Company jointly announced today that they have reached a settlement and patent license agreement. [i]Under the terms of the agreement, each company will have specified rights to make products under patents owned by the other. Technologies at issue include high moment of inertia drivers, undercut irons* and golf balls.[/i] The agreement resolves all pending litigation between the companies. Details of the settlement are confidential.Mark King, President and Chief Executive Officer of TaylorMade Golf said: “We’re glad to resolve this matter and move forward. Agreeing to this settlement allows the focus to remain on creating high performance golf products for the consumer.”

“We are very pleased that the parties were able to reach agreement while respecting the core technologies that set them apart from each other and from other golf companies,” said George Fellows, President and Chief Executive Officer of Callaway Golf.[/size]

*Notice in another thread the new Tour Burner Iron with the Notch Weighting.

Anyway, for those who might be conspiracy theorists. One might think that Callaway and TaylorMade have agreed to work together in a sense. Harkens back to the days when the U.S. was owned by GM and Ford. I just think it is not impossible that the Callaway and TMAG execs were sitting around saying "Look, we'll have a gentlemen's agreement to market against our other competition, together let's go full force in innovation and marketing, together let's out spend them all, push a few OEMs out, gobble up market share, and ten years from now when we own 75% of the business together, then we'll go head to head."

Considering the way Callaway is going after Acushnet, but settled with TaylorMade, is it possible that down in Carlsbad, two's company but three's a crowd?

[scubus]

[quote name='18th Legion' post='883338' date='Jan 25 2008, 11:43 PM']Is it just me, or did anyone else find the news of the Callaway -v- TaylorMade settlement interesting:

[size=1][b]Callaway Golf Settles Suit with TaylorMade[/b]

Callaway Golf Company and TaylorMade Golf Company jointly announced today that they have reached a settlement and patent license agreement. [i]Under the terms of the agreement, each company will have specified rights to make products under patents owned by the other. Technologies at issue include high moment of inertia drivers, undercut irons* and golf balls.[/i] The agreement resolves all pending litigation between the companies. Details of the settlement are confidential.Mark King, President and Chief Executive Officer of TaylorMade Golf said: “We’re glad to resolve this matter and move forward. Agreeing to this settlement allows the focus to remain on creating high performance golf products for the consumer.”

“We are very pleased that the parties were able to reach agreement while respecting the core technologies that set them apart from each other and from other golf companies,” said George Fellows, President and Chief Executive Officer of Callaway Golf.[/size]

*Notice in another thread the new Tour Burner Iron with the Notch Weighting.

Anyway, for those who might be conspiracy theorists. One might think that Callaway and TaylorMade have agreed to work together in a sense. Harkens back to the days when the U.S. was owned by GM and Ford. I just think it is not impossible that the Callaway and TMAG execs were sitting around saying "Look, we'll have a gentlemen's agreement to market against our other competition, together let's go full force in innovation and marketing, together let's out spend them all, push a few OEMs out, gobble up market share, and ten years from now when we own 75% of the business together, then we'll go head to head."

Considering the way Callaway is going after Acushnet, but settled with TaylorMade, is it possible that down in Carlsbad, two's company but three's a crowd?[/quote]
You're assuming that Acushnet is willing to settle, that Acushnet has something to offer Callaway (notice in the TM case the two parties are [i]sharing[/i] technology) and/or that Callaway actually intends to see this through and that it is not simply a ploy to force Acushnet to the table.

[18th Legion]

[size=1][quote name='scubus' post='883367' date='Jan 25 2008, 11:59 PM'][quote name='18th Legion' post='883338' date='Jan 25 2008, 11:43 PM']Is it just me, or did anyone else find the news of the Callaway -v- TaylorMade settlement interesting.....

......Considering the way Callaway is going after Acushnet, but settled with TaylorMade, is it possible that down in Carlsbad, two's company but three's a crowd?[/quote]

You're assuming that Acushnet is willing to settle, that Acushnet has something to offer Callaway (notice in the TM case the two parties are [i]sharing[/i] technology) and/or that Callaway actually intends to see this through and that it is not simply a ploy to force Acushnet to the table.
[/quote][/size]

No...nope... don't know how you interpreted that. I am not assuming anything here. Although, as the suit is against Acushnet, Callaway would first have to drop the lawsuit to finalize a settlement. Who knows what Callaway may want, royalties, their name in small print on the side of PRO V1 sleeves, or to drive them out of the market. I was offering up how it seemed odd that such long term rivals, (their offices are close to each other in Carlsbad), were able to settle, even on the details, without much ado.

[scubus]

[quote name='18th Legion' post='883380' date='Jan 26 2008, 12:11 AM'][size=1][quote name='scubus' post='883367' date='Jan 25 2008, 11:59 PM'][quote name='18th Legion' post='883338' date='Jan 25 2008, 11:43 PM']Is it just me, or did anyone else find the news of the Callaway -v- TaylorMade settlement interesting.....

......Considering the way Callaway is going after Acushnet, but settled with TaylorMade, is it possible that down in Carlsbad, two's company but three's a crowd?[/quote]

You're assuming that Acushnet is willing to settle, that Acushnet has something to offer Callaway (notice in the TM case the two parties are [i]sharing[/i] technology) and/or that Callaway actually intends to see this through and that it is not simply a ploy to force Acushnet to the table.
[/quote][/size]

No...nope... don't know how you interpreted that. I am not assuming anything here. Although, as the suit is against Acushnet, Callaway would first have to drop the lawsuit to finalize a settlement. Who knows what Callaway may want, royalties, their name in small print on the side of PRO V1 sleeves, or to drive them out of the market. I was offering up how it seemed odd that such long term rivals, (their offices are close to each other in Carlsbad), were able to settle, even on the details, without much ado.
[/quote]

I like a conspiracy theory as much as the next guy... it is possible. I should have said for that to be true one has to assume...

I suspect that Acushnet feels very confidant that the patents are improper and will be overturned. I don't think they want to negotiate much right now. Callaway may also feel a need to try and force their hand so they are pulling out all the stops.

Both parties have to be agreeable to settling... somebody feels pretty good about their position in this case.

Do you really drop the case to settle? I thought dropping the case was part of the settlement and the you didn't actually drop the suit until the settlement was signed. Just a minor point, but I'm curious.

[petergf]

[quote name='scubus' post='882735' date='Jan 26 2008, 08:26 AM'][quote name='petergf' post='882637' date='Jan 25 2008, 04:38 PM'][quote name='petergf' post='878153' date='Jan 23 2008, 08:02 PM']Does anybody know if the titleist professional 90/100 balls fall under the patent rip- offs.
cheers peter[/quote]

Is this such a difficult question to answer , considering the magnitude of legal talant responding to this thread
[/quote]
Hmm... just a little looking on my own shows that the Professional was released ahead of the patent filings.

I'd hazard a guess that the Professional series is not infringing.
[/quote]

thank you.
Should such be the case i'd be happy to use them in lieu, if they where re-released
cheers peter

[Volgolfer]

This is sad news indeed.

Not so much because Callaway could kill off the ProV's (it looks like Titleist, Callaway, Nike, and others are taking a back seat to TaylorMade anyway according to recently publshed test results), but because they threaten the entire line including Vokey, Camron, etc. that has brought so much to golf.

I've never been a Callaway fan for a number of reasons, including their marketing strategy and legal tactics. While I do respect their right to question patent infringement, their proposal for "remedy" is comical. Hopefully cooler heads will prevail in the courtroom and the judge will slap Callaway around a bit for this sillyness....

In the meantime, maybe we start a movement on principle to boycott Callaway?

[phelps22]

So what your saying is that we should support thieve's and boycott a company trying to protect their product. I sure that if you were in Callaway's shoe's would would do the same thing. Regardless of the outcome Titleist will survive with a new line of tour caliber ball, so i see no need to feel sorry for them.

[sharkhark]

[quote name='Volgolfer' post='883638' date='Jan 26 2008, 10:05 AM']This is sad news indeed.

Not so much because Callaway could kill off the ProV's (it looks like Titleist, Callaway, Nike, and others are taking a back seat to TaylorMade anyway according to recently publshed test results), but because they threaten the entire line including Vokey, Camron, etc. that has brought so much to golf.

I've never been a Callaway fan for a number of reasons, including their marketing strategy and legal tactics. While I do respect their right to question patent infringement, their proposal for "remedy" is comical. Hopefully cooler heads will prevail in the courtroom and the judge will slap Callaway around a bit for this sillyness....

In the meantime, maybe we start a movement on principle to boycott Callaway?[/quote]


Absolutely, lets boycott them. Alot of others agree with us saying things like "so what if titleist stole technology, the ball is the best". I agree.
Stealing is ok. Boo-yeah on cally. Just go away. They are just babies. Companies should be allowed to take whatever they want from any other company.
If ford steals technology from chrysler and the end result is the best car, then rock on. If chrysler comes back and proves that ford stole from them, then I will boycott chrysler. Babies.

[WRXJIM]

^^ What???

Your crazy? Id like to see what you wife wouldve said if you bought her a nice diamond ring and she shows all her freinds and then two weeks later one of her freinds gets an exact copy...

She would be pissed... but you on the other hand...

You obviously have NO clue how much money companies/people spend coming up with ideas and testing them... and then in your opinion its ok for someone to just walk along and get the benefit of others hard work...

You probably passed college by copying the nerds test papers... But thats ok in your mind

[sharkhark]

[quote name='WRXJIM' post='883732' date='Jan 26 2008, 11:32 AM']^^ What???

Your crazy? Id like to see what you wife wouldve said if you bought her a nice diamond ring and she shows all her freinds and then two weeks later one of her freinds gets an exact copy...

She would be pissed... but you on the other hand...

You obviously have NO clue how much money companies/people spend coming up with ideas and testing them... and then in your opinion its ok for someone to just walk along and get the benefit of others hard work...

You probably passed college by copying the nerds test papers... But thats ok in your mind [/quote]


ummm?....guess that one flew over your head............look up the word 'sarcasm' and then re-read my post......................

[Sean2]

Golf is a business. Businesses are in business to make money...as much as they can. Callaway is not "whining" they are thinking of the potential market share they could reap and/or settlement dollars they could receive. Either way it will be a large figure. Any company with patents will do what it can to protect those patents, because those patents transfer into dollars. Boycott Callaway? Sheesh.

Titleist got caught. Have others done it? Sure. And some got away with it. It is what it is, but to call it whining is just, well, short-sited.

This has nothing to do with honor, integrity of the game, etc. This is about MONEY. That's it.

[teedoff]

[quote name='golferdb-pro' post='882792' date='Jan 25 2008, 06:01 PM']I heard that both companies had copied patents from Spalding, thats why Callaway bought Top Flite, which is the problem in the case, as it wouldn`t be right [b]surely[/b] for Cally to benefit, when they stole similar patents themselves with rule 35, but then bought the company to avoid litigation.[/quote]

The only litigation that resulted from the introduction of the Callaway Rule 35 was from Bridgestone, not Spalding. The purchase of Spalding had nothing to do with avoiding litigation from them. Callaway paid Bridgesone an unspecified amount as licensed three piece technology as a reult of their out of court settlement.

[ej002]

[quote name='scubus' post='883387' date='Jan 26 2008, 01:18 AM'][b]Do you really drop the case to settle? I thought dropping the case was part of the settlement and the you didn't actually drop the suit until the settlement was signed. Just a minor point, but I'm curious.[/b][/quote]

Exactly, part of the settlement would be a conditional withdraw of the claims arising out of this dispute and an agreement for Callaway to not enforce their previous victory in court.


[quote name='WRXJIM' post='883732' date='Jan 26 2008, 12:32 PM']^^ What???

Your crazy? Id like to see what you wife wouldve said if you bought her a nice diamond ring and she shows all her freinds and then two weeks later one of her freinds gets an exact copy...

She would be pissed... but you on the other hand...

[b]You obviously have NO clue how much money companies/people spend coming up with ideas and testing them... and then in your opinion its ok for someone to just walk along and get the benefit of others hard work...[/b]

You probably passed college by copying the nerds test papers... But thats ok in your mind [/quote]

Right, but Callaway did not do all that research either, they also ripped off another company. "If your gonna cheat, cheat fair."

[quote name='Avatar' post='883794' date='Jan 26 2008, 01:07 PM']Golf is a business. Businesses are in business to make money...as much as they can. Callaway is not "whining" they are thinking of the potential market share they could reap and/or settlement dollars they could receive. Either way it will be a large figure. Any company with patents will do what it can to protect those patents, because those patents transfer into dollars. Boycott Callaway? Sheesh.

Titleist got caught. Have others done it? Sure. And some got away with it. It is what it is, but to call it whining is just, well, short-sited.

This has nothing to do with honor, integrity of the game, etc. [b]This is about MONEY[/b]. That's it.[/quote]

It is about money, and Titleist should pay their share IF the Patents are upheld. But to inforce an injuction, that is not about money. Equity involves "clean hands" (integrity). That is why I dont think Callaway will be able to win an injunction.

[scubus]

[quote name='teedoff' post='884127' date='Jan 26 2008, 05:17 PM'][quote name='golferdb-pro' post='882792' date='Jan 25 2008, 06:01 PM']I heard that both companies had copied patents from Spalding, thats why Callaway bought Top Flite, which is the problem in the case, as it wouldn`t be right [b]surely[/b] for Cally to benefit, when they stole similar patents themselves with rule 35, but then bought the company to avoid litigation.[/quote]

The only litigation that resulted from the introduction of the Callaway Rule 35 was from Bridgestone, not Spalding. The purchase of Spalding had nothing to do with avoiding litigation from them. Callaway paid Bridgesone an unspecified amount as licensed three piece technology as a reult of their out of court settlement.
[/quote]
Wow, that little tidbit could have saved me volumes of typing...

[teedoff]

[quote name='scubus' post='884325' date='Jan 26 2008, 07:42 PM'][quote name='teedoff' post='884127' date='Jan 26 2008, 05:17 PM'][quote name='golferdb-pro' post='882792' date='Jan 25 2008, 06:01 PM']I heard that both companies had copied patents from Spalding, thats why Callaway bought Top Flite, which is the problem in the case, as it wouldn`t be right [b]surely[/b] for Cally to benefit, when they stole similar patents themselves with rule 35, but then bought the company to avoid litigation.[/quote]

The only litigation that resulted from the introduction of the Callaway Rule 35 was from Bridgestone, not Spalding. The purchase of Spalding had nothing to do with avoiding litigation from them. Callaway paid Bridgesone an unspecified amount as licensed three piece technology as a reult of their out of court settlement.
[/quote]
Wow, that little tidbit could have saved me volumes of typing...


[/quote]

With my grammer here it appears that I am trying to save volumes of tying as well.

[geogolf]

[quote name='QueenCityGolfer' post='874193' date='Jan 20 2008, 09:08 PM']The real question is...Would Callaway be pushing this lawsuit if [i]they[/i] 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: [s]A better game by design[/s]. If you can't beat em', sue em'.[/quote]


Well the courts disagree with you. And Callaway owns the patents to prove it. Remember Titleist is a ball company first - a club maker second. Callaway is the opposite......



Innovations? Yes, the no hosel design, First mass marketed Ti drivers. variable face thickness & hundreds others......all Callaway.

To be honest, I can't think of any "innovation" from Acushnet that Callaway benefits from.