Callaway Seeks Permanent Injunction Against Titleist

[geogolf]

[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]


Soooooo that principal would be similar to supporting a proven thief, and boycotting the proven victim.

[StaffBag]

[quote name='Volgolfer' post='883638' date='Jan 26 2008, 09:05 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.

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


I agree completely.

However, boycotting Callaway won't solve anything. They will just find something else to file suit about!!

I have not tried the new Taylor ball yet, either... and reserve any judgement until I do.

In due time, I'm sure that if that ball takes off, Callaway will try to find a way to file a lawsuit with them, too!


Feed the Callaway monster!! Kowtow to them or they will sue you!!! Callaway has the most aggressive legal department of all the golf company's out there. They tried to file suit against Titleist for Titleist's use of bore through technology! I can't remember what came of that, but it is laughable, since the bore through technology has been in golf since the the early 20th century! In reality, there are a great deal of "technology items" out there that have already been tried many years before, there just wasn't enough knowledge at the time to make some of them stick with the materials they have had to work with. Those company's who had the technology at the time just were not bright enough to put a patent on them. Then someone else comes along some time later and takes that technology, patent's it, and then threatens to sue anyone who tries to get near it!



If Callaway wins and the Titleist ball is taken off the market, we all know that the number 2 ball out there would be the new #1 ball on TOUR. If this happens and Callaway becomes the new #1 ball in golf, what will be their advertising slogan?

How about, "Callaway Golf..... We eliminated the competion by litigating our way to the top!"

[geogolf]

[quote name='StaffBag' post='884794' date='Jan 27 2008, 01:34 AM'][quote name='Volgolfer' post='883638' date='Jan 26 2008, 09:05 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.

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


I agree completely.

However, boycotting Callaway won't solve anything. They will just find something else to file suit about!!

I have not tried the new Taylor ball yet, either... and reserve any judgement until I do.

In due time, I'm sure that if that ball takes off, Callaway will try to find a way to file a lawsuit with them, too!


Feed the Callaway monster!! Kowtow to them or they will sue you!!! Callaway has the most aggressive legal department of all the golf company's out there. They tried to file suit against Titleist for Titleist's use of bore through technology! I can't remember what came of that, but it is laughable, since the bore through technology has been in golf since the the early 20th century! In reality, there are a great deal of "technology items" out there that have already been tried many years before, there just wasn't enough knowledge at the time to make some of them stick with the materials they have had to work with. Those company's who had the technology at the time just were not bright enough to put a patent on them. Then someone else comes along some time later and takes that technology, patent's it, and then threatens to sue anyone who tries to get near it!



If Callaway wins and the Titleist ball is taken off the market, we all know that the number 2 ball out there would be the new #1 ball on TOUR. If this happens and Callaway becomes the new #1 ball in golf, what will be their advertising slogan?

How about, "Callaway Golf..... We eliminated the competion by litigating our way to the top!"


[/quote]


And you think Acushnet wouldn't do the same? Puhleeeese. Their parent company is far larger than Callaway...if you want to talk about a "monster".

Objectivity seems to have been lost. If it had been the other way around, we would be reading that as well...so be it. That's the law.

I guess Bridgestone isn't a "Monster"? Similar lawsuit that was settled already.

[url="http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=118315&pid=785748&st=0&#entry785748"]http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/index.php?sh...mp;#entry785748[/url]

Don't steal their patents and they won't sue. They have been that way since the beginning. How dare they actually are pro-active in protecting ideas they own!

It's that simple...and that was proven in court. As someone said in that thread "it's pretty clear acushnet was well aware of the boundaries they were crossing yet did it anyway"

[scubus]

The 747 analogy is interesting, but flawed.

Callaway is not grounding the current fleet of ProV's, just future ones.

I really do not understand the boycott idea only because [i]every[/i] company has sued to protect patents. But if it makes you feel better, more power to you.

You say it is only 5% of what makes the ball. I say "so?" It is obviously a crucial 5% or it wouldn't be in there. And if it is crucial, it obviously has value so the patent holder should be compensated.

I play neither Callaway nor Titleist. I don't like their balls.

I'm going to bow out of this discussion - like the MDF threads it is becoming redundant. It has been a real learning experience and a big thanks to everyone... 'bye 'bye.

[Swoosh216]

[quote name='midasmulligan2000' date='Jan 27 2008, 10:10 AM' post='885008']
I, personally, use ProV1s. And have since they came out. I love them. I'm used to them.

A patent is only ideas. It takes a [i]lot[/i] more than merey a patent to produce, manufacture, and market a product. And the patents that Callaway owns were a mere fraction of the total patents (well over 100, all but a few completely owned by Titleist) required to make the ProV1. Callaway is trying to kill an entire ball by going to court, and proving that 5% of the ball was created using patents owned by them.

Saying "Well, Acushnet is a criminal, and Callaway is merely a noble company trying to protect its intellectual property" is a very simplistic view of modern products. If Lockheed got a judge to rule that 5% of what went into the Boeing 747 concerned patents it held - would that justify an injunction grounding the entire global fleet of 747's? (I'm actually not worried - I doubt the injunction has a chance in court).

Callaway couldn't compete on the premium ball market. They simply have not produced anything that the market thinks is equal to the ProV1. No one has. (Yes ... there are many people that use - and love - other high-end, three piece balls, but the Prov1 simply [i]is[/i] the standard that even some of the competing companies compare themselves to in advertising).

So (as Callaway is rather a bit known for) - it is using the legal system to try to kill a competitor, and remove from the market a ball that tens of thousands of golfers love. One of the most uniquely succesfull balls in the history of golf.

Go for it Callaway. And if you agree with them? Fine. But there [i]are[/i] market risks to this business strategy. If they are successful, there [i]will[/i] be blowback - possibly greater than Callaway envisions. There are a [i]lot[/i] of [i]very[/i] loyal ProV1 users out there. And even further - their profile is very distinct (and desirable). It generally isn't the guy that plays twice a year on vacation, who has to rummage through the garage to find his clubs. Its the mid to low handicappers, that are into golf, and often spends a good deal of money on all sorts of equipment (not just balls).

I'm one of them. And as the result of this - I will never, [i]ever[/i], buy another Callaway product. Ever. Not even a hat. If you want to say Callaway is justified, because they're a business, and are correct in just looking at their bottom line? Cool. However - there's another side of the marketplace ... consumers. I'm one. And my goal in spending dollars is [i]not[/i] to help a company's bottom line - it is to pay for the product I most want to buy. Callaway can use whatever tactics it wants for its bottom line .... but if one of them is taking away, from [i]me[/i], the ball I've played since it came out - then there [i]are[/i] going to be downsides to the tactic as well as the upsides they think they'll get.

[/quote

Wow...You have got to be kidding me! Bridgestone; Callaway both have won lawsuits against Titleist. It just amazes me that poeple would threaten to boycott Callaway because they are taking away the PRO V & PRO Vx. That just makes me laugh and I am sure that they really care what you or I or anyone else thinks. What a JOKE!
If they are the King of balls then they should be able to make something better than the Pro V or Pro Vx. Sounds to me like the people upset about this lawsuit are not convinced they are going to be able to replace this ball or get away with stealing from anyone else.

The problem is that Titleist didn't think that someone would dare challenge them so they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

[geogolf]

[quote name='scubus' post='885028' date='Jan 27 2008, 10:22 AM']The 747 analogy is interesting, but flawed.

Callaway is not grounding the current fleet of ProV's, just future ones.

I really do not understand the boycott idea only because [i]every[/i] company has sued to protect patents. But if it makes you feel better, more power to you.

You say it is only 5% of what makes the ball. I say "so?" It is obviously a crucial 5% or it wouldn't be in there. And if it is crucial, it obviously has value so the patent holder should be compensated.

I play neither Callaway nor Titleist. I don't like their balls.

I'm going to bow out of this discussion - like the MDF threads it is becoming redundant. It has been a real learning experience and a big thanks to everyone... 'bye 'bye.

[/quote]


True, a lot of people read into it that they would never be able to buy Pro V's again. They obviously didn't read the entire thing on an objective, factual view. And if it were the other way around, the same ProV folks bemoaning Callaway would be cheering.

Be Objective.

midasmulligan2000 - I am trying to think of a competitor Callaway has "killed". Fact is, there are none. Unless you consider counterfeiters and crooks "competitors"

Yes their ball was uniquely successful. KNOWINGLY Using Patents from already owned by someone else.

It's also funny how people play "good guy/ bad guy" as if they were being endorsed by Titleist or something lol.

The Laws are out there- the facts are out there & they got caught.

Case Closed. I'm done here

[Swoosh216]

[quote name='TRB151' post='882503' date='Jan 25 2008, 03:20 PM']Did anyone read in Golf World that Callaway is also filing suit over Cobra and Titleist drivers over a patnent that a Dr. John B. Kosmatka holds?[/quote]


[quote name='QueenCityGolfer' post='882988' date='Jan 25 2008, 07:34 PM'][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.
[/quote]

Tiger; Duval; Mickelson; Sergio ; Paul Casey all left Titleist they were not dropped...That is a baseless point unless you work for Titleist Tour Department. Funny how if there product was so vital, how come all of these athletes are leaving them.
Titleist is a great marketing company and they have the most money so they will protect their back yard and come out with something new and call it the greatest ever.

I guess we will see what happens in '09...

[mat562]

Great post midasmulligan.

I'm not loyal to any one particular brand either, but I'll stand up and say the same as you - the whole episode has left a sour taste in my mouth and I will from this point on shy away from Callaway products as a result of being utterly alienated by the company and it's tactics in crying foul at every turn; including, apparently, in the case of some driver models now as well as balls. The whole 'you stole our patented technology' thing is already getting old for me and has done a good job of making me unsympathetic to Callaway's whole argument.

Callaway are no angels themselves, having used someone else's patented technology in producing their Rule 35 ball. The only difference is they then legitimized their wrongdoing by buying out up the patent rights after the fact. This seems to be passed off as legitimate and good business practice by the Callaway fans who are crucifying Titleist for their blatant 'theft' of similar technology from Callaway. The only difference is that Titleist haven't paid out hush money.

The Pro V1 is, and has been, a revolutionary piece of equipment and an overwhelming sucess story that no other ball manufacturer has been able to match. Yes, there are other premium balls that are very good (such as the one I play) but it's undeniable that the the Pro V1 family of balls have been the standard by which all others are judged for several years, and it's only recently that viable competitors have emerged with products that genuinely compare performance-wise.

I sense more than a whiff of sour grapes from Callaway in that they've been soundly beaten in the ball stakes by a company who have taken similar technology and used it to make a completely superior product that has been marketed more competently and sold vastly more units than Callaway's products.

Callaway can scratch me off their prospective customer list too. I'm not the first person that I know to say that, and I'm certain I won't be the last. However much cash a judge may award Callaway in damages, they can start subtracting lost profits from it straight away in my case and, I suspect, in the case of many others.

[IP_Golf_Guy]

Just thought I would add some fuel...

Check out:

[url="http://golf-patents.com/2008/01/27/x.aspx"]http://golf-patents.com/2008/01/27/x.aspx[/url]

[phelps22]

Like I said before, if Callaway wins this injunction and the Pro V1 and X go bye bye Titleist will just release a new premium ball to the market. Weather or not you people like it or not thats just the way it is. It will not kill Titleist. If everyone who disagree's with what Callaway is doing and boycotts their products thinking it's going to hurt them, think again. Your movement wont amount to a hill of beans as far as sales go. I'm not loyal to either brand but it is going to be interesting to see what happens in the end.

[RNF]

There no saints in this affair or in this business. Some here will "never play Callaway again" for their actions and yet will play Nike even though Nike has had labor "issues" throughout the world; violating minimum wage and overtime laws in Vietnam, exploitation of cheap labor, child labor. It's so bad that Nike's Swoosh is known in some circles as the "Swooshtika".

There are no saints in big business.

I have heard from a Ryder cup player that has switched from Titleist ball/mizuno irons to the new Callaway ball/irons that the new Callaway ball blows the prov1x away. That's his opinion anyways.

I guess that's why they have menus in restaurants.

[geogolf]

[quote name='mat562' post='885188' date='Jan 27 2008, 12:00 PM']Callaway are no angels themselves, having used someone else's patented technology in producing their Rule 35 ball. The only difference is they then legitimized their wrongdoing by buying out up the patent rights after the fact. This seems to be passed off as legitimate and good business practice by the Callaway fans who are crucifying Titleist for their blatant 'theft' of similar technology from Callaway. The only difference is that Titleist haven't paid out hush money.[/quote]


Guess I wasn't done:

Oct. 9 2001, Callaway announced that it had signed a golf ball patent license agreement with Bridgestone Sports Co., of Japan, that allows Callaway to use a number of Bridgestone Sports three-piece golf ball patents worldwide.

That's how it's done. Legally and correctly- Unlike Acushnet.

[teedoff]

[quote name='geogolf' post='885249' date='Jan 27 2008, 12:34 PM'][quote name='mat562' post='885188' date='Jan 27 2008, 12:00 PM']Callaway are no angels themselves, having used someone else's patented technology in producing their Rule 35 ball. The only difference is they then legitimized their wrongdoing by buying out up the patent rights after the fact. This seems to be passed off as legitimate and good business practice by the Callaway fans who are crucifying Titleist for their blatant 'theft' of similar technology from Callaway. The only difference is that Titleist haven't paid out hush money.[/quote]


Guess I wasn't done:

Oct. 9 2001, Callaway announced that it had signed a golf ball patent license agreement with Bridgestone Sports Co., of Japan, that allows Callaway to use a number of Bridgestone Sports three-piece golf ball patents worldwide.

That's how it's done. Legally and correctly- Unlike Acushnet.
[/quote]

No, not quite.

These agreements were entered into by Callaway and Bridgestone as part of a patent infringement lawsuit filed by Bridgestone against Callaway. Callaway settled out of court, having violated 4 patents involving technology from the Precept EV line of golf balls. So they, like Titleist, infringed on existing patented technology from another company in order to start up their golf ball line, the Rule 35. One note however, Callaway did attempt to work with Bridgestone prior to the launch of their ball but no agreement was in place when the Rule 35 was introduced at the PGA Merchandise Show in I believe January 2000. The lawsuit lasted approximately 18 months before a settlment was reached.

[mat562]

There are countless companies, in all areas of merchandise who outsource production to countries where the cost of labour and/or materials are lessened. Nike are not alone in that regard. It's unfortunate, but it's the way of the world, and it provides work for people who may otherwise have no other means of supporting themselves and their families. The system is taken advantage of, and there are, sadly, many instances of exploitation and of less than perfect working conditions, but that won't be changed by me not buying Nike clubs. It will be achieved by concerted economic and political pressure upon unscrupulous manufacturers by national governments and by self-regulation by manufacturers themselves. And it will take years to achieve in all likelihood.

I play the irons and woods that I do because they work for me and I play decent golf with them. How (and where) they were made never once entered my thoughts when I tested them or when I bought them. Just where the ball ended up after I hit it. Similarly, the logo on them is unimportant to me - just the performance. I've played numerous brands in my golfing life and have no particular loyalty to any one manufacturer

In terms of Callaway, I've never been a user of their equipment because I've never liked it. I've tried numerous Callaway clubs from the S2H2 woods, through the Bobby Jones and Big Bertha series of drivers and fairways, and right up to and including the FT series drivers and the X Forged irons. I've given them fair consideration and never found them to be as good as other stuff out there. In fairness to Callaway, they don't even make my preferred type of iron, so they'll always struggle to put an iron set in my bag. I've tried Callaway balls and they've varied from mediocre to really quite good - but not as good for me as others out there, such as the V1 and the ball I play.

The thing I find distasteful is the whole ethos of this episode. That Callaway take the moral high ground and effectively accuse Titleist of being little more than thieves when Acushnet have done something that is a) pretty common and widespread in the golf industry; and b) something that they've done themselves.

The whole thing is very petty in my eyes and is to me born out of jealousy that they haven't outdone Titleist in the ball stakes. Regardless of the whys, wherefors and justifications behind it, it's a mardy and petty display to me and, as I say, it's turned me off Callaway as a brand - quite aside from whether I like their products or not.

As has been pointed out, my 'boycott' of Callaway won't achieve a great deal, and won't have any Carlsbad executives losing sleep, but it's something I'm entitled to do as a consumer, and something that I'm entitled to have an opinion on, as is everyone else whether they agree with me or not.

By the way, my employer in the UK has also been guilty of violating working time directives on numerous occasions, and have also been found to have acted unlawfully (over several years' duration) in terms of pay issues relating to overtime. I'm amongst several thousand employees to have been taken advantage of over several years..

Such dodgy goings-on clearly aren't restricted to multinational sporting goods giants operating in south east asia...

[enterprise920]

[quote name='sharkhark' post='883678' date='Jan 26 2008, 07:49 AM'][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.
[/quote]

lmfao are you insane? Why don't we just eliminate all laws then, heck if you want to kill someone, go ahead! If their family complains about it, then we just boycott them, and call them babies. please go back and read what you just said and think about it

[sharkhark]

[quote name='Uno' post='885442' date='Jan 27 2008, 03:03 PM'][quote name='sharkhark' post='883678' date='Jan 26 2008, 07:49 AM'][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.
[/quote]

lmfao are you insane? Why don't we just eliminate all laws then, heck if you want to kill someone, go ahead! If their family complains about it, then we just boycott them, and call them babies. please go back and read what you just said and think about it
[/quote]

Buddy your attention to detail is a little lacking. If you look just after that reply[i][b], I posted that i was 'SARCASTIC'.[/b][/i] If you would bother to read all posts rather than just jumping around selectively where you choose to read you would have read that.
[u][/u] It was my attempt to poke fun at how ludicrous some of the people sound but I guess it flew over your head too.

[petergf]

[quote name='sharkhark' post='883678' date='Jan 27 2008, 01:49 AM'][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.
[/quote]
sarcasm or cynicism of some peoples ethics, which ever? The point is there and valid.
cheers peter

[sharkhark]

[quote name='petergf' post='885642' date='Jan 27 2008, 05:32 PM'][quote name='sharkhark' post='883678' date='Jan 27 2008, 01:49 AM'][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.
[/quote]
sarcasm or cynicism of some peoples ethics, which ever? The point is there and valid.
cheers peter
[/quote]


what point.

cheers, craig

[petergf]

[quote name='sharkhark' post='885686' date='Jan 28 2008, 08:58 AM'][quote name='petergf' post='885642' date='Jan 27 2008, 05:32 PM'][quote name='sharkhark' post='883678' date='Jan 27 2008, 01:49 AM'][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.
[/quote]
sarcasm or cynicism of some peoples ethics, which ever? The point is there and valid.
cheers peter
[/quote]


what point.

cheers, craig
[/quote]

yours Craig, The lack off ethics expressed throughout this thread by some.
Callaway are morally and legally entitled to regain their property and to cease any future exploitation by the thief (titleist) of any further monetary gain.
You do the crime, you do the time!

Titleist should have given more thought to the ramifaction's of their intended actions, so if anyone wants to get pissed off because there are no more Prov's, get pissed off with Titleist.
cheers peter

[RNF]

[quote name='mat562' post='885339' date='Jan 27 2008, 12:32 PM']I play the irons and woods that I do because they work for me and I play decent golf with them. How (and where) they were made never once entered my thoughts when I tested them or when I bought them. Just where the ball ended up after I hit it. Similarly, the logo on them is unimportant to me - just the performance.[/quote]
Agreed 100%.

[sharkhark]

[quote name='petergf' post='885969' date='Jan 27 2008, 08:23 PM'][quote name='sharkhark' post='885686' date='Jan 28 2008, 08:58 AM'][quote name='petergf' post='885642' date='Jan 27 2008, 05:32 PM'][quote name='sharkhark' post='883678' date='Jan 27 2008, 01:49 AM'][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.
[/quote]
sarcasm or cynicism of some peoples ethics, which ever? The point is there and valid.
cheers peter
[/quote]


what point.

cheers, craig
[/quote]

yours Craig, The lack off ethics expressed throughout this thread by some.
Callaway are morally and legally entitled to regain their property and to cease any future exploitation by the thief (titleist) of any further monetary gain.
You do the crime, you do the time!

Titleist should have given more thought to the ramifaction's of their intended actions, so if anyone wants to get pissed off because there are no more Prov's, get pissed off with Titleist.
cheers peter
[/quote]


peter i hope i am not misunderstanding you as I have had a few people who thought i was serious.
To anyone who does not understand.....I WAS SARCASTIC....I meant the opposite of my post. I think anyone who defends titleists position and says they would boycott callaway for simply defending their technology legally is nuts. Callaway has a legal right for anyone to be angry at them for doing that makes no sense.

sarcastic....geeze louise...I replied to the first poster saying you missed my reply a day ago that said I was being sarcastic, then they still don't get it. i remind you that i was being sarcastic ?

[StaffBag]

[quote name='midasmulligan2000' post='885008' date='Jan 27 2008, 09:10 AM']I, personally, use ProV1s. And have since they came out. I love them. I'm used to them.

A patent is only ideas. It takes a [i]lot[/i] more than merey a patent to produce, manufacture, and market a product. And the patents that Callaway owns were a mere fraction of the total patents (well over 100, all but a few completely owned by Titleist) required to make the ProV1. Callaway is trying to kill an entire ball by going to court, and proving that 5% of the ball was created using patents owned by them.

Saying "Well, Acushnet is a criminal, and Callaway is merely a noble company trying to protect its intellectual property" is a very simplistic view of modern products. If Lockheed got a judge to rule that 5% of what went into the Boeing 747 concerned patents it held - would that justify an injunction grounding the entire global fleet of 747's? (I'm actually not worried - I doubt the injunction has a chance in court).

Callaway couldn't compete on the premium ball market. They simply have not produced anything that the market thinks is equal to the ProV1. No one has. (Yes ... there are many people that use - and love - other high-end, three piece balls, but the Prov1 simply [i]is[/i] the standard that even some of the competing companies compare themselves to in advertising).

So (as Callaway is rather a bit known for) - it is using the legal system to try to kill a competitor, and remove from the market a ball that tens of thousands of golfers love. One of the most uniquely succesfull balls in the history of golf.

Go for it Callaway. And if you agree with them? Fine. But there [i]are[/i] market risks to this business strategy. If they are successful, there [i]will[/i] be blowback - possibly greater than Callaway envisions. There are a [i]lot[/i] of [i]very[/i] loyal ProV1 users out there. And even further - their profile is very distinct (and desirable). It generally isn't the guy that plays twice a year on vacation, who has to rummage through the garage to find his clubs. Its the mid to low handicappers, that are into golf, and often spends a good deal of money on all sorts of equipment (not just balls).

I'm one of them. And as the result of this - I will never, [i]ever[/i], buy another Callaway product. Ever. Not even a hat. If you want to say Callaway is justified, because they're a business, and are correct in just looking at their bottom line? Cool. However - there's another side of the marketplace ... consumers. I'm one. And my goal in spending dollars is [i]not[/i] to help a company's bottom line - it is to pay for the product I most want to buy. Callaway can use whatever tactics it wants for its bottom line .... but if one of them is taking away, from [i]me[/i], the ball I've played since it came out - then there [i]are[/i] going to be downsides to the tactic as well as the upsides they think they'll get.[/quote]


This is the best post on this topic so far!!

Not the pro-Callaway bias and super intense anti-Titleist bias that has been found in other posts. Had this come to the board earlier, I would have never even bothered to post my opinion on this matter.



Well stated!!!

[golf-freak]

You said it, Callaway is a buisness and is a publicly traded company with investors who bought their stocks to make money. That is what they are doing. I play the PRO V1 by the way and I do agree it is the best ball and Callaway's balls blow. I do however have a bag full of Callaway clubs as those as well work best for my game.I agree it may be underhanded what Callaway is doing but they have people who get up in the morning to make their ivestors money and that what they're trying to do. Titleist will not have to pull their balls off the shelves. As far as only 5% of the PRO V1 being protected by Callaway patents, then maybe Titleist should offer Callaway 5% of all the salls from tat ball from the time it was introduced until now.

[daihori]

[quote name='petergf' post='885969' date='Jan 27 2008, 08:23 PM']Titleist should have given more thought to the ramifaction's of their intended actions, so if anyone wants to get pissed off because there are no more Prov's, get pissed off with Titleist.
cheers peter[/quote]

I am current user of neither Titleist nor Callaway (oops, I do still use Vokeys...), but I've used a lot of products from each companies (... 975D, 905T, 905R, 907D2 drivers, a few 3 woods, 690CB, 660 irons, ProVs, ..., Callaway drivers, several 3 woods, and balls). I personally think they are both major, good companies, and I am not interested in thinking which company might be better in any category ... simply because the answer depends on who you are what what you're looking for.

Anyway, as long as this patent issue is concerned, I feel I have to agree with Peter above in that it's difficult to understand why the Titleist lovers here are attacking Callaway for what they did or what they're doing to protect their company. They should be very upset with Titleist, not with Callaway. I personally don't have strong sense of attachment to a particular golf company, but I would be very irritated if the company I love and trust were doing apparently unethical things to develop and promote their products. I wouldn't want to support that kind of company. Certainly, I wouldn't see any point in accusing the other company. ... On the other hand, I personally wish that Callaway would have asked for only money, just like Bridgestone probably did.

I personally would like all the companies to do well (... I know that won't happen) because I just love the game. I think Titleist should learn something positive from their troubles with Bridgestone and Callaway, and I sure hope that Titleist will come back strong with even better golf balls.

[Justin Uthadude]

Wow!
Isn't this going to affect one of the top 5 players in the world?

[xxio]

Bottom line.

Callaway used the technology that it thought it had bought out from Spalding, got caught, admitted and settled. They are moving on.

Titleist used the technology, got caught, apparently doesn't want to settle, had the patents re examined. Why IMHO they have more to lose if they admit their number one product in the past 8?? years was a rip off. No matter what anyone says it was still Titleist's responsibility to check if such a product had been patented before theirs.

Lost in all of this is...who really had it first Spalding/Topflite or Bridgestone? I remember getting into a pissing match a long time ago because someone claimed the Strata was the first multi-layer ball. I claimed that a couple of Precept balls released in Japan/Asia preceeded the Strata by at least a year. The first multi-layer ball US balls were the Precept Double Cover Tours, did they come out before the Stratas?

[mat562]

I may be wrong on this, but I think the Precept Double Cover ball preceded the Strata. Wilson also had the Ultra Tour ball in their lineup which again preceded the Strata ball. How the construction and all-important patents of each ball compared with the Strata I don't know, but suffice to say double-covered/multilayered balls have been around for getting on for 15 years.

[jick]

The STRATA started the first wave of three-piece solid technology in the USA.

A year later, Precept released the Double Cover as the first four piece ball, but this was different. It was the cover, then outer layer, then windings, then a core. Precept also released the Dynawing in the USA, claiming it was the top selling ball in Japan for the past years that preceded it and that it was three-piece solid technology that even predated the Strata.

Then comes Wilson, who said that their Ultra Tour Balata released back in 1993 was already three-piece solid technology but they did not market it as such. So they actually are the first in that regard. The timeline would therefore be - Wilson Ultra without the patents or marketing, then in Japan the Altus Newing, then the Top Flite Strata in the USA.

[vaca22]

I was just horsing around on the Callaway website and I came across a link to a subsite for the new Tour X and Tour iX balls. Check it out...[url="http://callawaygolf.com/Global/en-US/Products/GolfBalls/TheGoodBall.html"]
[/url]
[url="http://callawaygolf.com/Global/en-US/Products/GolfBalls/TheGoodBall.html"]http://callawaygolf.com/Global/en-US/Produ...heGoodBall.html[/url]

Pay close attention to the wording...

[sharkhark]

Its funny with all the pro titleist people (and by the way I have been arguing for callaway here even though I use the prov1x) who keep talking about a backlash against callaway.
Did you ever think that it goes both ways? I myself will now never buy another titleist product. Just bought 6 dozen new balls and instead of prov went with ben hogan tour deep. Good mulitlayer and owned by....hmm?
Someone argued that in their opinion that callaways patents were only 5% of the prov. Is that arguing that there is an acceptable percentage for stealing?
Is it 1% ? 5%? 20%?