Jump to content
IGNORED

Acushnet (Titleist) patent-infringement case takes on start-up brands

mvmac
 Share
Note: This thread is 3485 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

  • Moderator
billchao Incredible Member

billchao

  • Moderator
It sounds to me like the smaller companies were all probably relying on Foremost. So they probably had no idea if there was a patent violation. And maybe Foremost isn't named in the suit because they aren't a US company, and it is harder to enforce the patent against them? It sounds to me like the smaller companies are caught in the middle.

I don't know about that. There are international trade agreements that protect patents and stuff, which I'm sure Taiwan is a part of. If these companies are dependent on a manufacturer to design their products, I'm not sure they should have been in the business to begin with.

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades
1
1
1
1
1
1

  • Moderator
boogielicious Incredible Member

boogielicious

  • Moderator

Quote:

Originally Posted by boogielicious

But if the "little guys" actually did violate the patent and stole IP, then I don't feel sorry for them.

Me neither, but they should have access to a fair and just judicial ruling based on the facts, not their ability to money match the big boys.

Agreed.

Scott

Titleist, Edel, Scotty Cameron Putter, Snell - AimPoint - Evolvr - MirrorVision

My Swing Thread

boogielicious - Adjective describing the perfect surf wave

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades
1
1
1
1
1
1

Note: This thread is 3485 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up

  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).

  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • ChetlovesMer
      Can Somebody Explain to Me Why Lie Angle Balanced Putters Are Important?

      By ChetlovesMer ·

      Well said.  Er, um... Well typed... 🤷‍♂️
    • GolfLug
      Can Somebody Explain to Me Why Lie Angle Balanced Putters Are Important?

      By GolfLug ·

      I'm probably preaching to the choir with your background, but I'm sure most retailers worth their business salt will price it for some combination  of: delivered cost + current perceived market value + expected lower revenue for slow moving inventory + expected obsolescence. The 'market value' might be the largest component.  Retailers with low inventory build to order for long lead times have lower obsolescence recover cost added but it really hurts the impulsive buyer market, which is big when there is all this hoopla raging. The impulsive buyer also tends to pay more. I'm guessing that LAB wont make you wait unless you want custom tweaked stuff.    
    • Ty_Webb
      Can Somebody Explain to Me Why Lie Angle Balanced Putters Are Important?

      By Ty_Webb ·

      Fair points - one thing I would note, speaking as a consumer, the base model here is already very expensive. There is a (fairly large) part of me that is much more willing to pay additional customization costs if it's going to work better when the underlying product is expensive. If I'm getting a $10 putter out of a bargain bin, I'm comfortable giving it a try and if it doesn't work, then whatever - no big deal. Spend $450 plus tax and it better be good. I'd rather have something for 560 that's spot on rather than something that's 450 and not what I need. I'd also go the extra mile and pick out some of the visual customization as well - different color, different alignment lines etc. I don't necessarily see that $110 as poor value when it's already a high end and expensive piece of equipment. I don't know whether that's me being what the market will bear or that it costs them that much more to make it, but I don't particularly care either way. At the end of the day it really is just about what the market (i.e. me) will bear.  I will also note that I don't have a LAB putter and while I am periodically tempted, I'm not going to get one until I can be sure I'm getting the one that's right for me. Short of going to Oregon, I'm not sure how that can happen either, so I will remain a spectator who occasionally pops to PGA Superstore to have a play around with one.
    • ChetlovesMer
      Garmin R50 Launch Monitor

      By ChetlovesMer ·

      One thing I've wondered about with set to the side camera models in addition to toe shanks; Is does the plexiglass covering the cameras get all dirty? Especially when hitting from grass. I've used skytrak with a mat before and it ends up getting what I'll call "mat dust" on it. But that easily wipes right off. I've never used one of these in the grass. But I would think they'd get "grass splatter" on them. ... maybe? is that an issue? 
    • ChetlovesMer
      Can Somebody Explain to Me Why Lie Angle Balanced Putters Are Important?

      By ChetlovesMer ·

      I see what you are saying. I work with companies that make everything from hearing aids, to assembly cells, to fire trucks, to combines. Pretty much everything in between. I know of very few who cannot handle one-piece flow. (I'm actually struggling to think of any other than Rolls Royce. Incidentally, Rolls Royce is without a doubt the worst manufacturer I've ever worked with.) Either LAB's factory is really behind the times. (Pre-1992) or they are sticking you for ordering a custom.  Again, if they are making their customs from special order parts that's one thing. But since they are just building from standard parts, then either their factory sucks, in which case I could help them. Or they are just charging what the market will bear. And in that case, shame on us, the consumer, for allowing it.  A couple of good reads on the subject are "The Toyota Production System" (originally published in 1992, updated several times.) And the even better "The Toyota Way" (originally published in 2003). Any manufacturer of any product should be able to achieve one-piece flow.       Don't get me wrong. Even though I personally didn't really like their putter, I'm rooting for them. I've been involved with American Manufacturing since the late-80's. I got to see first hand as Toyota Principles migrated to the US. Pretty much every major American Manufacturer has adopted these principles in some form or another.... or they've gone out of business.  LAB is an American Manufacturer and therefore I'm on their side. Which is why if they really do need an extra 110 to 150 bucks to produce a custom from standard parts, I (and others like me) can help them.  I decided to write them an email and simply ask them if the additional cost was due to market value or cost-plus pricing. I'll let you know if they respond.   
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

  I accept
The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...