Just a quick note... so that you are aware. Peerless is a trademark owned by us. We bought all of the engineering, the blueprints, the good will of the company, and it's trademarks in 1989.

The products\goods offered by Doug are not genuine Peerless transformers and they should not be represented or sold as Peerless transformers.

Bear in mind that this behaviour is no different in kind than putting the telefunken name and labeling on chinese made tubes... just because someone calls them a Tele doesn't make them a telefunken.

cheers,

msl

Please post the link to your trademark registration on the PTO website. You'll find a search tool there where you can locate any trademark registration and then post a link to it here.

Trademarks are not required to be federally registered. Common law protects the ownership of trademarks. And if you look at the history of this particular federal registation (if those records are on line) you will note that it was assigned to me by Aletc many years ago. And it remains in constant use by us in interstate commerce.

I don't want to argue law with you or anyone else. I simply wanted to give you and others a heads up that certain goods being represented as Peerless articles are not, in fact, genuine Peerless articles.

I have no problem with Doug or anyone else going into the transformer business but would like it if they used their own name and not tried to ride on our coattails and the good will that we have earned for ourselves over the last 16 years.

When John Atwood designed transformers... he picked a name and built up the reputation of his products based on their own merits not on the coattails of another namesake that he had no rights to. This I respect very much.

The lazy way of marketing is to apparently misappropiate another company's name and their designs to make money, fame, or glory for yourself.

Your free to buy doug's products and wish you well with them...

but PEERLESS they are not.

MSL

I've seen it go bad in many different ways. The most common case is of little companies stealing from big companies by riding on their coattails, as you say. They copy their plans, they sell knock off products, whatever. But I've also seen big companies steal little companies rights, by taking their intellectual property and bleeding them through attrition. It makes it hard to obtain justice, because "fairness" costs money and can be prohibitively expensive.

Sometimes the larger company doesn't even have to go to much trouble, because they can use public perception and intimidation. The public may assume that a larger established company would not resort to tasteless tactics. But they do. They do all the time. And the internet is like the wild frontier, so lots of big names have been made almost overnight, some of them bending the rules to unimaginable levels yet most people don't even see what ugliness and games hide underneath.

So I'm pretty zealous about this particular issue and your charges definitely caught my attention.

Still, those are serious charges, and I think you owe it to all of us to provide proof. You owe it to Douglas, because you have impeached him and drawn his reputation into question. You cannot expect to come here with an anonymous username and claim that you own rights to a defunct company's designs and trademarks without providing some proof.

I own two federally registered trademarks, one of which I have had to police a few times. So while I'm not a patent & trademark attorney, I have some experience with trademark and other intellectual property issues.

As you have rightly said, trademarks in America are determined by first use in business. Registration is not a requirement. But registration is taken as evidence that the mark was used in business to identify a particular brand. One can say that they were using a mark in business at a prior date, but it may be difficult to prove. Registration is very convincing evidence of that fact. Federal registration also supercedes state registrations or unregistered marks.

I know that DST (Now Tymphany, makers of Scan-Speak, Vifa and Peerless speakers) has been using this brand name in America for their loudspeaker products for decades. According to PTO records, they published it for registration in 1988, declared first use in 1960 and obtained trademark serial number 73725000. It was cancelled in 1995, but I notice they still use the mark in commerce. From this, I'm not sure that an electronics company starting out to do business after the 1960's would be entitled to use "Peerless" as a brand name. There is too much potential for brand confusion.

I'm not sure whether Altec would have been able to assign rights to you. There are some pretty strict rules governing the transfer of trademarks. See "Transfers of Intellectual Property" by the Ladas & Parry firm. Beyond that, it appears there are several people that are using this name, and I think DST has the longest record of consistent use in commerce.

You said that you don't want to get into a legal discussion about your rights to the use of the Peerless brand name, but on the other hand, you seem to want people here to honor your wishes and disregard Douglas's. I'm not sure that is the right thing to do. For all I know, Douglas may have more rights to the name than you do.

If you want to go through the records and show us that you have obtained proper transfer of a legitimate Altec trademark that gives you rights, then I think that would set the record straight. But if you cannot provide those records, I think it is inappropriate for you to discredit Douglas or to talk about "riding on coattails." You speak about misappropriation and try to impeach someone else's good name, so I think it is extremely important for us all that you be clear on your own.

Here is how I would like to address these issues at least in part.

at www.ahbbo.com/dbatmcom.html there is a passage regarding trademarks and I quote;

"A trademark (or service mark) does not need to be registered to attain status as a mark i.e., unregistered trademarks are recognized by common law. If you have a distinctive trademark (that you own) in commerce, then you probably have a common law trademark already."

In our particular case (and this is just some of the details)... we have used the Peerless name and moniker in interstate commerce for approx 16 or more years. Advertisements in Glass Audio magazine dating back to 1989 by our firm advertised the Peerless name and moniker. This would clearly show use of the brand name and moniker back to a very early date.

I have copies of the appropiate federal forms which shows an assignment of the subject registered trademark to my wife (Kathryn Petrich-LaFevre) from F.Davis Merry, Jr., President of Altec Lansing Corporation whose principal place of business was 10500 West Reno Avenue, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73126. A Certificate Of Renewal of the Peerless trademark WAS issued in my wife's name by the US trademark office whose said renewal term begun on March 6, 1996.

Our attorney of record for trademark matters is Charles H. Lindrooth of Synnestvedt & Lechner whose offices are located at 2600 Aramark Tower, 1101 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA. 19107.

Our branded Peerless products have been advertised and used in interstate commerce for many years by our distributors and OEM's. They have also been mentioned in magazines as far away as Stereo Sound magazine in Japan and as close as the now defunct Bottlehead newsletters, Sound Practices magazine and others.

Friends of the Audioroundtable have been consumers of our transformers and have come directly to us when they needed direct replacements for Altec\Peerless products. Recently we supplied to Charley Kittleson a pair of Peerless 16492 outputs (from an Altec 15870 amp)so that he could restore a pair of these amps for one of his customers.

I would have guessed that our ownership of Peerless might have been well known and documented throughout the audio community for a period of many, many years.

Out of interest... I followed the url you posted to the patent and trademark office and did several searches of small specialist audio companies... here are some of my findings...

I ran a check to see if the following well known audio companies had the protection of a federal trademark or service mark registration.

Welborne Labs, Wavelength Audio, Bottlehead, Metasonix, One-electron.

None of these firms/individuals have a registered trademark that I could find relating to their audio business. Are they all, therefore, legitimate targets for other people to use their business names and the goodwill which each of them have nurtured?

But, yet, within our community each is fairly well known. If they lack this "name protection" then is anyone free to introduce products and call them ONE-ELECTRON for example? Would John need to come on this board and defend and demonstrate that he "owned" the unregistered namesake? What would count as proof?

Interestingly, I also looked up PI Speakers. Accdg to the trademark office you filed an application for a trademark (serial #75900392) and withdrew the application some 11 months later. So that your firm Pi Speakers also lacks this federal trademark registration. How would you prove that you did not abandon the name and that you still have rights to the name? Would you allow a poster to offer copies of Pi Speakers or cabinets on the Audioroundtable?

If someone (anyone) misappropiates the namesakes of Welborne Labs, Wavelength Audio, Pi Speakers, or any of the few other firms I mentioned above... we would all (I hope) condemn this action.

And it is important, as you've stated yourself, to keep the playing field level and honest... using the Peerless name in this context is akin to labeling chinese made tubes with the logo of a famous past manufacturer... it will (and may be intended) confuse the consumer or take advantage of the consumer. Just as would be the case if I offered Pi speaker kits (not made by you) on these boards.

Again, I have no problem with Doug or anyone else going into the transformer business. But I would hope that they would not misappropiate our namesake and use our goodwill to futher their business or hobby interests.

I do have more detailed legal documentation... but posting details of these documents and the business details of... does not seem appropiate to do in a public forum where such information could be misused. I would be happy to provide you with appropiate detailed information in a moreso private setting that would not disclose private business details or personal details of my wife as the trademark owner.

MSL

just to amplify one addtl point;

you wrote;

:::I'm not sure whether Altec would have been able to assign rights to you. There are some pretty strict rules governing the transfer of trademarks. See "Transfers of Intellectual Property" by the Ladas & Parry firm. Beyond that, it appears there are several people that are using this name, and I think DST has the longest record of consistent use in commerce.:::

Bear in mind that Mr. Merry (president of Altec) had legal counsel representing the Altec firm and that my wife had legal counsel representing her interests in the trademark.

Bear in mind further that the transfer was filed with and accepted by the US patent and trademark office.

that the US Patent and Trademark Office issued subsequent to the transfer of the trademark a renewal in my wife's name of the said subject trade mark.

As I understand it... anyone who might have thought that the transfer was not legal or appropiate would have had notice printed in the federal registry and could have challenged the assignment before it was granted. No one contested the assignment of the trademark from the Altec Lansign Corporation to my wife.

That the government accepted the transfer of ownership of the said trademark and subsequently issued a renewal (upon proper applicaton for such) of the same trademark to my wife is pretty strong evidence that the subject Peerless trademark is in fact owned by my wife.

msl

Regarding the Peerless brand name, if there was registration made by Altec, then there would be a record of it in the PTO database. I could not find it. I searched for trademarks registered by Altec and found several, Altec, Altec Lansing, Iconic, Mantaray, Tangerine, etc. But I did not find a registration for Peerless. Surely you must know a registration serial number for something so important to you.

As for a transfer, if you have made some sort of legal agreement that gave you intellectual property rights, you should have no trouble putting your hands on it. I mean, if you or your attorney were going to write someone a cease and decist letter, you'd want to include these documents as proof of your claims.

If you have other documentation I haven't found, I'd be interested to see it.

I can understand your zeal about the Peerless name, but I am concerned that you may not have a valid claim to the trademark. I know for sure that DST has been using the name prior to you, and so I don't think you can actually claim it. As frustrating as this may be, it appears you may have been violating a registered trademark held by Peerless Fabrikkerne all this time. Maybe you were "under the radar," and they simply didn't notice you.

If you would like to send me copies of your documentation, I'll have it checked out. If it's valid, I'll ensure it is respected here. But if your claim isn't valid, my suggestion is to get with an IP attorney as soon as possible and see what your options are. I'll help any way I can because I know how frustrating this can be.

As an aside, remember the Svetlana controversy? The real company is Russian, and is called Светлана, which is Russian, of course. Word has it that New Sensor effectively stole the name, by registering it in America under the table. If true, that's dirty, and even if done without legal opposition, it isn't right because it is taking advantage of people that didn't know better. They weren't in this country and didn't know the rules, or even have experience with these types of intellectual property issues.

• Ламповый Завод "Светлана"

So maybe something like that applies in your situation, I don't know. I'm not very familiar with your particular situation but I'm certainly interested and concerned. I think it would be best for everyone involved to come to the table and make things right.

But please remember, Douglas isn't just some kind of pawn. He is pretty good with tube circuits and his wishes should be respected too. If you have legal claim to the name that's one thing, but if it has been eroded or whatever, then you and he should probably make some kind of agreement. I would think if you've been using the name for 16 years that would count for something, but then again, DST has you beat by almost 30 years. This is kind of a tough situation.

I'm going to put the winding cards and information up in Projects soon. Probably right after Wayne discovers Mike is full of hot air and bile.

So, Mike about this PP load thing.......
cheers,
Douglas