Minelab Files Suit Against XP Metal Detectors

[Norvic]

Yeah appears the other threatening detector manufacturers have been kept out of the competition, is XPs turn, hope they have it to be a David. Ver 4 must be a corker.

I love the Deus, and the Z. Maybe a compromise, swap their no wires for whatever it is ML is going them for. Ohhh... but I`m a dreamer.

What, as customers, can we do to register our displeasure with such, I`m not going to boycott by not buying MLs products that`s for sure?

[MDCHIEFSH]

should be interesting to watch and see if they are seeking 7 years of back damages...could really hurt xp if that were the case. And going forward if they get a high license rate...would really hurt them again...helps to have millions to write patents all day long

[Ridge Runner]

Minelab I think you should take on China. I'm sure they'll bend in the wind and give you all you ask for.

I wonder if we go to Minelabs Country if we would be welcome with open arms to screw whoever we want ?

You can call it what you want but it comes down to just what I said.

Chuck

[Geotech]

On 11/4/2016 at 0:03 PM, Steve Herschbach said:

Well, I do recall that when the White's Vision Spectra came out, Garrett notified White's there was a trademark conflict regarding the name as regarded some old obscure Garrett feature. The Vision became the Spectra V3 and then later V3i.

Garrett had a TM on the name "Treasure Vision" which refers to their GTI display. However, a Chinese detector called the "Treasure Vision" was already being sold in the US and Garrett was not enforcing their TM in that case. And, unlike patents, if you don't enforce a trademark ALL THE TIME you lose the right to enforce it at all. So White's could have dismissed their complaint, but chose to avoid a conflict.

 

[LukeOzDigger]

Looks like Minelab spend mor....

Nar not going there'

but I guess having the competitors disqualified is the best way to win... and turn a profit.

 

[Ridge Runner]

For White's to give in to Minelab must have been cost factor. I wish they hadn't done that being now they looking at how they can collect easy money to keep them afloat.

Minelab would never lowered their price on their high end detectors if sales had been up.When Minelab had buy two of their high end detectors for a lot less money was really buy one get one free.

You can go write this down and that is it will happen again.

We all know that Minelab at this time do make the best nugget detector on the market. I just wish they'd stand on their own two feet.

Chuck

[Des D]

No love lost between the two of them....historically.

Around 2000, when Explorer S/XS came out the other outfit published the same name.

The Explorer makers took umbrage with that hence why it abbreviated today to 2 letters and an alternative spelling of the same word.

[Rick K - First Member]

Why now? Why is ML suing now?  It's not smart to let a competitor eat up your market like Deus has in Europe if you have a good case of patent infringement in your hip pocket. 

Here's my theory (I almost always have a theory - some of them occasionally turn out to be correct! Lol)

With ML announcing in their annual report in August that they would be introducing a new entry-level gold detector in the coming year, the word from their Africa/Asia distributor - Deper, that they would be getting the new XP gold machine - the DPR 600 - and at a stunningly low price - must have been a heck of a shock.  This is especially true if the ML machine turns out to be a VLF (as I heard from a usually reliable source).

I suspect that the timing of that news and the lawsuit are more than a coincidence.  

 

[Steve Herschbach]

The latest in this case is the XP moved to have the case dismissed. However, on June 28 an opinion was issued and the motion to dismissed denied.

"The Court finds that Defendants' argument is premature at this stage. Plaintiff raises a plausible construction of claim 15 and has pled sufficient facts to allege a claim under that construction.1 In view of that, the Court will allow this claim to survive.
IV. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss will be denied. An appropriate Order will issue."

I sure would like to get my hands on a DEUS elliptical HF coil before this goes any farther, just in case XP gets slapped with an injunction stopping sales at some point. Even if they lose that is doubtful as they would probably just come to some sort of financial accomadation with Minelab, but you just never know.