Hey guys, just found this out. Umarex won its lawsuit, therefore any non-tradmarked HK airsoft gun has to be gone from the shelves by 2013. Check the "Shockers" deal on ASGI and the Daily Deals on Evike for the discounts. This is mainly JG guns, but still alright.
Article: http://popularairsoft.com/umarex-wins-h ... e-lawsuits
No more HK!
No more HK!
[align=center]Delta Bravo Niner
[/align]
[/align]
Re: No more HK!
I really find it hard to believe that these guns will be gone. I think it is more likely that you will be forced to buy them by way of Hong Kong retailers instead of buying them at US based retailers. If trademark infringement was a big issue in Asia then Prime/Guarder/all those companies that provide trademarked slides and receivers would be out of business.
There's no kill switch on awesome!
-
fallout11
- I love forums!
- Posts: 330
- Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:06 pm
- Location: Warner Robins, GA
- Contact:
Re: No more HK!
SteevoLS is, as usual, correct. Umarex only has the license for Heckler and Koch products here, not in Taiwan or Hong Kong or Singapore for that matter. Cybergun has the same license in places like France, apparently. However, it if becomes an issue with enforcement far east importers may start "defacing" or otherwise obscuring the trademarks on guns they ship here, like they did many years ago.
Some here may not realize that years ago (and may still be this way for all I know) KSC and KWA pistols (such as Glocks) were the same products made in the same factory, yet KSC had trades (for the Japanese market) and KWA did not (I may have that backwards....alzheimers setting in).
You paid more for the same gun with trademarks.
The whole thing stinks to high hell though, no matter where you are. Plain and simple rent seeking behavior at its finest. Capitalism used to be about coming up with a great idea, making it, marketing it, and then profiting. Sometime in the last 30 years that became old-fashioned and out of style, replaced by money skimming operations, collecting middle-man fees (or even fee fees). Frictional costs. Umarex didn't have a damn thing to do with the design of the HK guns, or their manufacture, or the manufacture of airsoft replicas. The only thing they own, something they bought from someone else, is a #@!$ name. You, the end consumer, now get to pay more to line their pockets. Slimy lawyers.
Rant over, sorry about that.
Some here may not realize that years ago (and may still be this way for all I know) KSC and KWA pistols (such as Glocks) were the same products made in the same factory, yet KSC had trades (for the Japanese market) and KWA did not (I may have that backwards....alzheimers setting in).
You paid more for the same gun with trademarks.
The whole thing stinks to high hell though, no matter where you are. Plain and simple rent seeking behavior at its finest. Capitalism used to be about coming up with a great idea, making it, marketing it, and then profiting. Sometime in the last 30 years that became old-fashioned and out of style, replaced by money skimming operations, collecting middle-man fees (or even fee fees). Frictional costs. Umarex didn't have a damn thing to do with the design of the HK guns, or their manufacture, or the manufacture of airsoft replicas. The only thing they own, something they bought from someone else, is a #@!$ name. You, the end consumer, now get to pay more to line their pockets. Slimy lawyers.
Rant over, sorry about that.
-
Echo1 Operator
- Echo1 Rep
- Posts: 778
- Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2010 6:35 pm
- Contact:
Re: No more HK!
The license Umarex holds isn't only for the trademarks, but HK guns' likenesses as well.
-
fallout11
- I love forums!
- Posts: 330
- Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:06 pm
- Location: Warner Robins, GA
- Contact:
Re: No more HK!
Not entirely true E1Operator. Colt already fought and lost the "trade dress" (likeness) issue some years back (2005-2007).....against Bushmaster.
http://www.bushmaster.com/press_release%20120905.asp
Umarex is a licensing company which H&K has given their trademark (and trade dress rights, such as they are) to who then subcontract firearms companies (airsoft and otherwise, i.e. BB gun makers) to manufacture licensed legal replicas of H&K's designs.
Typically, part of trade dress infringement cases is that you have to prove functionality of the likeness of your gun. If something is purely cosmetic, then it doesn't legally fall under trade dress protections. H&K does not manufacture airsoft guns and they never have, so they don't have any copyrights of the function of airsoft guns or their components. The only thing they have is a copyright on their names and model designations. Remember that it has to not only look like a duck, but it must also walk like a duck, talk like a duck, and act like a duck to be a duck.
Second, Umarex does not manufacture guns of any kind. They contract other companies to make airsoft guns to their specifications and to print any trademark on which they have a license to use. Umarex could actually make airsoft AUGs and put H&K on them if they wanted to. A bad example, yes, but just an example. Umarex can only protect the H&K trademark, not the trade dress. Colas (sodas) are not owned by Coca-Cola....you can get colas from other sources that look, smell, fizz, and even kinda taste like Coca-Cola. Not infringement.
To this end I note that Ares, formerly an Umarex H&K licensee, already dropped the G-36K moniker and H&K trades on their newly renamed "AS-36K".
http://www.popularairsoft.com/news/ares ... ion-review
Similarly, Vector Arms (and Special Weapons, Inc., PTR Industries, Coharie Arms, Rapid Fire, RedRock Arms, GSG, American Tactical, plus half a dozen others, etc.) make 'unlicensed' real steel copies of the MP-5.
http://www.atlanticfirearms.com/index.p ... gory_id=23
No trade dress issues.
This matter took over 4 years to settle, btw. Umarex actually bought the H&K trades back in early 2008....it just took this long to get a judge to agree to their trademark ownership.
http://www.airsoft-barracks.com/forums/ ... e-vfc-416/
http://www.bushmaster.com/press_release%20120905.asp
Umarex is a licensing company which H&K has given their trademark (and trade dress rights, such as they are) to who then subcontract firearms companies (airsoft and otherwise, i.e. BB gun makers) to manufacture licensed legal replicas of H&K's designs.
Typically, part of trade dress infringement cases is that you have to prove functionality of the likeness of your gun. If something is purely cosmetic, then it doesn't legally fall under trade dress protections. H&K does not manufacture airsoft guns and they never have, so they don't have any copyrights of the function of airsoft guns or their components. The only thing they have is a copyright on their names and model designations. Remember that it has to not only look like a duck, but it must also walk like a duck, talk like a duck, and act like a duck to be a duck.
Second, Umarex does not manufacture guns of any kind. They contract other companies to make airsoft guns to their specifications and to print any trademark on which they have a license to use. Umarex could actually make airsoft AUGs and put H&K on them if they wanted to. A bad example, yes, but just an example. Umarex can only protect the H&K trademark, not the trade dress. Colas (sodas) are not owned by Coca-Cola....you can get colas from other sources that look, smell, fizz, and even kinda taste like Coca-Cola. Not infringement.
To this end I note that Ares, formerly an Umarex H&K licensee, already dropped the G-36K moniker and H&K trades on their newly renamed "AS-36K".
http://www.popularairsoft.com/news/ares ... ion-review
Similarly, Vector Arms (and Special Weapons, Inc., PTR Industries, Coharie Arms, Rapid Fire, RedRock Arms, GSG, American Tactical, plus half a dozen others, etc.) make 'unlicensed' real steel copies of the MP-5.
http://www.atlanticfirearms.com/index.p ... gory_id=23
No trade dress issues.
This matter took over 4 years to settle, btw. Umarex actually bought the H&K trades back in early 2008....it just took this long to get a judge to agree to their trademark ownership.
http://www.airsoft-barracks.com/forums/ ... e-vfc-416/
Last edited by fallout11 on Thu Apr 11, 2013 9:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Echo1 Operator
- Echo1 Rep
- Posts: 778
- Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2010 6:35 pm
- Contact:
Re: No more HK!
You might want to inform GSG about that then.fallout11 wrote:Not entirely true E1Operator.
-
fallout11
- I love forums!
- Posts: 330
- Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:06 pm
- Location: Warner Robins, GA
- Contact:
Re: No more HK!
In 2010 GSG (run by former H&K employees) agreed with H&K to make minor changes and apparently resumed production (and importation).
http://www.impactguns.com/german-sport- ... 12587.aspx
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/1 ... sg-522-sd/
H&K has already tried this with virtually everyone who is anyone, and while most simply give up and move on, those that stick to their guns (such as GunBroker.com) typically win in the end.
http://www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/Hal ... K/HK.shtml
For instance, H&K's case against Tippmann Paintball for trade dress violations was dismissed by the court.
http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?pa ... SizeDisp=7
You can't get a patent on the way something looks, otherwise paper towel and toilet paper companies would be suing each other all the time.
Others simply go along and pay for the licensing through Umarex, as Airsoft Atlanta and Evike both did (complete with court enforced confidentiality agreements) in exchange for dropping the legal issue.
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/califo ... 28/460918/
Note that the judge gave the plaintiff an order to show cause why the case should not be dismissed promptly shortly before (same with several others I looked up), so Umarex's representatives were suddenly willing to "negotiate".
With intellectual property issues, its often about who blinks first and/or who has the biggest wallet (or balls).
So no, it's not the end of H&K airsoft guns. Just probably the winding down of cheaper, untrademarked H&K guns via US retailers. They're still being manufactured where they always have been, and can still be obtained, but it may be harder to get 'em without going to a Hong Kong seller.
http://www.impactguns.com/german-sport- ... 12587.aspx
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/1 ... sg-522-sd/
H&K has already tried this with virtually everyone who is anyone, and while most simply give up and move on, those that stick to their guns (such as GunBroker.com) typically win in the end.
http://www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/Hal ... K/HK.shtml
For instance, H&K's case against Tippmann Paintball for trade dress violations was dismissed by the court.
http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?pa ... SizeDisp=7
You can't get a patent on the way something looks, otherwise paper towel and toilet paper companies would be suing each other all the time.
Others simply go along and pay for the licensing through Umarex, as Airsoft Atlanta and Evike both did (complete with court enforced confidentiality agreements) in exchange for dropping the legal issue.
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/califo ... 28/460918/
Note that the judge gave the plaintiff an order to show cause why the case should not be dismissed promptly shortly before (same with several others I looked up), so Umarex's representatives were suddenly willing to "negotiate".
With intellectual property issues, its often about who blinks first and/or who has the biggest wallet (or balls).
So no, it's not the end of H&K airsoft guns. Just probably the winding down of cheaper, untrademarked H&K guns via US retailers. They're still being manufactured where they always have been, and can still be obtained, but it may be harder to get 'em without going to a Hong Kong seller.
