Tabberone's Hall of Shame - Monster Cable .

Home | Site Index | Disclaimer | Email Me!

Monster Cable
Hall Of Shame Member

Who is Noel Lee? He's a very rich, sorry ass S.O.B. who owns Monster Cable which is located in Brisbane, California. For some ungodly reason he believes, or pretends to believe, that because he owns Monster Cable he owns the rights to the word MONSTER anywhere in commerce. We kid you not. His trademark, received in 1979, is not just for the word MONSTER but that hasn't stopped him.
There are a few "monster" uses to which yet he hasn't laid claim so we will endeavor to give them to him now. Noel Lee has a monster ego but really is nothing more than a monstor moron. His attorney, a bottom feeder at LaRiviere, Grubman & Payne, LLP, is a monster butt-wipe while Noel Lee's kid (shown at right) is monster ugly.

Monster Cable, a Califonia-based company, has an ego to match it's name. It filed for trademarking Monster Cable in 1978. Now, it seems they believe they own the exclusive rights to the word Monster for everything. Perhaps the folks at Monster Cable have an inferiority complex? We're heard that the louder someone beats their chest the smaller their wee-wee. Monster must have a very small one. Perhaps Mrs Noel Lee can tell us?
If Monster Cable prevails, the Gila Monster will become just another lizard. The Monster under your bed will have to become an ogre. The Monster Monday Morning Hangover will have to be described in some benign manner unbefitting the agony.
And what about the COOKIE MONSTER, the MONSTER MASH, MONSTER TRUCKS and MONSTER.COM?
We feel this is another example of a company, aided by their IP lawyers, running amok in Trademark Land. Only an apple-brained moron, or an IP attorney, could draw any sort of connection between Monster Cable and a Monster Pizza, between Monster Cable and Snow Monsters, or between Monster Cable and the Disney movie, Monsters, Inc. But the bottom feeders at LaRiviere, Grubman & Payne, LLP do their duty, to client and paycheck, like the corporate lawyers they are.

Articles About Monster Cable

A Denver Post article December 22, 2004, about Monster Cable threatening to sue Snow Monsters, a Colorado-based company that uses cute critters to promote children's awareness of safe skiing practices. In this article it is pointed out that Monster Cable would be willing to let someone continue using MONSTER in return for $1,000 a year and a percentage of the gross. What? Can you say EXTORTION?
The San Francisco Chronical, November 10, 2004, reported Monster Cable has gone after the Discovery Channel for Monster Garage, the Boston Red Sox for their Monster Seats, and Monster.com, the on-line job-hunting site.
MonsterVintage.com deals in used, vintage clothing. They were attacked by Monster Cable and are trying to fight back.
Monster.biz fought back. On the webite, at http://www.madmartian.com/legal, there are numberous examples of the transgressions of Monster Cable, including the apology from Monster Cable to Monster.biz and the fact they paid his legal expenses after he refused to knuckle under.
Energizer Successfully Sues Monster Cable over false advertising. Monster Cable decided to sign a consent order rather than fight.
Monster Cable isn't the earliest Monster trademark. The following trademarks are registered with the USPTO before or near that of Monster Cable:

Cookie Monster, first used 1971, trademark filing 1972
MONSTER CEREALS, first used 1975, trademark filing 1975
MUFFIN MONSTER, first used 1973, trademark filing 1976
GUMBO MONSTER MUDDER, first used 1975, trademark filing 1976
SLUDGE MONSTER, trademark filing 1978 sweden
LOCH NESS MONSTER, trademark filing 6-30-78
GODZILLA KING OF THE MONSTERS, trademark filing 5-30-79
THE MONSTER (pizza), trademark filing 6-20-80
Maybe they should go after Monster Cable? A lot more people know about the COOKIE MONSTER, the Loch Ness Monster and Godzilla than Monster Cable. Monster cable is presented by LaRiviere, Grubman & Payne, LLP, another IP law firm that likes to pad its billing with ridiculous law suits. What's next? Going after the Munsters?
LaRiviere, Grubman & Payne, LLP has offices in Moneterey and San Jose, California, and Seattle, Washington. Their web site is located at http://www.lgpatlaw.com/home.html.
We don't know of any actions by Monster Cable on eBay to date (December 29, 2004). However, a quick search of eBay auctions shows 19,768 auctions with the name MONSTER in the title. That will keep their IP lawyers lying for a long time. And, it will keep NetEnforcers busy as well since Monster Cable employs these CyberCops to do their dirty business for them.

Update March 1, 2008
On Februay 21, 2008, Monster Cable ordered eBay aution # 280202374277 - NEW Monster iCable Connects iPod & Mac to Your Stereo!, terminated as an "unauthorized item". eBay gave monster@ipowner.net as the contact email address. IPOwner.net is owned by a "front company" in order to keep the real identity of the URL a secret. We wonder why would a reputable business want to keep their identity a secret? Oh. that's right. We're talking about Monster Cable, with whom the phrase reputable business would not be linked.
What on Earth would prompt Monster Cable to order terminated an eBay auction for an authentic Monster item? We don't know because the low-lifes at Monster Cable are not replying to the seller's emails for an explanation. And, eBay does not require the VeRO member explain or answer anything! Wow, eBay! Nice way to handle your sellers. No wonder they are leaving eBay for other venues.
So, Monster Cable? Did some idiot in your office take down the perfectly legitimate auction or was it some bottom feeder at LaRiviere, Grubman & Payne, LLP? Or, have you told NetEnforcers to begin shutting down auctions? Hmmmm? Inquiring minds want to know.
Surprise! On March 8, 2008, we received more information! Seems Monster Cable has a new bottom feeder source, the Boston law firm WolfBlock. Seems some idiot at WolfBlock, Christopher S Finnerty, called the auction seller. First, Christopher S Finnerty, of the Boston law firm WolfBlock, attempted to claim the auction was terminated because of "copying intellectual propertiy from the website". But the seller took his own pictures and took all data from the box! (We have a big issue with companies who claim their website information is copyright protected - see Image and Text Theft). Gee, Chris, what's next?
Undaunted, Christopher S Finnerty, of the Boston law firm WolfBlock, then claimed it was offering to ship "outside the US". Whoa, there Nellie. Chris, since when is it illegal for someone to ship someting outside the US, such as these cables, and the manufacturer have a say in it? Chris, don't go off claiming "parallel imports" because the key word there is "imports", not exports. Monster Cable has no legal standing to stop eBay auctions because the items might be shipped to Europe. It's up to Monster Cable UK, if there is one, to stop these items from being imported.
Seems that Christopher S Finnerty, of the Boston law firm WolfBlock, relented and emailed eBay to reinstate the auction on March 7, 2008. Hey, Chris? Why didn't you do your job properly in the first place and none of this would have taken place? Oh, that's right, you don't care about the rights of others, only that fat commission check coming in from Monster Cable. Do you kids know what you really do for a living?

Update April 16, 2008
And the hits just keep on a-comin'. Audioholics, located at www.audioholics.com, recently posted an article called Blue Jeans Cable Strikes Back - Response to Monster Cable, which appears to be a follow-up of an earlier Audioholics article, Monster Cable Sues Blue Jeans Cable. This letter has been picked up by OverLawyered.com as well as other outlets. It seems that Monster Cable is not held in high regard, and for good reason.
What we have here in Monster Cable is a perfect example of trademark abuse by the IP owner (or alleged IP owner in this case). Stronger civil penalties are needed against the companies, their officers, and their law firms.

Rebuttals
In an effort to provide a balanced view, we make the following offer to anyone who feels they have been wrongly accused on this web site.
If you, or your company, have been referenced on these pages, and you would like the chance to post a rebuttal, we will post your rebuttal (provided it is in good taste) so others can read it. The rebuttal must be submitted in a format that can easily be converted into HTML. We reserve the right to alter the rebuttal to make it more readable. However, we will not alter the content (unless there is offensive material to be removed). We also reserve the right to comment on any rebuttal received. Emails protesting the content of this web site may be treated as rebuttals by us at our discretion.
We made this offer a very long time ago and as of September 2008, only AnimieHot.com, in our Hall Of Shame, and Charlotte Perman (Sevenarts in our Hall Of Shame) have chosen to submit a formal rebuttal.