So after the Cafe Roubaix climb down, they are now suing epix tri wear.

Indeedy it’s on there FB page it’s not like these ppl have just started up, been around since 2008… 😯

Maybe I’m not down wit de Kids buts whats the bone of contention here?

I’m not aware of a Speccy Epix so what gives.

Well I guess Spesh have a department full of expensive lawyers that have to do something to kill the time.

Glad I don’t own a Specialized bike now to be honest. I’d be embarrassed to ride it in daylight.

Remember how Livestrong Oakley glasses were cheap when Lance finally came out as a cheat?

Maybe I should keep an eye on that Tarmac after all. Wouldn’t mind a third off that.

Amazing… you can only hope this was in the post last week and not something they decided to send out yesterday….

eh? Is this the epic logo they are on about?

http://www.specialized.com/gb/gb/bikes/mountain/epic

looks nothing like the epix one. Maybe someone should bring out a bike brand called Specialised 😉

Oh dear, definitely sounds like a case of an overly zealous legal department!

Hollow words.

Boss man took the opportunity to gain sympathy and muddy the water with the conterfeiting example there, Bazz.

Looks like Spesh are backing down.

yeeeeees…… reveals the whole anti-counterfeiting excuse to be utter balls

Muppets.

I guess their actions explain the sudden increase in Spesh bikes for sale in the classified section. I’d be well embarrassed to ride one of their bikes

As you’ve now said twice in one thread.

I wouldn’t be. Each to their own.

This would all be non-problem if Specialized did 2 things:

Innovate and create brand names – don’t just try and own weak generic terms. Lazy.

Run their legal team to the same “socially responsible” standards as they claim for the rest of their company.

As has already been said on the other matter, for trademark protection to work they have no choice other than to act on possible infringements. You may not like the system, but they’re not doing anything differently to any other trademark owner in the States or in this country.

Typical STW bunch of armchair CEOs and perfect little angels. Not the xmas school hols yet is it?. Well done Spech, dealt with an adult problem in an adult way.

What struck me is this statement, which is relevant to the regular ‘cheap carbon frame’ threads:

Sinyard explained the misguided action against the shop owner. “I still remember losing sleep about this guy who submitted a lawsuit to us and his face was completely destroyed and teeth knocked out,” he said.

“I felt sick about it and thought, how could our bike break? He sent the bike back and our engineers quickly realised it wasn’t ours, but you could hardly tell. Ever since then I’ve been rabid to protect the riders and our dealers who are selling the product.”

Updated article on road.cc now:
http://road.cc/content/news/101165-specialized-drops-new-trademark-case-against-clothing-firm-epix

with the full text that Mike Sinyard posted on the company Facebook page.

they’re not doing anything differently to any other trademark owner in the States or in this country.

Mike Sinyard said they’ll be less aggressive in this area so there’s clearly some choice.

Yeah I just saw that. They’ll have a team of inhouse legals or outsourced firm whose sole remit is to look out for and send notices to potential infringers. Presumably an extra layer of vetting will now be added to that process!

I’ve just bought a Myka for the wife for Xmas… I have no issues at all with her being seen out in daylight on it. LOL.

Some people have too many morals for their own good on STW.

It does baffle me how it all STWers are such moral living, vegan eating, super cool hybrid eco warrior single speeder riders, however I see so few skinny rake riding SS riders on the trails.

The word “sanctimonious” comes to mind so so often on STW it’s hysterical.

More explanation on their FB page

https://www.facebook.com/specializedbicycles

The IP protection will almost certainly be handled by an external company, who probably aren’t experts in bicycles, so can’t really tell if something is a genuine rip off, or just a similar name. Its probably packaged up as a service. i.e. We’ll trademark your brand and then protect it for you. They should really be writing to Specialized before they do anything, and Specialized should really be reading the letters carefully….

As I suspect they now will be! Sinyard comes across very well, and from what I know of their HQ, it’s a really chilled place to work, certainly not as draconian as might be expected from all this.

Maybe someone should bring out a bike brand called Specialised

Years ago when I was a kid, my bike got stolen and the insurance company wanted to know the exact spelling of the Make of the bike.

I think the value of the cheque they sent me might have been significantly lower if I had given the wrong spelling 🙂

The word “sanctimonious” comes to mind so so often on STW it’s hysterical.

Yep! As mentioned in another thread on this, I wonder how many of these “outraged” folks are typing their outrage on devices made by companies with an equally, if not more, over-zealous approach to brand protection.

Sinyard explained the misguided action against the shop owner. “I still remember losing sleep about this guy who submitted a lawsuit to us and his face was completely destroyed and teeth knocked out,” he said.

“I felt sick about it and thought, how could our bike break? He sent the bike back and our engineers quickly realised it wasn’t ours, but you could hardly tell. Ever since then I’ve been rabid to protect the riders and our dealers who are selling the product.”

This all makes a lot more sense now. You gotta see his point.
OK, they’ve been heavy handed of late, but they’ve sorted it properly and publicly.

I can see his point, and I believe he did have sleepless nights about it after the guy wrecked his shoulder. I still think counterfeit bikes is a totally different thing from over zealous “defense” of trademarks.

yep rip off frames is different to a cup of tea that somebody may have thought came from a town in France….

I can see his point, and I believe he did have sleepless nights about it after the guy wrecked his shoulder. I still think counterfeit bikes is a totally different thing from over zealous “defense” of trademarks.

Which they’ve admitted was a mistake, apologised for and sorted out amicably.

I’ve just read Mike Sinyards whole post on Facebook and seen the pics of the broken “Specialized Tarmac” and I can totally 100% see where he’s coming from, and to be honest, I’d rather he was over zealous than let stuff like that slip through. After all, I have to sell, assemble and support bikes like that.

I read the FB page this morning as well. The pictures are frightening. I must say, Mike Sinyard came across as far more genuine there than he did on that cringe worthy video with Dan.

Specialized do have a history of excessive legal might. Who else could gain a patent on a technology that they didn’t invent and had been in open use for many years before they applied for it?

Anyway, whether change is driven by morals or a conscience or by worry about the impact of public opinion on his bottom line, if the change happens, that can only be a good thing.

Anyone can make a mistake, the true measure of the man is how they deal with it.

Anyone can make a mistake, the true measure of the man is how they deal with it.

That’s very true. I think they’ve dealt with it well.

They’ve made a good start, I’m tempted to wait until the dust settles and then make up my mind.

Can’t stand the tossbags. I hope they lose a lot of business.
disclaimer; this is posted without outrage or emotion. They are just a company of arseholes.

this guy who submitted a lawsuit to us and his face was completely destroyed and teeth knocked out,

He won’t be going into the legal office at spesh again, eh?

The company making ‘Cockstopper’ chastity belts are getting worried I bet… 😆

They are just a company of arseholes.

Based on…?

I read the response blaming it on crashes and teeth as a clear bit of spin though YMMV.

I accept totally why they don’t want people buying fake Specialized parts that aren’t up to scratch.

I don’t believe that that was the motivation behind chasing companies like Cafe Roubaix, Epix or the many other examples that have been sited many times. Those were chased for commercial reasons, not safety.

Well played by Spesh (from a corporate damage limitation POV) and hopefully it will change their approach to smaller companies but I don’t accept their excuse. They got big and greedy and have now realised that that has a price and are spinning their way out.

“I felt sick about it and thought, how could our bike break? He sent the bike back and our engineers quickly realised it wasn’t ours, but you could hardly tell. Ever since then I’ve been rabid to protect the riders and our dealers who are selling the product.”

I’d be really interested to see what response they gave the guy who raised the lawsuit. I suspect it wasn’t “here’s a proper Specialized frame as a replacement”

I have a Spesh, my wife has a Spesh, happy with them both as bikes. They replaced my rear wheel under warranty with no dramas, that’s what you get with a big multinational brand. I’ll keep riding their bikes, I’ll also ride my Kona, Cannondale and my Dialled.
It’s easy to see why they’re so sharp on protecting their brand, it’s what their business is built on. Perhaps some common sense and more investigation from their legal dept. before threatening letters are sent would be a positive step forward.

This is the same as the RedBull / Redwell Brewery incident a few months ago.

just heard there’s a rumoured product recall on bottom brackets due to much back pedaling…..think ceramic bearing may be required…