Lawsuit: Monster Cable Thinks You Might Confuse Mini-Golf With Overpriced Cables

Pricey cable-maker Monster is worried you might confuse a haunted house-themed mini-golf course with its popular products, so they’re suing.

From News 10:

Monster Cable Products of Brisbane filed suit in Sacramento federal court this week against the owners of Monster Mini Golf in Rancho Cordova along with the Rhode Island woman who sells Monster Mini Golf franchises.

In its trademark infringement suit, Monster Cable claims the miniature golf courses “are likely to cause confusion.”

Cindy Stoeckle, who with her husband Chris opened the Rancho Cordova location in March, was shocked when News10 told her about the lawsuit.

“What, are they not making money and they have to make some money off the little guys?” she asked.

The company’s founder, Christina Vitagliano of Providence, Rhode Island, said she’s been fighting with Monster Cable since she applied for her trademark in 2006. She said her attorney will defend the Stoeckles.

Monster Cable just loves to sue people! According to News 10 they sued Disney for Monsters, INC, the Boston Red Sox for “Monster Seats” on the big green monster, and is currently trying to keep them from calling the concession stand “Monster Concessions.”

Rancho Cordova Mini Golf Course Hit with “Monster” Lawsuit [News 10]

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. chrylis says:

    So is the manufacturer claiming that they’re the only real monsters out there?

  2. Wubbytoes says:

    What the hell, is no one allowed to use the word “monster” for anything anymore?

  3. LetMeGetTheManager says:

    Watch out Monster.com…YOU’RE NEXT!

  4. weakdome says:

    have they sued Monster.com, the job site?

    • Anonymous says:

      @weakdome:
      Many companies license out their trademarks so other companies can use them. That’s why Monster.com has a link to MonsterCable.com. That was part of the agreement.

  5. LetMeGetTheManager says:

    @weakdome:

    Great minds think alike.

  6. weakdome says:

    damn LetMeGetTheManager, your 2:42 happened before my 2:42 :(

  7. Nicholas_schaulsohn says:

    Monster cables are such a ****ing joke.

  8. Hmmm…

    1) Monster Cable does not understand the “likelihood of confusion” aspect of trademark law.

    2) Monster Cable has lawyers that have WAY too much time on their hands.

    3) Monster cable thinks they own the word “monster” a generic term that probably doesn’t even merit protection.

    4) Someone at Monster is competing to be even more insane than the CEO of Overstock.com

    • Anonymous says:

      @twophrasebark:
      Monster is a trademarked work just like Amazon, Apple, and Virgin. All those companies go to court to protect their trademarks. Monster Cable also has lines in sporting goods, gaming, and sporting venues. Monster Mini-Golf is also trying to trademark “Monster” even though its already taken.

  9. PlanetExpressdelivery says:

    When did Monster Cables hire Leo Stoller?

  10. IrisMR says:

    I guess they’ll have to sue many horror movies too. Damn, they might think these monsters are CABLES!

  11. foxbat2500 says:

    I will never buy anything from Monster cables…never!

  12. Elvisisdead says:

    Well, good luck trying to serve a subpoena under my daughter’s bed.

  13. Dakine says:

    as far as their cables go, I’ve had a few different types, including a component video cable that took the force of three men to push into the connector, and getting it back out, forget it. There’s no getting it back out.

    I always go with the cheaper brands now that still make cables designed for human use.

  14. Little Jimmy: “Daddy, there’s a monster in the closet.”
    Dad: “Shh- no don’t call it that. It’s a ghoul or a vampire, but we don’t want to get sued, now do we Jimmy?”

  15. donkeyjote says:

    I foresee some judicial smackdown-ing in monster’s future.

  16. rmz says:

    Now if only these mini-golf proprietors had previously been lawyers who now miss the process of ligitation…

  17. missdona says:

    Cookie Monster better retain an attorney.

  18. fostina1 says:

    i often get them confused with monster coat hangers

  19. dry-roasted-peanuts says:

    They try to sue Fred Schneider and I’ll be pissed:

  20. backbroken says:

    @fostina1: Got me lol at that one!

  21. winstonthorne says:

    So I guess we’ll never see a special edition DVD release of “Aaah! Real Monsters.” 90′s kids everywhere weep.

  22. EE2000 says:

    Monster Energy Drink, next?

  23. graymulligan says:

    You would think that at some point Monster Cable would decide that there really isn’t a point in all these lawsuits other than to make them look silly.

    “any publicity is good publicity” <–Monster’s motto.

  24. APFPilot says:

    I am very tempted to write them to tell them that because of stupid stuff like this I will NEVER purchase their products.

  25. lightaugust says:

    You clearly don’t understand how confused I get everytime I try to hook my golf clubs up to my stereo.

  26. smallestmills says:

    @Elvisisdead:

    lolz

  27. geeky_reader says:

    What about Monster Energy? That seems much more likely to confuse people (but we know it wouldn’t at all) than a company with “Monster” and “Mini Golf” in its name.

  28. evslin says:

    @EE2000: I totally get that mixed up every time I see a Monster Energy Drink in the cooler at the gas station. Who knew gas stations sold a/v cables!!

  29. strangeffect says:

    AMC Monstervision – going down and going down HARD

  30. GrandizerGo says:

    What a tool this company is…
    Makes me glad I have NEVER brought a single thing from them…
    Damn this makes me want to go to GoDaddy and register all the names I can think of with the word Monster in it… For shits and grins, add the word cable or something close to it just to fuck with them.

    Webster should sue them for using one of their words in their dictionary…

  31. Scotus says:

    I can see why Monster Cable would sue the mini-golf place, because they’re a small, defenseless business.

    And I guess I can understand why they’d sue the Red Sox, because the Red Sox should be sued as often as possible, just on general principle.

    But filing a lawsuit against Disney? One of the companies that pioneered the concept of frivolous trademark lawsuits? That just seems suicidal.

  32. chenry says:

    Have they sued monster.ca yet?

  33. Elvisisdead says:

    You know, commenters should bill out at $250/hour to Monster Cable. This is what their attorneys do.

  34. gqcarrick says:

    Why doesn’t Monster.com file a lawsuit against Monster Cable?

  35. GrandizerGo says:

    But in their defense, I did watch Monsters Inc. on cable!

    FTW!!!

  36. seamer says:

    Monster Cables vs Monster Trucks.

    Like to see that.

  37. silencedotcom says:

    I don’t see how there can be any confusion, unless Monster Mini-Golf is an overpriced rip-off.

  38. Coder4Life says:

    Umm.. this is like patenting the word “BIRD”. You can’t use the word BIRD or we are going to sue you.

    I bet 10% of their revenues from their heavy cable markup is probably for their legal dept. to sue it’s own customers.

    Thanks for bying this Monster cable for your Monster Mini Golf location, and we are going to sue you from the fees we collected from you b/ you have the word “MONSTER’ in your name.

  39. GrandizerGo says:

    Hmmm, last time I went to a Monster Truck rally, I didn’t see suits running around in front of Bigfoot trying to hand deliver a summons to court.
    And I didn’t see Bigfoot the Sasquatchs’ lawyers looking to sue the Bigfoot Monster truck, Sasquatch FTW!!

    History channel next?? Monster Quest???

  40. jasezero says:

    They would probably sue a company called Monster Crap if it existed. But that, probably would get confusing…

  41. JDAC says:

    For some reason, there’s no press release at monstercable.com:

    Press Search Results for: monster mini golf

    No Results Found. Please try your search again.

  42. simplegreen says:

    Their market share is going to crap, informed consumers won’t buy their products and their grabbing for as much as they can before the bottom. Good riddance.

  43. SonicMan says:

    @jasezero: Well, they would have a case there. It would be easy to confuse there cables with crap.

  44. blackmage439 says:

    Ah, yes the lawsuit. The greatest tool of a fledgling business. Just like the Starbucks’ “we copyrighted ‘double-shot’” lawsuits against small-time coffee shops, this one will fail, too.

    The overglorified and overpriced shielded coat hangers have run their course. Only fools, the ignorant, and the bribed (see: concert halls, stadiums, theaters, etc.) would even think of purchasing a Monster cable now.

  45. Starfury says:

    Maybe it’s time I start a small LLC and use Monster in the name of the business.

  46. bobpence says:

    This is giving me a monster headache. Oops, time to get out the checkbook!

    My suggestion: Golem Mini Golf. Yeah, Judaism might want to sue, but where are they going to get a lawyer?

  47. Uriel says:

    heh, that’s kinda like when Spike Lee sued “Spike”, the television channel. The judge threw that one out too.

  48. timmus says:

    Hell loses trademark lawsuit
    HELL (AP) — The Hell-based realm of Hades lost an appeal today against Monster Cable Products of Brisbane, California, who filed a cease and desist order against the use of the word “monster”. The loss is rare for Hell, which acquires a steady stream of OEM souls as well as involuntary servitude from breach of blood contracts.

    A representative for Hell’s 4100 demons, ghouls, and foreign workers called Monster Cables a “patent troll” that uses the courts as a way to induce settlements. Most companies end up settling rather than go through the hassle of fighting Monster in court.

    Satan, leader of Hell, said his organization was disappointed with the outcome of its legal battle. “We’re disappointed but we respect the appeals court’s decision. We do have it on good authority that we will have our turn against the members of this company and their legal staff after their mortal lives pass, and hence we shall bide our time.”

    Said a spokesman for Monster Cables, “Our company has been concerned for some time about Best Buy and Circuit City being consumer hell while also selling Monster Cables. There was too much opportunity here for brand confusion.”

    In a recent case involving the International Dairy Foods Association, a federal court in Wisconsin also sided in favor of Monster, finding that “monster” and “milk” both shared the letter M.

  49. crabbyman6 says:

    Maybe these two should call this guy:[gizmodo.com] and get him to draft a letter to monster.

  50. smirky says:

    @crabbyman6: Right on…they need to contact Kurt Denke because he is “unitimidated by litigation.” and he sometimes rather misses it.

  51. Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg says:

    @silencedotcom: I don’t see how there can be any confusion, unless Monster Mini-Golf is an overpriced rip-off.

    The first comment that made me laugh out loud. Well played, sir.

  52. Saboth says:

    “man, I’ve got to take a monster dump.”
    “that’s a suin’”
    “damit.”

  53. Crymson_77 says:

    God…as if I didn’t have enough reason not to give them my money…

  54. @weakdome:

    have they sued Monster.com, the job site?

    To my understanding, Monster.com actually pays royalties on the Monster name to Monster Cable.

  55. ARPRINCE says:

    @weakdome: MONSTER CABLES have sued MONSTER.COM and I believe the job site negotiated with Monster Cables. Under their agreement, Monster.com will have a link to the monster cable site on their web page. I believe they pay royalites too for the monster brand.

    If you go to Monster.com and scroll down to the bottom of the main web page, you will see the link.

  56. Fivetop says:

    Maybe they can sue Comcast for being known as the “cable” company.

  57. @silencedotcom:

    I don’t see how there can be any confusion, unless Monster Mini-Golf is an overpriced rip-off.

    This quote is the essence of win.

  58. Nighthawke says:

    News from Blue Jeans Cables… Their response seems to have silenced monster’s ambulance chasers for now. I doubt that they will get stupid.
    [www.bluejeanscable.com]

  59. Throtex says:

    @Coder4Life: Trademark … you don’t patent words. You don’t even copyright an individual word.

    @InfiniTrent: That can’t be right.

  60. Perhaps these folks should file to have Monster Cables trademark stripped, seeing as “Monster” is a generic word used for centuries before Monster Cables every came along.

    Under trademark law the only way that Monster could win against these folks was if these folks were selling crappy overpriced Monster-like speakers cables, seeing as the industries are not even closely related any competent (i use this term loosely) judge will dismiss the case with prejudice. I think Monster is suing to get media attention. Of course that still doesn’t help them sell crappy speakers cables if you ask me.

    Many electronics and even home improvement stores sell reels of 10 gauge wire (looks like GIANT paired electric cord) that works as good as or better than MONSTER (crapppy) cables. Heck even category 5 network cabling works better as speaker wire than MONSTER (sucky) speaker cables.

  61. parad0x360 says:

    @weakdome: Yes they did sue Monster.com and they settled out of court. Now Monster.com pays them a license fee and also has some warning on their site that says they arent monster cables.

  62. Toof_75_75 says:

    Fucking Monster(s)…Cable.

  63. Toof_75_75 says:

    @parad0x360:
    Are you kidding?! That’s ridiculous!

  64. orielbean says:

    Need a loser-pays system for this frivolity.

  65. 10intheCrunch says:

    @timmus: Clapclapclapclap.

    What other common ideas can we copyright?

  66. celticgina says:

    ok, this is really going to suck at Halloween.

    What will EVERY elementary school party do without playing
    “THE MONSTER MASH”????

  67. BMRFILE says:

    To counter this, there should be a boycott on Monster Cable products. It’s been know that their products are NOT superior but a ridiculous mark-up on the same damn cables you get anywhere else, or if you’re techno-saavy, you can make the same cables for much less.

    Never buy Monster Cables. Use the extra money on something else.

  68. QuantumRiff says:

    Monster cables Vs. Monster energy drinks?

    Both are overpriced, and deliver energy…

  69. valthun says:

    monster cable did sue monster.com and they settled. The settlement is that monster.com has to provide a link to monster cable. Check the bottom of monster.com for proof. However monster cable does not have to provide a link back to monster.com that company needs to go down. They also shut down a used clothing store that used the Monster name in their company too.

  70. D-Bo says:

    WTF is wrong with the leadership at Monster Cable?

  71. TMMadman says:

    My favorite is Monster Cable suing the Chicago Bears for using the phrase Monsters of the Midway. The phrase was originally coined during the 40′s and experienced a resurgance during the 85 season.

    Monster cable pretty much sues everyone who uses the word monster in their name.

  72. Mr_D says:

    @celticgina: I hear they’re going to have Bobby Pickett’s corpse disinterred.

    It’s kind of like Weekend at Bernie’s, only with lawyers.

  73. mcnerd85 says:

    Have they sued the energy drinks? How are they really getting away with any of this? At what point is someone just going to say ‘You’re not allowed to sue anymore, stop being a whiny little bitch.’

  74. Breach says:

    Shit cables and shittier company, had they bothered to come up with an original name that someone else emulates to a ridiculous degree, I could see it. But “monster” is a generic word, just get over it or rename your business to something unique.

  75. Gawg says:

    Hey Monster Cable, bite my Monster…

  76. latemodel says:

    Monster cable has a full time lawyer with NOTHING to do other than try to extort/shakedown a little money from some companies. I want to know the outcome of this story from April[consumerist.com]

  77. kingofmars says:

    Didn’t Rambus start suing everybody in sight just before it went under? I remember their RAM never really lived up to their promises, so they just sued all the other RAM manufactures. My point is that maybe over priced Monster is showing signs of going under.

  78. lightaugust says:

    I heard they sued Charlize Theron out of her Oscar, too.

  79. LynxWinters says:

    Well, I guess my horror-movie-themed furniture idea is out the window.

    Monster Tables, we hardly knew ye.

  80. Kev26 says:

    Those f-ing morons at Monster Cable have nothing better to do then sue it seems. I was a customer of Monster Hosting (webhosting company) and guess what, sued as well and had to change their name because they couldn’t afford the lawsuit. Monster Cable can suck my monster balls. Go ahead sue me for them.

  81. Why did monster.com settle? It’s not like people would confuse the two. All the companies using the word really need to get together and get the monster trademark removed. How do you trademark a english word anyway

  82. BuddyGuyMontag says:

    @LynxWinters: Are you kidding me? We just re-animated Eight Belles as part of our propetiary Equi-Zombie process at Monster Stables!

  83. I would understand is monster cables was trademarked but not the word monster

  84. urban_ninjya says:

    Geez, did they just sue anything that googles up a “Monster”

    I think we need to raise the fees for corporations to bring lawsuits to courts. (And keep the price low for consumers) This is pretty ridiculous.

  85. TangDrinker says:

    Does Monster Magnet have to pay royalties to them now? Or do they just have to agree to use their crappy cables while on tour?

    According to the USPTO site, there are 885 live TM records with the term “monster” in them, so their lawyers will be busy for a while.

  86. Buran says:

    How can they win any of these lawsuits considering a golf company, a job search site, and a used-clothing shop are not in the same business as a cable maker?

    Obligatory Monster “fuck you” comment: I bought the switchbox and HDMI cables to add a PS3 to my TiVo Series 3/HDTV setup from monoprice.com. I saved a ton of money, too.

  87. I’m confused! You mean the monsters I watch on cable channels aren’t the same thing as those wires that come out of the back of my speakers? Here I was trying to get more monster cable by watching AMC when I could have gone to Best Buy and bought more of these wires instead. No wonder this marvelous vendor of overpriced lengths of copper needs to sue everyone. Baffling!

    Seriously, this sort of thing is precisely why we need laws that _severely_ punish litigants (and more importantly their attorneys) who launch completely frivolous lawsuits. Oh wait, in order to pass such common sense legislation, we’d have to rely on a bunch of… former trial lawyers.

  88. cortana says:

    It’s obvious. Someone needs to start a WISP named. Monster Wireless.

  89. Ass_Cobra says:

    This is a variant of proposition 100 women lewdly school and 1 of them is bound to say yes.

    They figure if they send out some stupid C&D letter to anyone at all remotely using Monster that many of them will just pay up and move along. I can’t find any record of successful litigation and that should tell you something given the volume. Monster basically has a retained body shop that cranks out all this tripe and hopes to hit a few times.

    [www.lgpatlaw.com]

    If you actually took these jokes to litigation I can’t imagine that they would have the expertise necessary to see it through. As was pointed out in the very well penned response by Mr. Denke these lawyers are acting in bad faith and unethically. Perhaps bringing this to the attention of the California State Bar Association would at least make Monster’s counsel consider the course of action it takes.

    I’d check this out:

    [www.bluejeanscable.com]

    It’s great to see a third year get his ass handed to him by an experienced litigator.

  90. drjayphd says:

    @GrandizerGo: …I already did my mother. (wait, wrong thread?)

  91. Chadarius says:

    I think they should sue Cookie Monster and the Gila Monster lizard, Wizards of the Coast for producing the Moster Manual for Dungeons and Dragons. They should also sue whoever owns the rights to “The Munsters” TV show as well. That is way too close to Monster too. There was also a cartoon back in the day called Monster Squad, and Scooby-Doo says “Ronster!” a lot so Hanna Barbara should also be sued.

    I think we should all start adding Monster to everything we put on the Internet so that Monster Cables can’t protect their trademark properly and goes out of business due to legal fees.

  92. TMurphy says:

    I wonder what the chances are that the company just gives these lawyers free reign to find creative ways to ring up more fees… I could understand an underhanded company suing small companies, but with their suits against big companies even a litigation-happy CEO should know there’s a limit to the usefulness of the hit-and-run C&D.

    I say that blue jeans cables guy should offer to defend anyone Monster cables tries to sue. I should hope he would never have to enter a courtroom to get this to end.

  93. mr.dandy says:

    [www.monstercable.com]
    Go there and tell them what you think of their legal shennanigans!

  94. ClankBoomSteam says:

    Hey, Monster Cable Products:

    (ahem.)

    YOU CAN’T TRADEMARK A WORD IN COMMON USAGE.

    LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN, IN CASE IT WAS SOMEHOW UNCLEAR:

    You CANNOT TRADEMARK a word that is in COMMON USAGE.

    If you had made up the word, we could talk. If you were trademarking a specific “Monster” logo, no problem. But there are literally thousands of instances of companies using the word “monster” for business purposes from decades before your company even existed. Ergo, each and every one of your bullying, frivolous lawsuits is flat-out invalid.

    Personally, I hope the Jim Henson people sue Monster Cable into the ground for infringing on their beloved “Cookie Monster” character (a suit that would have just as much validity as any number of those you have filed). Then, I hope every company that has ever used the word “cable” in their name comes along and pulverizes you and your shitty products, sows your fields with salt and marches off into the distance with all your money.

    Failing all that, I’ll simply avoid purchasing any and all Monster Cable products, in perpetuity, and I’ll do my best to assure that my family and friends do the same. You’re scum, Monster. Die in a fire.

  95. puddleglum411 says:

    I’m trying to imagine someone leaving their house intent on buying cables and winding up playing mini-golf due to brand confusion.

    Monster Cables seem to think that they are allow to stop people from using the word monster in it’s original etymological sense.

  96. Ass_Cobra says:

    After reading a little more about this company, not only are they shitty engineers they have a legal mind the size of a pea running the show.

    [www.monstergreed.com]

    Apparently Disney was represented by Quinn Emanuel and those dudes don’t play. They have like a 95% win rate when something goes to judgement.

  97. SacraBos says:

    @Al Czerviks Ride: Now it’s: Daddy, I’m scared of the Monster lawyer in the closet.

    At least Microsoft isn’t quite as bad as suing anyone that touts their products as “Windows”.

  98. citybuddha says:

    So, if there IS a monster in your pants does that mean they will give you a sub peona? Or they just have you by the balls.

  99. se7a7n7 says:

    I’ve got a 1 eyed monster they can try to sue.

  100. m4ximusprim3 says:

    Grr. Now I’ll never get my new children’s book published.

    Monster Fables was going to make me rich.

  101. WraithSama says:

    Monster Cable’s legal team are breaking their necks in their desperate, frantic bid to drag their company’s name through the mud as much as possible. I will not, ever, buy any prodcut from their company.

  102. DataRaider says:

    @InfiniTrent:

    Actually, Monster Cables sued them and they settled.

    This article is actually about Monster suing about Monster House, but at the bottom it mentions the lawsuit.

    [www.sfgate.com]

  103. jdmba says:

    Come on people … Where have we seen this over and over. Dying company (or industry … ahem – RIAA) resorts to litigation instead of innovation.

    These guys are to cables what Airborne is to cold prevention (you did get your Airborne class action notice, right)? My super ultra favorite part of the story which showed that they were darned close to the level of a wire hanger, pointed out that one main consideration is that Monster came with a warranty, and a wire hanger didn’t; so if the wire hanger broke, you would have to go out and get another wire hanger :) Loves it.

  104. dragonfire81 says:

    That mini golf operator should fight this at every turn because she there is no reason she should not legally be allowed to use the word Monster.

  105. elephantattack says:

    @dry-roasted-peanuts: (video)

    WTF?!

  106. rlee says:

    My first thought was that once they’d been duly swatted by the court for such a frivolous suit against Disney, the
    lawyers would be exposing themselves to possible sanctions by keeping it up. But, alas, apparently Disney settled!?!?

  107. macinjosh says:

    Reminds me of Nissan vs. Nissan: [en.wikipedia.org]

  108. SmitaNepos says:

    Any company that is still in the b&m video rental business is already
    bankrupt, and just hasn’t figured it out. There is absolutely nothing they
    can do to stop the ship from sinking. Maybe Hollywood figured it out and
    just said screw it. Customers will get pissed off but at least we’ll get a
    bit more of their money before we jump ship.

  109. strangeffect says:

    @se7a7n7: fantasmonious

  110. steve says:

    I think I know what the confusion is. I went into a Monster Mini-Golf intending to play and walked out 2 minutes later. What a craphole- I don’t think any effort went into the construction of that golf course, virtually every hole was an L-shaped path with a wooden wedge or two. There was one or two decoration “monsters”. Monster cable wants have a monopoly on crap, and Monster Golf is interfering with it.

  111. BensAngel says:

    Fuck Monster Cable.

    I have just registered boycottmonstercable.com and boycottmonstercable.org.

    Any hosts or web designers out there that want to join my bandwagon?

  112. kyle4 says:

    These people too? Have we gotten an update on that lawyer they sued who was going to take their asses to the wall?

    Monster Cable is a joke. I can’t believe they actually sued Disney over a movie title.

  113. Wow, sueing a minature golf company. A company mind you that has nothing what so ever to do with crappy cables.

  114. crankymediaguy says:

    They should sue anyone who uses the phrase “overpriced piece of shit” since it clearly refers to their products.

  115. Scatter says:

    There’s a Monster mini golf location in my area and I’ve always thought that their logo always reminded me of Monster energy drinks. I never even thought of the cable company.

  116. cerbie says:

    @kingofmars: actually, that really was the fault of the manufacturers, not wanting to give Rambus control or royalties. But, Rambus made some bad decisions, didn’t try to spin the PR, and the no-DDR deal with Intel probably hurt them more than RDRAM helped them. They also hardly went under, and it took three years for a non-Rambus system to catch up on main memory performance (850E until the 865/875/848). Rambus had real gripes, made good technology, and are a pure IP company.

    Monster cable has a trademark based on a retail product for connecting electronic devices over small distances. WTH does a mini golf park have to do with that? When Monster loses, can they sued for suing when they knew they were wrong as a predatory tactic?

  117. darkryd says:

    And why aren’t they going after “Monster.com” as well?

    Or are they too afraid to take on a company that can actually afford to defend itself in court?

  118. evilinkblot says:

    Just yesterday I had a Monster energy drink and was pissed it didn’t include crappy TV cables

  119. gover57 says:

    quick, lets start up a music production company called Monster Label under the umbrella of one of the big wig redcord labels, and we’d have unlimited money to fight them in court…

  120. vladthepaler says:

    Gosh, why would someone want to name a mini-golf chain after an overpriced cable? Won’t they lose all their customers to Store Brand Mini Golf, which is just as good and much cheaper?

  121. ericblitzen says:

    I live literally miles from the Monster Mini Golf in question here, and ironically it’s logo looks suspiciously like the Monster Energy Drink logo.

  122. lestat730 says:

    I still don’t think a word like monster should be able to be owned by anyone…

  123. jjeeff says:

    @weakdome: I believe monster.com was sued. Check out the bottom of monster.com’s website – they were forced to put a link to monster cable!

  124. emptytiger says:

    Monster mini Golf is just a nice inexpensive place to take your family. I went to one on the east coast. I did’t see any wires pop out to try to scare me.

  125. Throtex says:

    @ClankBoomSteam: Why did you bold an incorrect statement of the law?

    You CAN TRADEMARK a word that is in COMMON USAGE.

    You’re not going to be able to enforce “Monster” as a trademark if your product is, uhm, monsters (because that’s a generic usage). But use it to sell cables, and you’ve got something (that’s an arbitrary mark in Monster’s case, a fairly strong mark actually). And there’s no problem with me coming in and selling, say, Monster motorcycles. That’s only a problem with well-known marks, and you can see that in action if you tried selling Coca Cola hula hoops.

    [www.bitlaw.com] <- a trademark primer for ya.

  126. TechnoDestructo says:

    The message I sent via Monster Cable’s comment form:
    “Subject: (other)
    Product Name: Mini-golf
    I don’t understand…where do I go to find out where to play miniature golf and what the hours are. I came to this site and I was totally confused.

    Can you help me out here?
    “Roneil Narayan
    to me

    show details 5:14 PM (2 hours ago)

    Reply

    Hello Ian,

    Thank you for taking time to contact Monster Cable E-mail Customer Support.

    Unfortunately Monster Cable Products, Inc. is a manufacturer for superior home theater audio/video accessories and Surge Suppressors. You might have entered this website in an error. We apologize for this and please refine the search in your area for the Mini Golf.

    Feel free to contact Monster Cable Products Customer Support on 1 877 800 8989 if you need any assistance with the Products.

    Monsterously!!

    Technical Services
    877-800-8989
    MONSTER CABLE PRODUCTS, INC.”

    The reply I received:

  127. Anonymous says:

    Public Proposal to Monster Mini Golf

    The internet has changed how companies like us can defend our brand and prevent the dilution of our trademarks by those who choose to infringe on them. By appealing to consumers’ emotions using mis-information and distorted truths has created a different dynamic to patent and trademark protection. The sentiment of our customers wins over our rights to protect the brand. Monster Mini Golf is attempting to trademark “Monster”, Monster Mini Golf, and Monster Entertainment in areas that we already own, so we had no choice to file a lawsuit, or otherwise suffer dilution of our mark and potential loss of the mark itself.

    It’s costly to sue anyone, no one wants to do it. We have made many attempts to avoid this lawsuit by offering a simple and low cost license agreement that would allow us to protect our trademarks that we already own, and allow Monster Mini Golf to use the name for their business. They refused each time.

    Through their attempts to disparage us as a greedy corporate bully, we have been wrongly portrayed as a company focused on squashing small business, when the opposite is true. We are also a small business, and have survived for 30 years. This lawsuit admittedly has caused so much misguided ill will amongst our customers, that we have no choice but to give up on it, and along with it our rights to have a judge or jury decide this conflict.

    So we are publicly declaring;

    1) Monster has filed papers with the Federal Court to dismiss the lawsuit against Monster Mini Golf as of Friday, December 12, 2009. We will let the trademark office decide when they review their trademark application.

    2) Monster will still owns the trademarks granted by the trademark office for which we offer a license for the use of them to Monster Mini Golf for a minimal royalty of $100 per month per franchise. Monster (us) will donate and match the royalty proceeds to the following charities that Monster has supported.

    The Elf foundation; Creating Rooms of Magic:
    http://www.elfsystems.org/partners.html

    Seg4Vets: Segways for disabled veterans

    http://www.draft.cc/draft3/Donations/Benefactors/tabid/113/Default.aspx

    Monster Mini Golf will then have the ability to use and franchise the “monster” trademark and continue with their business, and we will have continued protection. This will save thousands of dollars in attorneys’ fees and the court’s time. Everyone wins.

    This lawsuit was never about the money, our requests were always minimal. It’s about the protection of our trademarks. It’s unfortunate for anyone who owns a trademark or patent, that the wrongful and disparaging remarks of a few can inhibit companies like ours from pursuing our right to legal process.

    In this country, lawsuits are a method to resolve differences of opinion. The courts resolve disputes thousands of time each day. It is not always the bad guy suing the good guy. It’s asking the court to hear the both sides and make a decision. A judge or a jury determines ones right to trademark ownership. We believe that we would win this case, or we never would have filed it. This is far from a frivolous lawsuit, we have the prior trademarks to prove it.

    For all of those who have supported us during this attack on our integrity, we thank you for your support. We apologize to everyone who may have been affected by our lawsuit with Monster Mini-Golf. We apologize to our loyal customers who may have been negatively impacted and to our retailers whose customers may have been affected by mis-information. We are sorry for all of the ill-will that has been generated on both sides.

    For 30 years, we have prided ourselves on making the highest performance products in everything that we do. We have millions of happy customers. With economic conditions as they are, we need to focus on our core business. We will just keep producing the great high quality products for all to enjoy and hopefully Monster Mini Golf will get what they want one way or the other.

    Thanks for lending your ear,

    Noel Lee

    The Head Monster

    Founder and Owner of Monster

    http://www.monstercable.com/monster_truth

  128. TheodoreGabuldury says:

    I think people are mistaken. The lawsuits are once the companies try to trademark “Monster” by itself.

  129. Anonymous says:

    Don’t be naive: it’s all about business. Monster mini golf does not have the rights to use the word Monster which is a trademak of Monster Cable. The word Monster generates sales and strong branding but I don’t believe that Monster mini golf should use it if it’s illegal. There are people are Monster just like you and I and they want to protect their jobs by protecting their company’s name. It makes sense!! We may not like it but Monster is right when they sue Monster mini golf otherwise everybody is going to use this name for their business and Monster Cable’s efforts will be useless.