# NEWS: Beats in a lawsuit with Yamaha



## joe

According to a recent article on Hollywood Reporter, Dr. Dre's Beats Electronics is suing Yamaha in California federal court, alleging violations of patents with Yamaha's Pro 300, Pro 400 and Pro 500 lines of headphones.  
   
  Beats seeks to protect rights on a number of its products -- including the Beats Studio and Beats Solo headphones -- and that its proprietary trade dress extends to "the overall appearance of the shape and design of the headphone, including the size, proportion and curvature of the headband, yoke and earcups."
   
  Here's an image from the article comparing both Beats and Yamaha headphones, side by side.
   
   

  What do you think?
   
  (Read the full article at Hollywood Reporter *here*.)


----------



## Spakka

In all honesty, I think beats actually have a point there...


----------



## WhiteCrow

but not suing every other company that rips off the style?


----------



## liamstrain

Quote: 





whitecrow said:


> but not suing every other company that rips off the style?


 
   
  Lawsuit decisions are pretty simple calculus. Do we have a strong case, is the company in our jurisdiction (e.g. not chinese knock offs) and is the company big enough to make it worth our while?


----------



## Spakka

Exactly, just because they don't pursue all companies they may feel could be 'borrowing' their style doesn't lose them the right to do it at all.
   
  In any case both of those look cheap and nasty.


----------



## ToddTheMetalGod

From the moment I saw these headphones I thought the design of these headphones was a complete rip off of Beats and seriously wondered why they would even consider this design. I don't even like the flashy, cheap design of Monster headphones in the first place. I respect Yamaha as an audio company, but targeting a consumer market in this way is pathetic 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





. Then I saw this, and now I'm not sure what to think...

  ...while it is hilarious, they made it clear that they are copying the design and are probably going to be forced to pay a reasonable fine. Then again, a ton of other companies have copied this exact design and Monster took no legal action. I think that Monster are afraid of Yamaha having superior sonic quality to their headphones and don't want them intruding on the Beats sales.


----------



## Craigster75

I commented on this in the Yamaha PRO thread and there was a strong response.  I am in no way a fan of Beats- looks or sound.  I have also read the Yamaha PRO series sound fantastic, but  sound is not the issue.  It is one thing for a product to bear a passing resemblance to another.  In fact, I was annoyed when some commented the Denon D600 and PSB M4U2 are Beats-like in appearance because, in my opinion, they don't bear a close resemblance to Beats just because they are plastic and have folding hinges.
   
  The reason I think the Beats suit does have merit is that the Yamaha PRO series looks so much like Beats that the argument could be made the similarity is intentional so that Yamaha can capitalize on the popularity of the Beats design.  For anyone thinking this is the big, bad conglomerate trying to squash the little upstart, Yamaha as a whole is a much larger company than the current iteration of Beats.  Don't think for a minute Yamaha didn't have design meetings where they discussed how they could make their headphones look as much like Beats as possible without appearing to be a blatant copy.


----------



## GREQ

This only re-enforces what we all suspected - beats are only interested in profits, not sound. 
  If they were certain of the superiority of the sound quality of their product, they would let the public decide by ear.
   
  But their business model is based on merchandising, branding and marketing. They've created something to make people believe they need it. 
  There have been a small number of other headphones from VERY small companies that have similar looks to the beats, but as previously mentioned, as soon as a high-roller comes along it's a different story.


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





greq said:


> This only re-enforces what we all suspected - beats are only interested in profits, not sound.
> If they were certain of the superiority of the sound quality of their product, they would let the public decide by ear.
> 
> But their business model is based on merchandising, branding and marketing. They've created something to make people believe they need it.
> There have been a small number of other headphones from VERY small companies that have similar looks to the beats, but as previously mentioned, as soon as a high-roller comes along it's a different story.


 

 Every company is interested in profits.  Sound isn't the issue here. Every company has the right to protect their intellectual property, including patents where they invested huge sums of money to develop their products and brand so that they could reap the benefits of long term profits.  Wanting to make a profit doesn't make a company evil and no one is forcing consumers to buy Beats.  The reality is that, for many Beats customers, sound is secondary to fashion.  While Yamaha may offer the best of both worlds for those customers, Beats can argue that they are so similar, it causes confusion in the market.  If I was an executive with Noontec, I would also be concerned.


----------



## SandvichDISH

It's obvious what Yamaha is trying to do here. But personally I find it hard to justify lawsuits over similar looking designs. Creativity, in reality, is little more than iteration of what you've already seen / heard. Of course it's obvious that here the only big "inspiration" is the Beats, however then you have to ask: What's the barrier? When is something stealing and when is something just inspired?
   
  If you ask me the best solution to the problem would be to make a superior product rather than sue. Then again, who's got time for good products when you've got marketing to muck about with.
   
  And that goes for yamaha too, they'd be better off just making a good sounding, stylish looking headphone rather than trying to reap the benefits of looking like Beats.


----------



## liamstrain

> But personally I find it hard to justify lawsuits over similar looking designs. Creativity, in reality, is little more than iteration of what you've already seen / heard.


 
   
   
Yes and no. There is very good precedent for industrial design intellectual property - especially with active product lines. There is also a big damn difference between being influenced by something, and ripping it off. And, of course, judges get the final say on it... not us.


----------



## Meddle

I do think that Beats will have a strong case here, possible with the help of the Apple v Samsung precedent if they find it relevant. According this site: http://www.complex.com/music/2013/02/dr-dre-and-beats-electronics-are-suing-yamaha-for-copying-their-headphone-design, they are only suing for $75,000, which is a minuscule amount. So Beats aren't really in this for money, but for another reason.


----------



## Armaegis

They sued Fanny Wang too didn't they? If I recall, that one just kinda fizzled.


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





sandvichdish said:


> It's obvious what Yamaha is trying to do here. But personally I find it hard to justify lawsuits over similar looking designs. Creativity, in reality, is little more than iteration of what you've already seen / heard. Of course it's obvious that here the only big "inspiration" is the Beats, however then you have to ask: What's the barrier? When is something stealing and when is something just inspired?
> 
> If you ask me the best solution to the problem would be to make a superior product rather than sue. Then again, who's got time for good products when you've got marketing to muck about with.
> 
> *And that goes for yamaha too, they'd be better off just making a good sounding, stylish looking headphone rather than trying to reap the benefits of looking like Beats.*


 
  You bring up a good point here, legal issue aside, nearly every audio company is jumping on the headphone wagon and they should keep in mind that their first headphones are a reflection on their entire brand.  Yamaha has been a respected name in recording and home audio for years.  The look and build of these headphones are, IMO, not reflective of the image and quality Yamaha has represented to me in the past.  I applaud their effort with the sound on these, but I believe they made a miscalculation with the looks.


----------



## Mheat122134

I find those look like soul by ludacris more.


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





armaegis said:


> They sued Fanny Wang too didn't they? If I recall, that one just kinda fizzled.


 

 I think Yamaha took the design similarity to another level as evidenced by their own ad referenced in post #6 that practically taunts Beats.


----------



## Davedog

I can understand where the lawsuit is coming from and frankly, the styling IS a rip-off.
  but Copyrighting shapes is silly, all large over-ear headphones are going to have the same generic shape, 2 cans and a headband. yes beats are selling the look but trying to sue is almost as daft as say... apple trying to patent a rectangle with rounded corners.


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





mheat122134 said:


> I find those look like soul by ludacris more.


 

 My son has an SL300 and there are significant differences- light up logos, quilted padding under the headband, different color schemes and cord colors as well as other design differences.  I think the difference between Yamaha and "rapper cans" like Soul, Street and others is that the rapper cans made an effort to present some differentiation from Beats.


----------



## SandvichDISH

I think looking like Beats might have some negative side-effects too. 
  For instance, with so many cheap knock-offs lying about, would the target audience (teenagers) not avoid wearing these very obvious copies because they might otherwise be called out for having "fake" Beats?


----------



## liamstrain

Quote: 





davedog said:


> trying to sue is almost as daft as say... apple trying to patent a rectangle with rounded corners.


 
   
  Since they stole that from Dieter Rams's work for Braun. 
   
  This is a bit more distinct than "two cans and a headband" though. Moving beyond functional design requirements and into deliberate aesthetic styling.


----------



## Armaegis

Quote: 





craigster75 said:


> I think Yamaha took the design similarity to another level as evidenced by their own ad referenced in post #6 that practically taunts Beats.


 
   
  Maybe it's intentional... plan for the eventual lawsuit, ride the media exposure, drop the bomb that says "haha we're totally legit", walk away with money.
   
What? It could happen.
   
/cynic


----------



## dlalfjf1234

It's same case as iPhone vs galaxy, at the end beats will win the law suit


----------



## dryvadeum

It's sad that a respectable company like Yamaha is trying to tap into the mainstream demographic that Beats are targeting. 
   
  On a side note, I do think the Yammy's look much better than the Beats Solo. =D


----------



## dryvadeum

Quote: 





armaegis said:


> Maybe it's intentional... plan for the eventual lawsuit, ride the media exposure, drop the bomb that says "haha we're totally legit", walk away with money.
> 
> What? It could happen.
> 
> /cynic


 
  I agree...Controversy creates success in a lot of cases...


----------



## Dyaems

fanny wang, soul by ludacris, that 50cent headphone from sms audio, yammy pro series, beats...
   
  beats should sue this "company" too! =))
   
  http://www.cdrking.com/?mod=products&type=view&sid=14742&main=34


----------



## ThatNzGuy

Quote: 





dyaems said:


> fanny wang, soul by ludacris, that 50cent headphone from sms audio, yammy pro series, beats...
> 
> beats should sue this "company" too! =))
> 
> http://www.cdrking.com/?mod=products&type=view&sid=14742&main=34


 
   
  Maybe they're actually scared that, Yamaha being a reputable audio company and all, actually has the sound to back up the looks.
 Or i'm just over-thinking it, that they're suing them just because they're reputable, and they'll make a profit out of it.


----------



## Armaegis

To be honest, before the whole Beats thing... I had no idea who Dre was.


----------



## Meddle

thatnzguy said:


> Or i'm just over-thinking it, that they're suing them just because they're reputable, and they'll make a profit out of it.




They're only suing for $75,000 though, so I don't think profit is a major motivation.


----------



## pro1137

Quote: 





dyaems said:


> fanny wang, soul by ludacris, that 50cent headphone from sms audio, yammy pro series, beats...
> 
> beats should sue this "company" too! =))
> 
> http://www.cdrking.com/?mod=products&type=view&sid=14742&main=34


 
   
  What even.. How did you even find that site?


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





armaegis said:


> Maybe it's intentional... plan for the eventual lawsuit, ride the media exposure, drop the bomb that says "haha we're totally legit", walk away with money.
> 
> What? It could happen.
> 
> /cynic


 
   
  Quote: 





dryvadeum said:


> I agree...Controversy creates success in a lot of cases...


 

 You may be right and this may all be part of their marketing plan if they are chess players looking several moves ahead.  The Yamaha thread here, while receiving positive praise from several seasoned Head-fiers for their sound, has only experienced a fraction of the activity from comparable new releases from Sony, V-Moda, Sennheiser and AKG.  This controversy puts Yamaha out there in the same breath as Beats to the masses, especially if the story is picked up by national media.


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





dyaems said:


> fanny wang, soul by ludacris, that 50cent headphone from sms audio, yammy pro series, beats...
> 
> beats should sue this "company" too! =))
> 
> http://www.cdrking.com/?mod=products&type=view&sid=14742&main=34


 

 They look nothing like Beats


----------



## Armaegis

Quote: 





meddle said:


> They're only suing for $75,000 though, so I don't think profit is a major motivation.


 
   
  $75k for advertising/publicity is a drop in the bucket for big companies.


----------



## ourfpshero

headphones have been copying designs for 100 years now, since the 1st radio operator headphones. I doubt any headphone design is completely unique anymore.


----------



## JuanseAmador

spakka said:


> In all honesty, I think beats actually have a point there...




What about them copying Shure.


----------



## PurpleAngel

Quote: 





toddthemetalgod said:


>


 
  Dr Who.....ha ha.


----------



## rckyosho

Quote: 





ourfpshero said:


> headphones have been copying designs for 100 years now, since the 1st radio operator headphones. I doubt any headphone design is completely unique anymore.


 
   
  I agree.
   
  It's called competition.Riding on the popularity is a natural thing to do.If you could improve on the design or sound why not? This is the way to move forward no? Frankly suing is just saying that your not capable of making a better product and shows the confident level you have with your product is low and afraid of competition.Suing just stifle competition IMHO.In the end the more the merrier right...more choices for us consumers be it for the price,design or sound.


----------



## Th3 James

I never thought that the beats headphones looked good. They just look like cheap glossy plastic crap.


----------



## Currawong

$75k? They probably have already spent far more money on consulting lawyers about the design before the release.


----------



## kalbee

Quote: 





armaegis said:


> To be honest, before the whole Beats thing... I had no idea who Dre was.


 
  For me it was the Dr. Pepper commercial back in the days.
  Then I totally forgot about him.
   
   
  The Yamaha's look so much nicer, even if just thanks to the IMHO better looking logo.


----------



## streetdragon

Quote: 





juanseamador said:


> What about them copying Shure.


 
  i was just about to say that


   

  just maybe not as obvious as yamaha's attempt though


----------



## MrViolin

I didn't get the "Dr.... who?" thing until now. LOL. Way to go Yamaha. 
 As for suing... meh. I wouldn't blame either of them. Yamaha was kinda asking for it w/ the "Dr... who?" ,which IMO is really hilarious, and the mainstream like for beats is outrageous. 
 I even advised a guy in my class to go the head-fi, but nope, he just went straight ahead and bought beats.
  Overall, it's kinda boarder-line grey.
   
  Edit:
  But this:
   



kalbee said:


> For me it was the Dr. Pepper commercial back in the days.
> Then I totally forgot about him.
> 
> 
> *The Yamaha's look so much nicer, even if just thanks to the IMHO better looking logo.*


----------



## EPICFAILXD

Beats rip people off by being expensive and sounding terrible, so it should be fair for manufacturers to rip off their designs.


----------



## Destroysall

Did they ever patent their design? If not, this is just a game of pointing fingers...


----------



## pro1137

Quote: 





destroysall said:


> Did they ever patent their design? If not, this is just a game of pointing fingers...


 
   
  I don't even think Beats would be allowed to patent it. Considering how the design is pretty unoriginal already.


----------



## linglingjr

Quote: 





armaegis said:


> $75k for advertising/publicity is a drop in the bucket for big companies.


 
  ^This I'm surprised only one person has said this.  Even if beats loose their case they still win because of all the attention they're getting.


----------



## luckyseventh

you know, im rather surprised there's so little beats hate considering how the brand has become head-fi's whipping boy as of late.
   
  but back on the topic, i believe that this is a ploy by yamaha to score some attention from the public, because i highly doubt that such a well-established company would be as stupid as to just copying another company's models. but then again, stupidity is not uncommon...


----------



## Dsnuts

Wonder if they will ever go after the Chinese.


----------



## pro1137

Quote: 





dsnuts said:


> Wonder if they will ever go after the Chinese.


 
   
  If you count DealExtreme, they already have.


----------



## dlalfjf1234

i dont think that is possible, its impossible to track those kind of people in China.


----------



## MrViolin

Quote: 





luckyseventh said:


> *you know, im rather surprised there's so little beats hate considering how the brand has become head-fi's whipping boy as of late*.
> 
> but back on the topic, i believe that this is a ploy by yamaha to score some attention from the public, because i highly doubt that such a well-established company would be as stupid as to just copying another company's models. but then again, stupidity is not uncommon...


 
  We tend to... take things maturely in public 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 or at least hold things in


----------



## DefQon

Dr.Dre Beat's following straight after Apple's behaviour.


----------



## pokpokgei

if i were a consumer that is interested in both the beats headphone design and the sound quality i am receiving from them.
   
  then this piece of news is only good news and gives me a good direction for purchase. 
   
  obviously beats feels threatened here and is retaliating and when someone  retaliates to a threat, it means there is serious contesting going on. if the yahama design pulls it off well enough in my preference and offers better sound quality upon auditioning both, then why not go with the yamaha? 
   
  haha, it's a win for me as long as the yamaha product is still on shelves in stores.

and of course i must not be a fanboy for either brand to benefit from this comparison.
   
   
lawsuit wise there is nothing worth commenting on as it's a total waste of time. try to look at it as another hobby of the filthy rich.


----------



## bcschmerker4

Quote: 





craigster75 said:


> I think Yamaha took the design similarity to another level as evidenced by their own ad referenced in post #6 that practically taunts Beats.


 
  If that's the case, the advertisement cited could very well get Yamaha Corporation in trouble with the British Broadcasting Corporation, who holds copyright on "Doctor Who" (originally filed for in 1967 for the BBC's ongoing sci-fi drama), in addition to the suit launched by Monster Cable and Dr. Dre on specification infringement.


----------



## miceblue

I'm surprised no one mentioned the Noontec Zoro. Even Tyll at Innerfidelity says they're Beats Solo knock-offs.


----------



## DefQon

Both are ugly and crap imo.


----------



## Theogenes

Several people have made the comparison between this lawsuit and Apple v. Samsung, and without opening a can of fanbois, I have to say that I find these two cases differing greatly in merit. In the overall look, it seems pretty obvious that Yamaha was knowingly imitating Beats, which could reasonably be said to cause confusion in the marketplace. (This is, of course, setting aside very valid points about whether Beats ripped off Shure or other companies themselves, among many other issues). 
   
  However, I found the Apple v. Samsung comparison to be almost wholly lacking in merit. The summaries and breakdowns presented on Ars Technica really made it seem like Apple was grasping desperately at straws, and I don't think anybody with even a rudimentary knowledge of either operating system (even with Samsung's goddawful TouchWiz interface) would even momentarily confuse one for the other. They are just too vastly different, and any arguments about their similarities could just as easily be made to a number of other products to further underscore the ludicrousness of Apple's position, in my opinion. 
   
  But nobody ever introduced me with "His Right Honorable..." in front of my name, so my thoughts here are worth pretty much horseapples. Boo bears.


----------



## Theogenes

Quote: 





defqon said:


> Both are ugly and crap imo.


 
   
  I second that emotion.


----------



## Dubstep Girl

sad


----------



## Armaegis

Quote: 





mrviolin said:


> I didn't get the "Dr.... who?" thing until now. LOL. Way to go Yamaha.
> As for suing... meh. I wouldn't blame either of them. Yamaha was kinda asking for it w/ the "Dr... who?" ,which IMO is really hilarious, and the mainstream like for beats is outrageous.
> I even advised a guy in my class to go the head-fi, but nope, he just went straight ahead and bought beats.
> Overall, it's kinda boarder-line grey.
> ...


 
   
  I would love it if Yamaha tapped David Tennant or Matt Smith to wear their headphones. It would fit with the tagline and be a big "neener neener" to Beats because it's a perfectly valid ad then. 
   
  Quote: 





linglingjr said:


> ^This I'm surprised only one person has said this.  Even if beats loose their case they still win because of all the attention they're getting.


 
   
  See, I'm fully expecting Yamaha to make a **big deal** out of this. Beats at this point doesn't really need publicity, or the gains there would be marginal. But if Yamaha makes a big public fuss and has their defences geared to go, they can only go up from there because public awareness in terms of lawsuits is kinda anti Beats anyways due to affiliation with Monster (oh they're suing somebody again?)
   
Or maybe I'm just being overly academic here and assuming too much of the public. After all, an educated public wouldn't have been such sheep to begin with right?
   
/sigh


----------



## moali125

Design is beats by dres focus so when everyone else has it, they lose everything, except muddy bass. Why yamaha did this? No idea.. Shame they will get sued


----------



## h4mm3r 0f th0r

americans and their suing crap like crapple


----------



## catspaw

While they do look alike, i think that "design" copyright is a bit overkill. After all, headphones alll look alike in a way, so its strange that they would even consider patenting a headphone design.
   
  For me, the beats are what the Iphone is: paying for a social status, not for real quality.
   
  This beeing said, Yamaha was the first company to draw blood in this pointless drama, so i cant really blame Monster for the legal action.


----------



## RPGWiZaRD

Quote: 





davedog said:


> but Copyrighting shapes is silly, all large over-ear headphones are going to have the same generic shape, 2 cans and a headband. yes beats are selling the look but trying to sue is almost as daft as say... apple trying to patent a rectangle with rounded corners.


 
   
  THIS x1000, man I hate copyrighting of silly stuff, especially the Apple iPhone vs Samsung case drove me nuts. I'd feel like giving a good smack to any1 who thinks copyrighting such things is "OK". That's just my personal opinion, some things shouldn't be eligible for copyright, it's just a harm for the society when certain things have ideal functionality like the shapes of the phones. If a company decides to copyright silly things like form-factor then that means the whole society will suffer as they will either have to force to buy that manufacturer's offering or settle for something worse and having just one option is NEVER a good thing. So therefore, you shouldn't be eligible to copyright everything. Headphone appearence is there on the border for me, if it's EXACT copy shape-wise I'd agree but if there's tiny differences like in this case, I think it's ok. 
   


h4mm3r 0f th0r said:


> americans and their suing crap like crapple


 
   
  This too...


----------



## peaceful1

when will people realize colorful gunk is not worth it!!!
   
   
   Yamaha we support u!!! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




   
   
  I never understood why they call the guy "DR" if it was porn it made sense


----------



## nigeljames

I would of thought any self respecting headphone manufacturer would try to stay as far away from anything resembling Beats as possible.
  So it serves Yamaha right IMO


----------



## scuttle

Quote: 





spakka said:


> In all honesty, I think beats actually have a point there...


 
   
  There are only so many possible ways to make a headphone look. If every maker was allowed to sue on such grounds, then there would be room in the market for only about 5 manufacturers.
   
  To give an example from an even more appearance driven market, Rolex probably wouldn't be allowed to make the Submariner because it looks at least as much like the Blancpain 50 Fathoms as those two headphones look like each other - in fact, out of hundreds of diving watch designs you'd probably only be able to buy Doxas and those Seikos that have the crown at 4. Oh - and the Seiko Tuna, because no one is mistaking that for anything other than an alarm clock strapped to the wrist.


----------



## LizardKing1

I thought the legal basis for this kind of foolish lawsuit was that you could prove the company with original design might lose potential customers because they had mistaken their product for the imitating company's product (i.e. they bought Yamaha phones thinking they were Beats). Since in this case the Yamaha symbom is very visible, I don't see how this could be a problem.
   
  I have no love for the idea that a company suddenly owns a geometric shape. Paper clips all look alike, mugs are all identical, and you don't see those companies suing each other. As long as the Beats logo isn't there (check) and the Yamaha symbol is obvious (check, even bigger than the Beats' B) this shouldn't even be an issue.


----------



## GREQ

It's just progress. Companies are always taking design cues from others. Sometimes it's more similar than others. I think they look less similar than most smart phones today, and most of those court cases didn't go very far, so I don't see what the big fuss is about.


----------



## 28980

I find it amusing that a correlation between apple and beats was made.


----------



## h4mm3r 0f th0r

Quote: 





28980 said:


> I find it amusing that a correlation between apple and beats was made.


 

 i mentioned crapple as both are american and love to sue others thinking that it would help stop their downfall....


----------



## Fuzziekiwi

I kind of agree with them.. But, look at the Sony mdr-1R and the newer beats line.


----------



## lebomb

Quote: 





greq said:


> This only re-enforces what we all suspected - beats are only interested in profits, not sound.
> If they were certain of the superiority of the sound quality of their product, they would let the public decide by ear.
> 
> But their business model is based on merchandising, branding and marketing. They've created something to make people believe they need it.
> There have been a small number of other headphones from VERY small companies that have similar looks to the beats, but as previously mentioned, as soon as a high-roller comes along it's a different story.


 

 What is wrong with any of this?  I dont have Beats, and dont want them.  But its the publics responsibility to do their homework when it comes to their headphones.  Dont blame Dr. Dre for hitting big with nice looking headphones that appeal to whomever.  This is America and free enterprise.  People should have done their homework on headphones and SQ.  Its not Dr. Dre's responsibility to teach SQ to consumers.


----------



## Theogenes

A few interesting reads from Ars Technica on American patent law (and the blatant dysfunction rampant within it) if anyone is interested: 
   
How a rogue appeals court wrecked the patent system
   
Opinion: The problem with software patents? They don't scale
   
Trolls filed 40% of patent infringement lawsuits in 2011
   
ITC: How an obscure bureaucracy makes the world safe for patent trolls
   
Opinion: EFF should call for the elimination of software patents
   
  A lot of it has to do with software patents specifically, but it's still quite interesting IMO an illustrative of the cluster$%^& our patent courts have become.


----------



## GREQ

Quote: 





lebomb said:


> What is wrong with any of this?


 
   
  What's wrong with making money for the sake of making money without any benefit to humanity? Think about it.
   
  I live on a continent where companies don't constantly sue each other over small petty differences. It's called competition, but some large American companies seem to be allergic to that concept.


----------



## SpiderNhan

Love the packaging!

 On a slightly related note, have you guys read the Gizmodo article Tyll linked to about how Beats completely screwed over Monster Inc.?

 http://gizmodo.com/5981823/beat-by-dre-the-inside-story-of-how-monster-lost-the-world


----------



## sbradley02

Anyone know when the Shure came out?


----------



## streetdragon

Quote: 





lebomb said:


> What is wrong with any of this?  I dont have Beats, and dont want them.  But its the publics responsibility to do their homework when it comes to their headphones.  Dont blame Dr. Dre for hitting big with nice looking headphones that appeal to whomever.  This is America and free enterprise.  People should have done their homework on headphones and SQ.  Its not Dr. Dre's responsibility to teach SQ to consumers.


 
  well he is quite doing the opposite in fact
 "used in every major studio"
 "recovers lost data in mp3 compression"
 "hear what the artist intended"
 "solo has crystal clear highs"
 "better than any competition at its price range"
 "patent pending revolutionary driver design technology"
 "no batteries required!" (as if regular headphones need a battery to run)


----------



## Malevolent

I think that suing other companies based on design is just wrong. After all, there are only a few ways to make a headphone a "headphone". My simple opinion is, a headphone is primarily a listening device first, fashion device second. If Beats wanted to prove superiority of their products, they should so this in the arena of sound, and not of design/style.
   
  Still, Yamaha knew that such lawsuits would be possible the moment they unleashed their new line of PRO headphones on the market. There is no way that the management/design team designed the headphone without taking most of their styling cues from the Beats Solo/Studio.


----------



## streetdragon

they should style their headphones like the stax lambdas or the taket H2+ 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




 (or even better the sennheiser surrounder)


----------



## EPICFAILXD

Quote: 





streetdragon said:


> well he is quite doing the opposite in fact
> "used in every major studio"
> "recovers lost data in mp3 compression"
> "hear what the artist intended"
> ...


 
   
  -"industrial strength sound"
  -"made for DJ's"
  -"incredibly durable"
  -"clearer sound, deeper bass"
  -"the sound of the studio"
  -"practically indestructible"
  I honestly think my IQ dropped ten percent after reading this


----------



## streetdragon

Quote: 





epicfailxd said:


> -"industrial strength sound"
> -"made for DJ's"
> -"incredibly durable"
> -"clearer sound, deeper bass"
> ...


 
  that's why so many people buy them, their IQ has dropped so much after reading stuff like this


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





h4mm3r 0f th0r said:


> i mentioned crapple as both are american and love to sue others thinking that it would help stop their downfall....


 

 There are many ways I can think of to respond to this post, including not responding at all.  I will just say that I am not judging you based on where you are from, so I believe it is wrong for you to be stereotyping Americans collectively.  I do however choose to judge you based on your ignorant comment.
   
  P.S.  Thor was created by Marvel Comics that is brought to you by America.


----------



## GREQ

Quote: 





craigster75 said:


> P.S.  Thor was created by Marvel Comics that is brought to you by America.


 
  Actually Thor comes from Norse mythology (which originates in Scandinavia)... hundreds of year ago....before 'America' (and Marvel Comics) existed.


----------



## streetdragon

add on note: Shure is by America too


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





greq said:


> Actually Thor comes from Norse mythology (which originates in Scandinavia)... hundreds of year ago....before 'America' (and Marvel Comics) existed.


 

 You are correct- I misspoke regarding the origin of Thor, but the modern-day interest in Thor does come from the comics which led to the animated features and now movies


----------



## pokpokgei

Quote: 





theogenes said:


> A few interesting reads from Ars Technica on American patent law (and the blatant dysfunction rampant within it) if anyone is interested:
> 
> How a rogue appeals court wrecked the patent system
> 
> ...


 
   
  thanks for the informative links.
   
  we need more of such forumers around


----------



## kramer5150

So Beats bulldozed Monstarcable to acquire the design rights, now they are going after anything / anyone whos products are styled similarly.  If thats what Beats wants to do with their $$, so be it I guess.  Theres still the possibility they won't win.  Subjectively I kind of do hope they win.  Its an ugly design that shouldn't be regurgitated.  My close co worker across the cubicle row has dre-beats... big ugly red and white ones and I have to look at them every day.  It would however equally irk me if Beats wins this... to see such a crappy audio product gain further market dominance.
   
If Yamaha wants to borrow style cues from someone else, its their choice really.   As long as Yamaha has been in existence, they HAD TO KNOW the risks in what they were doing when they were in the R&D phases.  They knowingly took that risk.
   
  Either way both will take a hit financially.


----------



## Armaegis

Quote: 





craigster75 said:


> You are correct- I misspoke regarding the origin of Thor, but the modern-day interest in Thor does come from the comics which led to the animated features and now movies


 
   
  Though he's supposed to be a redhead anyways...


----------



## h4mm3r 0f th0r

Quote: 





craigster75 said:


> There are many ways I can think of to respond to this post, including not responding at all.  I will just say that I am not judging you based on where you are from, so I believe it is wrong for you to be stereotyping Americans collectively.  I do however choose to judge you based on your ignorant comment.
> 
> P.S.  Thor was created by Marvel Comics that is brought to you by America.


 

 i am not attacking america if that is what you thought... i, however, am talking about their recent strategies of suing the other team out of business rather than pure innovation... it was mentioned that they do not have anything in common so i pointed out that they are americans and have some blind following... no attack on a country bro... you misunderstood. Although, the beats patents won't surely be as absurd as what apple has patented and suing others for, while they just buy the small companies working for the competition and patent stuff as their own and labeling it as innovation. If i have to hate anything about america then i would hate the power of their strategic minds for false and aggressive marketing to fool the masses.


----------



## RochRx7

This was an interesting read.. I'm somewhat turned off by Yamaha wanting to cash in on "that" market demographic.

 But it turns me on the fact that they blatantly attacked Dr. Dre/Beats.. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
   
  I'm going to buy a Yamaha R6 after I get my tax return almost because of this.. haha.


----------



## joe

Quote: 





h4mm3r 0f th0r said:


> If i have to hate anything about america then i would hate the power of their strategic minds for false and aggressive marketing to fool the masses.


 
   
   
  Let's keep sweeping generalizations that'll likely lead to political-type discussion out of this, guys.


----------



## h4mm3r 0f th0r

Quote: 





joe said:


> Let's keep sweeping generalizations that'll likely lead to political-type discussion out of this, guys.


 

 just related to these two companies... none else...


----------



## LizardKing1

If Beats wins this moronic sue, it opens a lot of dangerous questions. For example think of the Sennheiser HD650/600. Apart from the color, their design couldn't be simpler: oval cups with metal grills covering the entire outer cup. It's really as simples as an open headphone gets. If I was designing a tasteful-looking pair of headphones, I'd probably go with something similar. And Sennheiser would be able to sue me, apparently.
   
  I'm not rooting for Yamaha because I dislike Beats, as far as I know Yamaha is just trying to use an appealing design to get easy money instead of working on sound (I'm assuming). But if this goes on, it becomes completely subjective what constitutes design theft and what doesn't.


----------



## Billyjoegunrack

Quote: 





streetdragon said:


> i was just about to say that
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
   
  Headphones that have the same general look to them, imagine that. I said it once, and I will say it again, this is pettiness. No one is going to mistake those Yamaha headphones for Beats, any more than people are going mistake those Beats for Shure.  After the ridiculousness of that Apple lawsuit, and now this, where is the line, and at one point did Yamaha cross it?
   
  The general appearance is pretty similar, but this is a different design. Beats incorporates that swiveling flat two piece plate with a "B" into a plastic loop. The Yamaha is a fixed spherical single piece. The general fashion sense is very similar, but here again, this is so petty.
   
  Yamaha is obviously going after the same market share as Beats, and bringing them a more refined sound with the same general appearance. But isn't this what people and companies are supposed to do, compete for market share? What is next, only one company allowed to make jeans, or t-shirts? All polo shirts look very similar, should only one company be allowed?


----------



## risenfallen

Quote: 





streetdragon said:


> well he is quite doing the opposite in fact
> "used in every major studio"
> "recovers lost data in mp3 compression"
> "hear what the artist intended"
> ...


 
   
  I had a great laugh at those lines. I didn't know they went that far with their marketing nonsense. Again, I don't have anything against Beats and people who like their headphones, but seriously, "recovers lost data in mp3 compression"???


----------



## lebomb

Im sure Yamaha's marketing department and design team could have developed a whole new fantastic looking can period. With the great SQ they have.


----------



## streetdragon

aftarall they DID tune the engine sound of the Lexus LFA, just to mention.
 how does the yamaha pro series sound like btw?


----------



## pokpokgei

streetdragon said:


> i was just about to say that
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

   
   
  lol not sure if the yamaha resembles the beats or the shures resembles the beats even more.  if you get what i mean. perhaps it's just ego issues since yamaha went ahead to include the dr...whO? slogan.


----------



## Billyjoegunrack

Quote: 





craigster75 said:


> I commented on this in the Yamaha PRO thread and there was a strong response.  I am in no way a fan of Beats- looks or sound.  I have also read the Yamaha PRO series sound fantastic, but  sound is not the issue.  It is one thing for a product to bear a passing resemblance to another.  In fact, I was annoyed when some commented the Denon D600 and PSB M4U2 are Beats-like in appearance because, in my opinion, they don't bear a close resemblance to Beats just because they are plastic and have folding hinges.
> 
> The reason I think the Beats suit does have merit is that the Yamaha PRO series looks so much like Beats that the argument could be made the similarity is intentional so that Yamaha can capitalize on the popularity of the Beats design.  For anyone thinking this is the big, bad conglomerate trying to squash the little upstart, Yamaha as a whole is a much larger company than the current iteration of Beats.  Don't think for a minute Yamaha didn't have design meetings where they discussed how they could make their headphones look as much like Beats as possible without appearing to be a blatant copy.


 
  Everybody in the game right now is trying to capitalize on what Beats has done to popularize headphones. There is a boom in headphones going on right now and everyone is trying to get in on this "gold rush."  Denon with their 600, and PSB with their M4U2, are trying to steal the same market share, with similar overall designs, just like Yamaha.


----------



## bloodbringer

I see the argument that Beats has, but really, blow it out your arse. "You're not allowed to look like this! You're not allowed!" I just don't see very much strength in it. Can Shure sue Beats?

 They just hate that Yamaha makes better products, sure the designs are similar, but it's the same with the car market. Most cars have very similar designs, but under the hood is a different story.


----------



## Aaron94

If Dre manages to win this the only think Yamaha will do is recase the exact same driver in a different shell, possibly only do something as simple as change the shape of the current driver housing from a circle to an oval.


----------



## jude

Quote: 





juanseamador said:


> What about them copying Shure.


 
   
  Beats was out with the Studio (in 2008) before Shure had released any of its SRH over-ears (in 2009). Of course, I'm not suggesting that Shure copied Beats, or vice-versa--only that it seems unlikely Beats copied Shure, per those dates.
   


meddle said:


> They're only suing for $75,000 though, so I don't think profit is a major motivation.


   

  I'm not sure where the $75,000 figure is coming from, as I haven't read the complaint in its entirety; but I did scroll down to the "PRAYER FOR RELIEF" section, and it reads as follows:
   


> WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that the Court enter judgment in its favor and against Defendant as follows:
> 
> A.  Judgment be entered that Defendant has infringed the claim of the '077 Patent directly, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, and/or indirectly;
> 
> ...


 
   
  I'm no attorney, but it reads to me like a whole lot more than $75,000 being sought.


----------



## stereoguy

It is an obvious attempt to look the same but is that a crime? They look very similar, kind of like Pro Keds and Converse all star sneakers or Oreos and Hydrox cookies. I don't know if those had to be licensed from whoever was first but if they did'nt, I don't see much chance here. Unless Yamaha is calling it beats, or maybe if Yamaha infringed electrical design patents but I doubt it.


----------



## guerillaw

This community has added so much to my enjoyment of music and I seldom get to contribute much back. As a lawyer I will thus ignore my instinct not to get involved in legal issues I am not a party to because I think I can shed some light on some of the questions and concerns raised in this thread, in particular as it relates to our beloved hobby.
 The fact of the matter is our current legal system provides anyone with enough resources the opportunity to start a lawsuit whether it is meritorious or not. That is just the reality. This has negative consequences for both folks with limited means as well as huge corporations with almost limitless funds.
 Often times under resourced parties will lose cases they should when or not even be able to go to court at all because of their limitations. Parties with lots of resources, "deep pockets", oftentimes suffer in the reverse where they will be the victims of a suit simply because they have enough money to pay. For example if there is a case with a very weak argument that company X owes $1 million in attorney may take that case and sue because the company will not want to waste time and attorneys fees even if they know they can beat a weak case when they can just pay a set amount upfront and be done with it.
 In that context, the true motivations for any given lawsuit are very difficult to determine. The fact is we will never know why Beats has chosen to go to court. It could be out of principle, for strategic reasons, because they think Yamaha will settle quickly, or for some reason that has yet to be revealed.
 As for the merit of the lawsuit itself a lot of posts explaining the nature of patents have actually been right on point. Whether or not an individual patent is reasonable to the average person is irrelevant. Once it is filed and granted it has the force of law. If the party who owns the patent can prove that it has been violated they are entitled to damages caused by that violation.
  
 Going forward then, the issue is not whether the patent was reasonable but rather whether BEATS can prove it was violated. If so, Yamaha will be liable. More likely though, Yamaha will let it play out for a while because it is free publicity and eventually settle the case as long as they can keep producing the headphones. For a global conglomerate like Yamaha it will be a strict cost-benefit analysis. Even if they have to pay to settle the lawsuit that money just gets added to the ledger as a cost of doing business. As long as that amount doesn't make the entire project lose money it's good business.
  
 The implications for our hobby are very interesting. In light of the above, one could make the case that Yamaha purposely violated the patent as a sound business strategy. Why not copy the most popular product on the market? Worst case scenario they will be sued but whatever that lawsuit ultimately costs will be worth the profits they can make off the copy plus the bonus of the free publicity from the lawsuit.
 On the other side of the suit BEATS is very intelligent to go after Yamaha because if they can win a case against a corporation with a lot of resources it will scare off other patent infringers and set a precedent that their design is legally protected.
 The really fascinating part is that this all arises from a patent application and its acceptance several years ago. The validity of that patent for the beats Corporation (under another company at that time obviously) was decided by a random patent clerk. I would love to know whether that person even owns a pair of real headphones and has any expertise into what really makes one pair of headphones or another "unique".
 If we really want to get crazy with the speculation my dream scenario would be if the suit doesn't settle and gets really heated they're going to need experts on either side. I would love to hear those depositions and testimony as to who is a supposedly expert on headphone technology. Will it be science folks from the companies? Will it be employees of other companies? Will it be experienced reviewers on this site and others? Now that would be fun.


----------



## shuke

Interesting. Sounds similar to what apple has had suits over in recent yeas.


----------



## GREQ

Quote: 





guerillaw said:


> In light of the above, one could make the case that Yamaha purposely violated the patent as a sound business strategy.


 
  I've never thought of it from that perspective. Interesting idea.
   
  Does anyone know exactly which patents Yamaha have allegedly violated? Curious to see exactly what angle beats are taking.


----------



## shuke

Very good points here.


----------



## fatcat28037

If Yamaha copied anyone maybe it was Shure not Beats. Whatever the case may be Monster has a history of suing rival companies.


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





fatcat28037 said:


> If Yamaha copied anyone maybe it was Shure not Beats. Whatever the case may be Monster has a history of suing rival companies.


 

 As a reminder, Monster and Beats split off some time ago into two separate and distinct companies.


----------



## NA Blur

First of all the headphones are not exactly alike in materials, design specs, and looks.  Second, direct competition is a good thing and in most cases the people who buy either of these headphones had a choice to buy the other thus the decision was made not based on how it look rather than cost, sound, brand.  If you want a Beats product you make sure that is the one you buy.  How is buying a Yamaha product outing Beats?  Greed is just shameful sometimes and this is yet another example of it.
   
  Sure Beats has a right to sue, but take a look.  Even if the designs were much closer in looks, the fact that Yamaha has their logo on it tells everyone buying it that it is Yamaha branded not Beats.  If Yamaha moves in on some of Beats' customers let the best headphone win.
   
  Regarding the Fanny Wang case:
  In Oct. 2011, Beats settled a design-patent case that it brought against Fanny Wang over that company’s headphones.
  --
  http://www.twice.com/articletype/news/beats-sues-yamaha-over-headphone-design-patents/104995


----------



## miceblue

I feel that this discussion has been going on long before this lawsuit even started. I remember people in the SRH840 thread saying how the SRH240 looks like the Studios...2 years ago.


----------



## Rixlplyx

Yamaha's sound beats (pun) the Beats hands down.  If we're going by sonic merits, Yamaha should win by default!  I auditioned the Pro 400 and 500s a week ago, and they DO look a lot like the Studios...all glossy and fingerprint prone.  Yamaha might lose this one...and it will be for the better.  Maybe they'll start making their cans look more like audio equipment and less like toys.


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





rixlplyx said:


> Yamaha's sound beats (pun) the Beats hands down.  If we're going by sonic merits, Yamaha should win by default!  I auditioned the Pro 400 and 500s a week ago, and they DO look a lot like the Studios...all glossy and fingerprint prone.  Yamaha might lose this one...and it will be for the better.  *Maybe they'll start making their cans look more like audio equipment and less like toys.*


 
  YES!


----------



## samandhi

Quote: 





davedog said:


> I can understand where the lawsuit is coming from and frankly, the styling IS a rip-off.
> but Copyrighting shapes is silly, all large over-ear headphones are going to have the same generic shape, 2 cans and a headband. yes beats are selling the look but trying to sue is almost as daft as say... apple trying to patent a rectangle with rounded corners.


 

   Didnt Apple, in fact, try to sue Android or someone, for the shape of the wifi indicator too?
   
    Lets see, round cups - check. Blingy logo on said cup - check. Round'ish shaped headband - check. Sound quality better - that's it, sue them...=P


----------



## Vlooienuker

That Dr... Who thing made me laugh so hard! I reckon beats has the rights to sue Yamaha but Yamaha shouldn't have copied them in the first place... Beats are a total rip off and only teens wear them so why would Yamaha try to compete with them?


----------



## anuraj250

another means for earning money...


----------



## Steve Eddy

Yamaha should hire Kurt Denke of Blue Jeans Cable to deal with this.
   
  http://www.bluejeanscable.com/legal/mcp/index.htm
   
  Classic!
   
  se


----------



## eugenius

Nothing is new in this world, that shape has surely been used before. Watch out if Apple launches some headphones, they're going to patent headphones with sound going to both ears.


----------



## migasson

Personally, I think Beats phones are low quality. However, if I was Beats, I'd freak out and take 'em to court...


----------



## socks2sound

While I'm personally disappointed with Yamaha's decision to adopt the same style as Beats, I really don't think that Dr. Dre has a chance in winning this. I mean, new money cans can't possibly hold a finger to a dynasty of motorcycles, audio products, musical instruments, and software. 

 I mean, look at the Yamaha V-Max for christ sakes. A company that can make that kind of two-wheeled beast can't possibly lose to some crappy headphone peddler when the amount of R&D is worth more than Beats Audio could ever hope to make.

 tl;dr, it's like a single ant picking a fight with a T-rex.


----------



## threelury

That is so cute of Yamaha
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





. I guess Beats must be really worried that yamaha may steal their customers.
   
  Yamaha's PRO headphones looks nicer than beats imo.


----------



## rock&rollfrenchfries

guess who the highest paid musician was in 2012? and without even releasing an album in that year.


----------



## DJINFERNO806

Quote: 





rock&rollfrenchfries said:


> guess who the highest paid musician was in 2012? and without even releasing an album in that year.


 
  Was it Chris Brown?


----------



## scuttle

Quote: 





craigster75 said:


> P.S.  Thor was created by Marvel Comics that is brought to you by America.


 
   
  Yes. Marvel Comics invented Thor...


----------



## scuttle

Quote: 





rock&rollfrenchfries said:


> guess who the highest paid musician was in 2012? and without even releasing an album in that year.


 
   
  Probably Lou Reed and Metallica - everyone I know was willing to give them $5 if they promised never to make another album together:


----------



## pokpokgei

the slogan from this yamaha advertisement pretty much says it's a calculated risk and yamaha has gone ahead with it knowing what waters they are entering here.

 yamaha probably sees more benefit over the cons of the lawsuit in this specific case and the yamaha guys behind this are probably laughing their way to the end of this episode.


----------



## scuttle

Quote: 





guerillaw said:


> Going forward then, the issue is not whether the patent was reasonable but rather whether BEATS can prove it was violated. If so, Yamaha will be liable.


 
   
  I'm not a lawyer, but I have worked with IP rights in the tech industry and the above is misleading for a layman I think: it makes it sound as if Beats could have lucked into a patent that should never have been granted, and if so there is nothing Yamaha can do. This is far, far, very far from the truth: getting a patent is relatively easy, but defending it is very hard. Getting the patent only requires that your claims pass a relatively cursory examination on uniqueness, etc. Defending requires a much higher level of proof against a determined opponent, because they will countersuit to show that the patent should not have been granted. E.g.
   
  Quote: 





> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent#Enforcement
> 
> An accused infringer has the right to challenge the validity of the patent allegedly being infringed in a countersuit. A patent can be found invalid on grounds described in the relevant patent laws, which vary between countries. Often, the grounds are a subset of requirements for patentability in the relevant country.


 
   
  This is very important because often the originality/significance grounds of the patent are complete bs and the Patent Office has failed to notice this. For example, I saw an example for an audioprocessing techology that attempted to restrict any competing technology from being based on ANY psychoasoustic model. This is, of course, insane.


----------



## Niyologist

Come on Yamaha. You guys are better than this. Why couldn't you guys just make your own headphone housing instead?


----------



## streetdragon

Quote: 





niyologist said:


> Come on Yamaha. You guys are better than this. Why couldn't you guys just make your own headphone housing instead?


 
  preferably an open backed housing


----------



## yliu

From the advertisement, it is obvious that Yamaha was copying Dr.Dre, which is quite sad.
   
  Yamaha's reputation will probably take a hit after this (at least for me) .


----------



## fatcat28037

Quote: 





craigster75 said:


> As a reminder, Monster and Beats split off some time ago into two separate and distinct companies.


 
   
   Point takes, Possibly the Monster culture has carried over the now Independent Beats.  
   
  Quote:
  Originally Posted by *Steve Eddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif

  


> Yamaha should hire Kurt Denke of Blue Jeans Cable to deal with this.
> 
> http://www.bluejeanscable.com/legal/mcp/index.htm
> 
> ...


 
  I remember this, classic indeed.


----------



## Lifted Andreas

Well since the Yamaha's would no doubt have better sound I'm not surprised.
   
  Beats was right to sue them, otherwise everyone would have realized that Yamahas sound better and Beats would have gone bust from loosing all their customers lol


----------



## cravenz

Disclaimer: I never bothered with the Apple and Samsung law suits. 
   
  I'm not sure they will have much on Yamaha if they are gunning for patent infringement (I've not been reading up on the case). 
   
  What they should be going for is looking at designs law in intellectual property.
   
  Also, if the issue of a patent challenge has come up, that's the usual counter by anyone who has been accused of infringement. It's more or less general protocol. If Beats get over the line, then the have a case. If they don't, then Yamaha are off the hook. But to prove infringement is a whole other hurdle altogether. You need to find some definitive proof that they have used Beat's technology, some connection that brings them together, to show that they didn't just build the whole thing themselves. 
   
  The whole idea behind intellectual property is to protect the process of the idea, at least in patents. But the idea itself is not protected because they don't want to stop "competition" and "innovation" so to speak. 
   
  One thing I will say though, if they go for designs, they will have to show that there are a gazillion different ways of making a headphone. And honestly, there are only so many ways you can make a headphone. Sure, Yamaha's ad campaign was targeted at Beats, but you see so many different companies do it, and this doesn't just apply in the audio industry. It applies globally. Alternatively, Yamaha could take the fall back option of a defence based on satire, to some extent. Not sure it is a defence in the country the suit is being brought up. 
   
  My little few pence worth.


----------



## AHorseNamedJeff

You can only make headphones  a couple of ways.... I'm gonna say NOPE, because the YAMAHA's are very clearly marked as yamaha, the logo is HUGE, looks nothing like the b, and the yamaha's do look more curved. Nice try monster, you're turning into apple.


----------



## FullCircle

Quote: 





eugenius said:


> Nothing is new in this world, that shape has surely been used before. Watch out if Apple launches some headphones, they're going to patent headphones with sound going to both ears.


 
   
   
         That has probably already been done.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





cravenz said:


> Disclaimer: I never bothered with the Apple and Samsung law suits.
> 
> I'm not sure they will have much on Yamaha if they are gunning for patent infringement (I've not been reading up on the case).
> 
> ...


 
   
  Far as I'm aware, the lawsuit doesn't involve any utility patents. It's all about design patents and "trade dress."
   
  se


----------



## AHorseNamedJeff

Lol, did a Heir Audio sponsor just diss apple?? lol watch out they're going to sue you for making small objects that put sound in your ears.


----------



## peaceful1

looks like a friendly relationship to me.


----------



## Niyologist

That'll work nicely.


----------



## myears

Pathetic Yamaha, Pathetic...


----------



## peaceful1

& now!! ladies & gentlemen Beats new housewife limit edition 
   
   

   
            this lawsuit will become the funniest moment of the year!!

        Beats slimy & sticky  series


----------



## myears

Quote: 





streetdragon said:


> i was just about to say that
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
   
  You have a good point, but the fact is that a company like Yamaha is copying the crap looking beats and taking advantage of its hype, which is based more on status than the performance of the product, which in turn is why yamaha's name is respected in the audio industry. It's just pathetic and damages the company's reputation amongst some of us.
   
  Disclaimer: I've never listened to any music with beats, but that's what it looks like based on may comments here, other sites and a little of prejudice (to be honest).


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





myears said:


> You have a good point, but the fact is that a company like Yamaha is copying the crap looking beats and taking advantage of its hype, which is based more on status than the performance of the product, which in turn is why yamaha's name is respected in the audio industry. It's just pathetic and damages the company's reputation amongst some of us.
> 
> Disclaimer: I've never listened to any music with beats, but that's what it looks like based on may comments here, other sites and a little of prejudice (to be honest).


 

 The sad reality is that Beats will continue to own a lion's share of the premium headphone market and an overwhelming percentage of current and future Beats owners will have no idea that Yamaha even makes headphones or even heard of Shure.


----------



## dryvadeum

Who cares? Those that remain ignorant and buy beats will continue to enjoy them whilst those that know better will seek other options and continue to enjoy those choices. 

If people want to buy and support mediocrity, let them - it's their problem not ours.


----------



## charliex

Quote: 





dryvadeum said:


> Who cares? Those that remain ignorant and buy beats will continue to enjoy them whilst those that know better will seek other options and continue to enjoy those choices.
> 
> If people want to buy and support mediocrity, let them - it's their problem not ours.


 
   
 touché !!


----------



## Beagle

Quote: 





dryvadeum said:


> Who cares? Those that remain ignorant and buy beats will continue to enjoy them whilst those that know better will seek other options and continue to enjoy those choices.
> 
> If people want to buy and support mediocrity, let them - it's their problem not ours.


 
   
  Exactly.
   
  I still don't see the resemblance. Besides, many headphones resemble other headphones. Is Sennheiser going to sue Shure because the 1440/1840 look like the 600/650?
   
  Quote: 





craigster75 said:


> The sad reality is that Beats will continue to own a lion's share of the premium headphone market and an overwhelming percentage of current and future Beats owners will have no idea that Yamaha even makes headphones or even heard of Shure.


 
   
  If they don't do their research and homework, they don't deserve good headphones anyway.


----------



## uchihaitachi

True that!


----------



## bcschmerker4

Quote: 





toddthemetalgod said:


> From the moment I saw these headphones I thought the design of these headphones was a complete rip off of Beats and seriously wondered why they would even consider this design. I don't even like the flashy, cheap design of Monster headphones in the first place. I respect Yamaha as an audio company, but targeting a consumer market in this way is pathetic
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
  Yamaha® makes better dynamic speakers for headsets than Monster Cable could hope to approach (albeit not so good as their domestic arch-rival Nakamichi® has across its own line).  I reckon that, provided they play their cards right, Yamaha Corporation can mount a gas-tight defence against Dr. Dre Beats, as a huge number of headsets across makes and models is similar in frame style.  Holding off the BBC (who, as I mentioned in Post #53, holds copyright on "Doctor Who") may be yet another matter.


----------



## bhima

Patenting a shape for a headphone is pretty bogus but with the US patent office, I'm sure they let someone patent water already.


----------



## Makiah S

bcschmerker4 said:


> Yamaha® makes better dynamic speakers for headsets than Monster Cable could hope to approach (albeit not so good as their domestic arch-rival Nakamichi® has across its own line).  I reckon that, provided they play their cards right, Yamaha Corporation can mount a gas-tight defence against Dr. Dre Beats, as a huge number of headsets across makes and models is similar in frame style.  Holding off the BBC (who, as I mentioned in Post #53, holds copyright on "Doctor Who") may be yet another matter.




Oh god yea... Bbc suing for dr.who usage... Thatd b something. Still the new dennons (d7100) look like beats too... Oh well... Still though... I think the Style is ugly. Anyways


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





bhima said:


> Patenting a shape for a headphone is pretty bogus but with the US patent office, I'm sure they let someone patent water already.


 
   
  They're called "design patents," and are different from "utility patents" which are for your regular "inventions" and what we normally think of when we think of patents.
   
  se


----------



## FullCircle

Quote: 





ahorsenamedjeff said:


> Lol, did a Heir Audio sponsor just diss apple?? lol watch out they're going to sue you for making small objects that put sound in your ears.


 
      
   
         "That has probably already been done" is a blanket statement not aimed at Apple. It is mainly a statement regarding the absurdity of the "system" today.


----------



## MDCLXVI

I don't really care which side wins as they are both in the wrong. Yamaha for not bothering to create something distinct on their own and Beats for their hyperbolic marketing and aggression. I got to admit though, that Yamaha "Doctor... who?" advert makes me laugh hard


----------



## drez

mdclxvi said:


> I don't really care which side wins as they are both in the wrong. Yamaha for not bothering to create something distinct on their own and Beats for their hyperbolic marketing and aggression. I got to admit though, that Yamaha "Doctor... who?" advert makes me laugh hard




I agree, very dissappointed that Yamaha went down this route with the styling, the beats actually look substantially better. I hope yamaha get caught out simply so that other companies stop making ugly shiny plastic headphones.


----------



## dryvadeum

Next thing Dr Dre will release a diss song directed towards Yamaha cos of the Dr Who? line...


----------



## scuttle

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> They're called "design patents," and are different from "utility patents" which are for your regular "inventions" and what we normally think of when we think of patents.
> 
> se


 
   
  Design patents are only valid for specific ornamentation.  In this case the shape - round earpieces, band at right angles - is  the most obvious possible, so it shouldn't be patentable - because the obvious/simplest/most functional solution doesn't count as ornamentation. Eg you can patent the classic hourglass coke bottle, but not a bottle with straight sides.


----------



## kr0gg

guys, i do really think that you're missing one important issue here.
  especially considering the "Dr... WHO" Yamaho commercial it is evident to me that the main point of design-copying was to loudly shout about the fact that Yamaha is entering a new market (which is currently occupied by Beats)
  any news about Beats spreads around verrry fast and wide. so this law-suit can actually be considered as a very wide commercial campaign.
  and i do think that Yamaha can pay any price for such a commercial.
   
   
  consider this:
  you've got two identical looking headphones in the market, the only diference is SQ.
  which one would someone choose?


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





kr0gg said:


> guys, i do really think that you're missing one important issue here.
> especially considering the "Dr... WHO" Yamaho commercial it is evident to me that the main point of design-copying was to loudly shout about the fact that Yamaha is entering a new market (which is currently occupied by Beats)
> any news about Beats spreads around verrry fast and wide. so this law-suit can actually be considered as a very wide commercial campaign.
> and i do think that Yamaha can pay any price for such a commercial.
> ...


 
  While the question might be rhetorical on Head-fi, it isn't to the general population.  For the same reason many want to see "Nike" on their sneakers, they want the "b" on their headphones.


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





beagle said:


> If they don't do their research and homework, they don't deserve good headphones anyway.


 
  I agree and actually see this suit as a win-win.  If Beats loses, I won't shed a tear and Yamaha gained free publicity for their superior-sounding headphones.  If Yamaha loses, they may be forced to change [improve] their design.


----------



## rongjc

Soul by Ludacris, Fanny Wang, Beats, and Yamaha all look similar to me


----------



## Billyjoegunrack

A win for beats is nothing but a win for absurdity. These lawsuits just reinforce a bad direction in a system that is becoming more and more ridiculous. The more choices people have in a given style, the better. Beats wins, and in the end, we all lose, because markets should be as open and free as possible. Nobody should own the rights to the general look of any product. Monster designed a headphone and went after a specific demographic, with the biggest amount of mass exposure. Anyone else should be able to design a product for that market, as long as it is their design. Is the Yamaha headphone similar in appearance? Yes, but is it clearly a different design, with merely a general resemblance.  Some people don't like the general look, and I get that, but Yamaha isn't going after the audiophile crowd with this, they are going after the mass market, where this general look is well received, and they should have the right to go into this market with their own design, even if it has a general resemblance to other products in that market.


----------



## Beagle

Quote: 





dryvadeum said:


> Next thing Dr Dre will release a diss song directed towards Yamaha cos of the Dr Who? line...


 
   
  Will he be able to pronounce "Yamaha"?


----------



## oogabooga

Is it wrong that I was more interested by Yamaha's ad for "Dr... who?", thinking they were actually Doctor Who related?


----------



## MDCLXVI

Haha.. look at those deep cups.. the soundstage must be great!


----------



## SandvichDISH

The whole patent system is just filled with bullocks.
  Another good example of this is the software patent problem.


----------



## oogabooga

Quote: 





mdclxvi said:


> Haha.. look at those deep cups.. the soundstage must be great!


 
  Out of this world.


----------



## SandvichDISH

Quote: 





oogabooga said:


> Out of this world.


 
  Oh, I saw what you did there you sneaky person!
  But truth be told, the Doctor must've had a taste for proper audio equipment in his +900 years of time travel!


----------



## Makiah S

sandvichdish said:


> Oh, I saw what you did there you sneaky person!
> But truth be told, the Doctor must've had a taste for proper audio equipment in his +900 years of time travel!




Ofc. Those cans where the stax omegas x10 dr who has 2 b a serious.audiophile :3 of he has those 400 years b4 us


----------



## Aisein

Quote: 





meddle said:


> I do think that Beats will have a strong case here, possible with the help of the Apple v Samsung precedent if they find it relevant. According this site: http://www.complex.com/music/2013/02/dr-dre-and-beats-electronics-are-suing-yamaha-for-copying-their-headphone-design, they are only suing for $75,000, which is a minuscule amount. So Beats aren't really in this for money, but for another reason.


 
  $75,000? That's it? That's hardly a profit. Not to mention that there are other headphones with similar styles to the Beats so I'm thinking that the design issue isn't as big a deal as Dr. Dre makes it out to be. The only up side for both companies is the marketing and attention that this dispute will get them. And if that's what both companies wanted, they should have just skipped this whole process and done something else.


----------



## Makiah S

... Dare i say charly sheen has cooked up another.publicity stunt... I can see him with the victors cans on his head... "winning duh" x(


----------



## miceblue

Quote: 





aisein said:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
  You're talking about Beats here, of course marketing is huge for them. Dem Beats fanboys will be all Gung-ho if Beats wins the case.


----------



## Makiah S

miceblue said:


> You're talking about Beats here, of course marketing is huge for them. Dem Beats fanboys will be all Gung-ho if Beats wins the case.




True... Dr dre n sheen will proably do a dis rap n Make even more money off what might b a wib


----------



## whitedragon551

What about the Monster N-Tune's? They look extremely similar as well.


----------



## Armaegis

Quote: 





mshenay said:


> True... Dr dre n sheen will proably do a dis rap n Make even more money off what might b a wib


 
   
  Charlie Sheen can rap?


----------



## dryvadeum

Quote: 





armaegis said:


> Charlie Sheen can rap?


 
  Only after a few lines of course


----------



## catspaw

Guys, correct me if im wrong but i think these Headphones (all of them) come in a package, that has a name on it. LIKE YAMAHA, SHURE or BEATS.
   
  So, even if the design is similar, there is no way to mistake them?
   
  Those patent wars are going to destroy the economy even faster than bankers and politicians....


----------



## asdfghjkzxcvbnm

.


----------



## Makiah S

Quote: 





dryvadeum said:


> Only after a few lines of course


 
  yea man, Charlie sheen can do ANYTHING after a few lines xD


----------



## Standarddeviate

I only read the first couple of pages, but I didn't see anything on here about race. When people buy beats, they're buying status, history, and the struggles of black man who fought his way up into fame and influence. This is something not only the black community buy into, but any teen or adult for that matter who's been been kicked around and shoved in the dirt. Yeah, sure to us head-fiers who can drop hundreds or even several grand on headphones and weigh out the subtle nuances of sound stage, pitch range and all that, Beats are joke! When you're struggling to get by with what you have, and someone buys you a pair of beats, or you finally save up enough to buy them yourself, they blow away that $20.00 pair of skull candy you've been hanging on to for the past couple years, and maybe it's all in your head, but people on the street look at you with respect. There's a guy with money. There's a guy who's made something of himself. There's the guy I'm gonna mug!
   
  Now as all of you were saying, yeah, they look very similar. Yeah, Yamaha knew what they were doing. Are they close enough for lawsuit? That's all up to the judge. If it's true that Yamaha was only sued for $75,000, then it's very possible Monster didn't expect it to even go to court. I'd imagine that's pretty close to what the lawyers are going to make.
   
  The real question is, do you think I can get some Yamaha stickers to put over my Studio Beats so I don't get mugged?


----------



## nigeljames

Quote: 





standarddeviate said:


> I only read the first couple of pages, but I didn't see anything on here about race. *When people buy beats, they're buying status, history, and the struggles of black man who fought his way up into fame and influence. This is something not only the black community buy into,* but any teen or adult for that matter who's been been kicked around and shoved in the dirt. Yeah, sure to us head-fiers who can drop hundreds or even several grand on headphones and weigh out the subtle nuances of sound stage, pitch range and all that, Beats are joke! When you're struggling to get by with what you have, and someone buys you a pair of beats, or you finally save up enough to buy them yourself, they blow away that $20.00 pair of skull candy you've been hanging on to for the past couple years, and maybe it's all in your head, but people on the street look at you with respect. There's a guy with money. There's a guy who's made something of himself. There's the guy I'm gonna mug!
> 
> Now as all of you were saying, yeah, they look very similar. Yeah, Yamaha knew what they were doing. Are they close enough for lawsuit? That's all up to the judge. If it's true that Yamaha was only sued for $75,000, then it's very possible Monster didn't expect it to even go to court. I'd imagine that's pretty close to what the lawyers are going to make.
> 
> The real question is, do you think I can get some Yamaha stickers to put over my Studio Beats so I don't get mugged?


 
   
  This is a joke, right?
  Certainly made me laugh


----------



## Makiah S

Quote: 





standarddeviate said:


> I only read the first couple of pages, but I didn't see anything on here about race. When people buy beats, they're buying status, history, and the struggles of black man who fought his way up into fame and influence. This is something not only the black community buy into, but any teen or adult for that matter who's been been kicked around and shoved in the dirt. Yeah, sure to us head-fiers who can drop hundreds or even several grand on headphones and weigh out the subtle nuances of sound stage, pitch range and all that, Beats are joke! When you're struggling to get by with what you have, and someone buys you a pair of beats, or you finally save up enough to buy them yourself, they blow away that $20.00 pair of skull candy you've been hanging on to for the past couple years, and maybe it's all in your head, but people on the street look at you with respect. There's a guy with money. There's a guy who's made something of himself. There's the guy I'm gonna mug!
> 
> Now as all of you were saying, yeah, they look very similar. Yeah, Yamaha knew what they were doing. Are they close enough for lawsuit? That's all up to the judge. If it's true that Yamaha was only sued for $75,000, then it's very possible Monster didn't expect it to even go to court. I'd imagine that's pretty close to what the lawyers are going to make.
> 
> The real question is, do you think I can get some Yamaha stickers to put over my Studio Beats so I don't get mugged?


 
  And there it is! Yea I live in a... ghetto neighborhood! And yes Beats are a status thing! Just like having a nice "hat" or a pair of awesome Jays [or what ever those shoes are called] and I'm not talking about any one race, since americans of all kinds. As Deviate mentioned.
   
  But I mean people should just be more aware of actually GOOD headphones, still though props to monster for capitalzing on that culture! I still hope they lose though... this is the United States, every on from every where does everything! Shame on Yahama for copying them but seriously... they aren't the only ones lol. But again monster might be working towards making a better name for it self, amoungst audiophiles and sound concious people. So maybe taking Yahama down is the first step in their approaching a new market... who knows xD


----------



## GREQ

Quote: 





nigeljames said:


> This is a joke, right?
> Certainly made me laugh


 
  Most beats are seen worn around the neck; this symbolises a broken chain which demonstrates their freedom.... or whatever.


----------



## streetdragon

Quote: 





greq said:


> Most beats are seen worn around the neck; this symbolises a broken chain which demonstrates their freedom.... or whatever.


 
  shouldn't it mean that they are being chained instead? since people can grab the wire and swing/fling them around by the neck if they are strong enough.....


----------



## kr0gg

"struggles of black man who fought his way up into fame and influence" made me laugh.
   
  it's true, but... in the end Dre needed that influence so that he could rip off poor teenagers.
   
  get to the top of the hill and humiliate those who are at the bottom.
   
  not quite THE american dream, eh?


----------



## Armaegis

Quote: 





kr0gg said:


> get to the top of the hill and humiliate those who are at the bottom.
> 
> not quite THE american dream, eh?


 
   
  Sounds pretty close to the American Dream to me...
   
  /cynic


----------



## odiolopithecool

Easy to see around beats are more a matter of style than quality
  and a simply : "you like music ? So quality ? This kind of style too ?! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Here is something for your MONEY..."  from yamaha.


----------



## Makiah S

Quote: 





armaegis said:


> Sounds pretty close to the American Dream to me...
> 
> /cynic


 
  Ikr <.<
   
  still I also agree Beats are a serious fashion assecory! Some guys where em in place of hats... I saw a dude tilt his beats the wrong direction once... he got jumped...


----------



## Dr4Bob

I think "Dr." Dre and Ludacris did about as much design work on their repective namesake headphones as Mike Tyson did on the electric grill which bears his name or the latest fragrance "by" Jennifer Lopez... At least the Yamaha seeks no such absurd labels.
   
  As to the styling similarity, the lawyers and courts will decide who profits. I predict the largest profit will be that of the attorneys.


----------



## Makiah S

Quote: 





dr4bob said:


> I think "Dr." Dre and Ludacris did about as much design work on their repective namesake headphones as Mike Tyson did on the electric grill which bears his name or the latest fragrance "by" Jennifer Lopez... At least the Yamaha seeks no such absurd labels.
> 
> As to the styling similarity, the lawyers and courts will decide who profits. I predict the largest profit will be that of the attorneys.


 
  ... True that dude!


----------



## Raphael K

Quote: 





kr0gg said:


> "struggles of black man who fought his way up into fame and influence" made me laugh.
> 
> it's true, but... in the end Dre needed that influence so that he could rip off poor teenagers.
> 
> ...


 
   
  Perfectly agree !


----------



## JuanseAmador

streetdragon said:


> juanseamador said:
> 
> 
> > What about them copying Shure.
> ...




IMO, Beats are way more similar to Shure's, than the Yamaha's to Beats.


----------



## Billyjoegunrack

Quote: 





juanseamador said:


> IMO, Beats are way more similar to Shure's, than the Yamaha's to Beats.


 
   
  I think of the:
   
[size=1.6em] Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon.[/size]


----------



## jude

Quote: 





juanseamador said:


> IMO, Beats are way more similar to Shure's, than the Yamaha's to Beats.


 
   
  Earlier in the thread, *I posted this*, but you probably didn't see it. Beats was out with the Studio (in 2008) before Shure had released any of its SRH over-ears (in 2009). Of course, I'm not suggesting that Shure copied Beats, or vice-versa--only that it seems unlikely Beats copied Shure, per those dates.


----------



## n9eryeah

interesting


----------



## guerillaw

Quote: 





scuttle said:


> I'm not a lawyer, but I have worked with IP rights in the tech industry and the above is misleading for a layman I think: it makes it sound as if Beats could have lucked into a patent that should never have been granted, and if so there is nothing Yamaha can do. This is far, far, very far from the truth: getting a patent is relatively easy, but defending it is very hard. Getting the patent only requires that your claims pass a relatively cursory examination on uniqueness, etc. Defending requires a much higher level of proof against a determined opponent, because they will countersuit to show that the patent should not have been granted. E.g.
> 
> 
> This is very important because often the originality/significance grounds of the patent are complete bs and the Patent Office has failed to notice this. For example, I saw an example for an audioprocessing techology that attempted to restrict any competing technology from being based on ANY psychoasoustic model. This is, of course, insane.


 
   
  Your point is very well taken. I presume, however, that a large company like monster would have done their due diligence and put forward a fairly bulletproof initial patent application.
   
  Again though, your point is very well taken. Yamaha is still able to challenge the validity of the initial patent to some degree. I would just be surprised if monster made that initial error given the size and nature of the company.


----------



## biggbenn74

This is just my opinion:

As long as Yamaha didn't steal any patents from Dre, or take Dres headphones and put their name on it, Yamaha should be left alone. I suppose that Dre got too afraid that the Yamaha would out perform, and out sell his product, so the first reaction: lawsuit. I'm personally pulling for Yamaha on this one, and I hope they can come to a good agreement throughout the entire process.

Think what you want though.


----------



## LizardKing1

Quote: 





biggbenn74 said:


> This is just my opinion:
> 
> As long as Yamaha didn't steal any patents from Dre, or take Dres headphones and put their name on it, Yamaha should be left alone. I suppose that Dre got too afraid that the Yamaha would out perform, and out sell his product, so the first reaction: lawsuit. I'm personally pulling for Yamaha on this one, and I hope they can come to a good agreement throughout the entire process.
> 
> Think what you want though.


 
   
  You're thinking like an audiophile, which is far from Beats' market. Yamaha can't outsell Beats because they lack what makes Beats sell: publicity from rappers and pop singers. It would hardly matter if the Yamahas were the best in their class sound-wise, this would only appeal to a niche.
  In my guess, Beats sued them because it's an outright provocation. I really don't care much about Yamaha, although like I said as long as they don't copy the B logo and have their clearly showing, they aren't copying anything.


----------



## Koerhijo

While those do look similar, I believe it's a good step. By 'stealing' Beats customers due to looks, perhaps those customers will also realize the sound quality being better and then, MAYBE, they'll become better educated on good quality sound overall. Maybe.. maybe people will stop buying headphones due to looks entirely and other not as 'hip' headphones will get more business.


----------



## steffanan

yeah, that's like the 50th company to make headphones that look JUST like the beats.


----------



## Arkyle

They have a point here. I don't get why Yamaha resorted to that; they are a serious company that doesn't need that kind of rip-off. I heard they sound way better than beats (not that it is something hard to accomplish).


----------



## Arkyle

Quote: 





steffanan said:


> yeah, that's like the 50th company to make headphones that look JUST like the beats.


 
  But there's a huge difference. We are talking about YAMAHA here, not some new company made specifically to steal others' designs.


----------



## BloodyPenguin

Wonder if Yamaha is trying to clear their inventory, because the *Yamaha PRO 500 *is on sale at Amazon (in Black or Blue) for $302.
   
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0092T858E
   
  ..


----------



## pokpokgei

Quote: 





bloodypenguin said:


> Wonder if Yamaha is trying to clear their inventory, because the *Yamaha PRO 500 *is on sale at Amazon (in Black or Blue) for $302.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0092T858E
> 
> ..


 
   
  anyone know the sound signature of these?


----------



## SpiderNhan

Quote: 





pokpokgei said:


> anyone know the sound signature of these?


 
  I had a quick listen at B&H Photo and I thought they sounded nice. My reference headphones are the V-Moda M-100s and I thought the clarity was comparable with the M-100s having an edge in detail retrieval. The 500s have a mid-bass hump, which is not surprising given their aesthetics, and the bass has plenty of slam although it's not as tight or controlled as the M-100s, but bass is definitely the defining sound frequency. The mids were forward and more pronounced than the M-100, which have been criticized for having a "laid-back" or "recessed" midrange. The last thing I'm going to comment on is its soundstage which is on par for closed circumaurals. It is noticeably not as wide was the M-100 and more of a "in your head" kind of feel.
   
  This is just from a quick listen and I only used one song so take this with a grain of salt.


----------



## goodvibes

Quote: 





biggbenn74 said:


> This is just my opinion:
> 
> As long as Yamaha didn't steal any patents from Dre, or take Dres headphones and put their name on it, Yamaha should be left alone. I suppose that Dre got too afraid that the Yamaha would out perform, and out sell his product, so the first reaction: lawsuit. I'm personally pulling for Yamaha on this one, and I hope they can come to a good agreement throughout the entire process.
> 
> Think what you want though.


 
  I thought the same until a saw this.

  That's clearly trading on the Beats dime.


----------



## EPICFAILXD

Honestly this argument is pointless. Beats haven't even patented their design fwir


----------



## Makiah S

here's a nice though to. I'm not 100% of the validity of this statement. But apprently Monster Cable [the ppl who where behind Beats] had over 53% of all headphones Sales in the Us in 2012. Again not to sure how true that it but... based on what i see around me it makes sense.
   
  Which is terribly because I remember when EVERYONE had Sony's or Koss's or Philips, Yahama ect... ect... so -.- I really do hope Monster Loses... they push there "trendy" products on an ignorant market... but I suppose if those consumers don't care for sound [which there r many ppl like that] no big deal.
   
  Still I had a neat conversation with a young gal yesterday. She's says to me "why spend $300 on Beats when I can get a purse for that much, I don't even use headphones every day"... which impressed upon my how "stylish" Monster Cable products are [even though they sound pretty terribad] I guess for some that "300" purse is a pair of beats around your neck! 
   
  So... I hope the lose but I doubt they will.


----------



## Armaegis

Well for that crowd, who needs headphones when they can blast the tiny piercing speaker on their iphones?


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





epicfailxd said:


> Honestly this argument is pointless. Beats haven't even patented their design fwir


 
   
  Beats has 11 design patents covering a number of headphone, ear bud, loudspeaker and transmitter box designs.
   
  D632,668
  D637,176
  D637,998
  D637,999
  D641,736
  D657,344
  D657,345
  D660,826
  D672,715
  D674,767
   
  Again, these are design patents, not utility patents. They only cover "looks," not functionality.
   
  se


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





> Originally Posted by *Mshenay* /img/forum/go_quote.gif
> 
> Which is terribly because I remember when EVERYONE had Sony's or Koss's or Philips, Yahama ect... ect... so -.- I really do hope Monster Loses... they push there "trendy" products on an ignorant market... but I suppose if those consumers don't care for sound [which there r many ppl like that] no big deal.


 
   
  Monster already lost. Beats (a completely separate company) owns all of the intellectual property.
   
  se


----------



## TheGame21x

Normally, I love taking the side of the other guys whenever Beats sues someone but Yamaha was asking for it with that clear rip off and marketing design.


----------



## earfonia

This happen when people cares more of the appearance than the sound 
  I guess when they sound the same, using same driver, but difference appearance, no one will care to file a lawsuit...


----------



## spitfire77

They shoud be sueing soul headphones they look just like the yamahas  go to https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&biw=1280&bih=685&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=soul+headphones&btnG=#imgrc=-fTBimjzNrZnOM%3A%3B42XKAe0J3DwZUM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.maximumpc.com%252Ffiles%252Fu5033%252Fludacris_soul_bz.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.maximumpc.com%252Farticle%252Freviews%252Fsoul_electronics_sl150_headphone_review%3B911%3B1200 to see a  pic


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





spitfire77 said:


> They shoud be sueing soul headphones they look just like the yamahas  go to https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&biw=1280&bih=685&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=soul+headphones&btnG=#imgrc=-fTBimjzNrZnOM%3A%3B42XKAe0J3DwZUM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.maximumpc.com%252Ffiles%252Fu5033%252Fludacris_soul_bz.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.maximumpc.com%252Farticle%252Freviews%252Fsoul_electronics_sl150_headphone_review%3B911%3B1200 to see a  pic


 

 IMO, much bigger difference between Soul/Beats compared to Yamaha/Beats.  Some obvious differences include starkly different color choices, quilted padding under headband and cup design.


----------



## Arkyle

Quote: 





spitfire77 said:


> They shoud be sueing soul headphones they look just like the yamahas  go to https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&biw=1280&bih=685&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=soul+headphones&btnG=#imgrc=-fTBimjzNrZnOM%3A%3B42XKAe0J3DwZUM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.maximumpc.com%252Ffiles%252Fu5033%252Fludacris_soul_bz.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.maximumpc.com%252Farticle%252Freviews%252Fsoul_electronics_sl150_headphone_review%3B911%3B1200 to see a  pic


 
   
  That's the problem when dealing with that kind of design (pivoting sleek drivers on the band). Unless they do something substancial they are pretty much alike (like Denon's new flagship).


----------



## pokpokgei

Quote: 





earfonia said:


> This happen when people cares more of the appearance than the sound
> I guess when they sound the same, using same driver, but difference appearance, no one will care to file a lawsuit...


 
   
  lol using the same driver but different appearance and slightly different tuning?
   
  imagine how that will turn out with the actual OEM of most products being some unknown OEM in China. then all the rights should go to these unknown OEMs? 

 the world is a scary place if you look/trace things down to their roots/source and the "objectivity" that is practised on the surface in society. but this isnt a thread to discuss that, so..


----------



## pokpokgei

Quote: 





spidernhan said:


> I had a quick listen at B&H Photo and I thought they sounded nice. My reference headphones are the V-Moda M-100s and I thought the clarity was comparable with the M-100s having an edge in detail retrieval. The 500s have a mid-bass hump, which is not surprising given their aesthetics, and the bass has plenty of slam although it's not as tight or controlled as the M-100s, but bass is definitely the defining sound frequency. The mids were forward and more pronounced than the M-100, which have been criticized for having a "laid-back" or "recessed" midrange. The last thing I'm going to comment on is its soundstage which is on par for closed circumaurals. It is noticeably not as wide was the M-100 and more of a "in your head" kind of feel.
> 
> This is just from a quick listen and I only used one song so take this with a grain of salt.


 
   
  interesting of yamaha to be able to tune a punchier bass than the m100 and yet still retain a more forward mid than the m100.


----------



## catspaw

I doubt that we will be able to come to any reasonable answer to this dispute. We are a niche of higly informed users with high expentancy of the products we purchase.
   
  Beats are Yamahas are not directed towards this sort of crowd, but to a crowd that buys based on impulses (80% of the human population).
   
  This is why we are "the lucky ones", when it comes to sound, as we get our moneys worth.
   
  Lucky for me, im the same in Computers, and my main passion is gaming/music.
   
  Unfortunatelly, this means normal people who want to not get scammed (i belive selling a cheap overpriced product is a form of scam), a decent amount of information has to be gathered before any purchase.
   
  This is ..... bs...
   
  This is for example, something i belive is happening also with the gaming industry almost since 2009.
  From times of crysis, dead space 1 , witcher 1 and gears of war, to call of duty-like games.
   
  Seems like people have such a huge need to spend their money, that no matter what they are offered they will buy it.
   
  Well, i better stop here cus im going off-topic with something that simply pisses me off.


----------



## SpiderNhan

Quote: 





pokpokgei said:


> interesting of yamaha to be able to tune a punchier bass than the m100 and yet still retain a more forward mid than the m100.


 
  It could be my source. My M-80s do the same thing. There seems to be more mid-bass "slam" on the M-80s, yet the bass doesn't extend as deep as the M-100s or is as detailed or controlled. I went back yesterday and had a bit more time to play with the Pro 500s and they have a similar sound signature to the M-100s. I was wrong about the sound stage. They are actually on par with one another. For now I say they are like M-100s with more mid-bass, more pronounced mids, and with less comfortable earcups.


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





spidernhan said:


> It could be my source. My M-80s do the same thing. There seems to be more mid-bass "slam" on the M-80s, yet the bass doesn't extend as deep as the M-100s or is as detailed or controlled. I went back yesterday and had a bit more time to play with the Pro 500s and they have a similar sound signature to the M-100s. I was wrong about the sound stage. They are actually on par with one another. For now I say they are like M-100s with more mid-bass, more pronounced mids, and with less comfortable earcups.


 

 These are some interesting tradeoffs.  Since sound comparisons might be off topic here but are very interesting, would you mind posting on the M-100 and/or PRO 500 threads?


----------



## pokpokgei

Quote: 





spidernhan said:


> It could be my source. My M-80s do the same thing. There seems to be more mid-bass "slam" on the M-80s, yet the bass doesn't extend as deep as the M-100s or is as detailed or controlled. I went back yesterday and had a bit more time to play with the Pro 500s and they have a similar sound signature to the M-100s. I was wrong about the sound stage. They are actually on par with one another. For now I say they are like M-100s with more mid-bass, more pronounced mids, and with less comfortable earcups.


 
   
  sounds like a total upgrade over the M-100s.
   
  i dont have much experience with forward mids having own only a handful of IEMs but 1 issue i had with forward mids in a recent IEM i purchased.
   
  i noticed that forward mids give me more intimacy as vocals are nearer but it also limits the amount of volume i can increase, quite significantly and seems to fatigue listening more easier especially if i am listening over a couple of hours continuously even if i am already listening at low volumes. not sure if this is a universal encounter with others too.


----------



## Makiah S

Quote: 





catspaw said:


> I doubt that we will be able to come to any reasonable answer to this dispute. We are a niche of higly informed users with high expentancy of the products we purchase.
> 
> Beats are Yamahas are not directed towards this sort of crowd, but to a crowd that buys based on impulses (80% of the human population).
> 
> ...


 
  Preach it brother!


----------



## Techno Kid

Quote: 





toddthemetalgod said:


> From the moment I saw these headphones I thought the design of these headphones was a complete rip off of Beats and seriously wondered why they would even consider this design. I don't even like the flashy, cheap design of Monster headphones in the first place. I respect Yamaha as an audio company, but targeting a consumer market in this way is pathetic
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
   
  Monster and Beats aren't business partners anymore, this is Dre's own company know.


----------



## JuanseAmador

jude said:


> juanseamador said:
> 
> 
> > IMO, Beats are way more similar to Shure's, than the Yamaha's to Beats.
> ...




Actually, these (http://www.amazon.com/Shure-SRH240A-Professional-Quality-Headphones/dp/B002DP594W/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1361579755&sr=8-5&keywords=shure+srh+440) came out in 2004.


----------



## jude

Quote: 





juanseamador said:


> Actually, these (http://www.amazon.com/Shure-SRH240A-Professional-Quality-Headphones/dp/B002DP594W/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1361579755&sr=8-5&keywords=shure+srh+440) came out in 2004.


 
   
  JuanseAmador, I know that it says that in the Amazon entry, in the _"Date first available at Amazon.com"_ field, but that date looks like an error to me. If you look at the date of the first review for that product on Amazon, it's in 2009. And the first post anywhere revealing pricing of the SRH240, SRH440, and SRH840 was on April 20, 2009, on Head-Fi--I know because I made that post (and I remember because I announced it a day before the prices were announced by Shure at NAB that year).
   
  Here's Shure's press release on one of the wires, dated July 20, 2009...
   
  http://multivu.prnewswire.com/mnr/shure/39209/
   
  ...and the release on Shure's website...
   
  http://www.shure.com/americas/news-events/press-releases/new-srh-headphones


----------



## JuanseAmador

jude said:


> juanseamador said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, these (
> ...


----------



## jude

Quote: 





juanseamador said:


> Oh, I thought it was released on 2004 because of that, they should fix it.


 
   
  I agree, I would've thought the same thing. I also use that field when I'm trying to verify music and movie reissue dates.


----------



## King of Pangaea

They look like headphones, both of them.  What can any reasonable person expect them to look like?  Form follows function, and so any reasonable design is pretty much going to follow that rule and wind up looking, in general, the same.  Outlandish design approaches merely to catch the eye or the sales dollar of the unconventional buyer aside, a pair of headphones is going to look like a pair of headphones.  They have the Yamaha logo on them, not the Beats logo.  I don't think anyone is going to be confused.
   
  I didn't think much of the Beats phones when I heard them once, muddy mushy over EQ'd bass, and now this?  Not only do I fail to see any reasonable argument in Beat's favor, I think they deserve to be thrown out of court on the general grounds of wasting the court's time.  If I was an Judge I would rule for a demurrer.


----------



## Mraudio777

yep,that looks very similar to the pros,yamaha! btw yamaha,your headphones suck


----------



## Contrails

Someone should sue Beats for failing to produce the sound as the artist wanted...


----------



## streetdragon

Quote: 





contrails said:


> Someone should sue Beats for failing to produce the sound as the artist wanted...


 
  LOL
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 that would be interesting though


----------



## Hutnicks

Have to wonder at the timing here. Dre sells off a large portion of his holdings in Beats and they do not renew their relationship with Monster. I have to wonder if this is some kind of pr nonsense to show Beats can in fact exist without Monster.
   
   
  BTW Beats, the only headphone that sounds better as a Chinese knock off.


----------



## lazyredhead

i don't really care about Beats or Yamaha. So from a neutral standpoint, beats are clearly in the right here. Yamaha might as well buy the Beats and slap their own logo on it.


----------



## Maxx134

The trademark is the logo.
All headphones will have similarities. 
Yamaha has a much more different logo imprinted. 
There is no confusion on difference. 
Thats like saying GE can sue Philips because their 60watt light bulb has same shape. 

Too bad for beats.
Their "b" symbol will be their downfall in this.


----------



## Maxx134

Wow this is a great post:



guerillaw said:


> This community has added so much to my enjoyment of music and I seldom get to contribute much back. As a lawyer I will thus ignore my instinct not to get involved in legal issues I am not a party to because I think I can shed some light on some of the questions and concerns raised in this thread, in particular as it relates to our beloved hobby.
> 
> 
> The fact of the matter is our current legal system provides anyone with enough resources the opportunity to start a lawsuit whether it is meritorious or not. That is just the reality. This has negative consequences for both folks with limited means as well as huge corporations with almost limitless funds.
> ...


----------



## catspaw

Of course its free publicity, however, its bad publicity, since it does not show your product as a good one, but rather atack another.
  This is the same reason why politicians atack each other, becouse they can say nothing good about themsleves.
  Its true that for now, this strategy seems to work, but its getting less and less effective.
  Especially with people like the ones in this comunity. People who can educate others into not buying beats or yamaha, but hifiman and sennhesier.
   
  Its a stupid move by yamaha, as simple as that.


----------



## Makiah S

that was a good post, and yea... that makes the most sense. Pubcility on both sides.


----------



## King of Pangaea

Yes, in response to the lawyer from NYC, all the Head-Fiers can march up to the courthouse and besiege the place as expert witnesses.  That would be a lot of fun.


----------



## Makiah S

Quote: 





king of pangaea said:


> Yes, in response to the lawyer from NYC, all the Head-Fiers can march up to the courthouse and besiege the place as expert witnesses.  That would be a lot of fun.


 
  omg a Head-Fi walking Protest... that would b cool... we could just sit on the courthouse steps with our portable rigs... have a good ole sit in or a SPUR OF THE MOMENT. Head Fi meet right out side lawl


----------



## v10gta

Beats has a point. They look very simaler.


----------



## raihananandya

It's apple versus samsung all over again. But honestly i can't blame beats for this one, the headphones do look similar


----------



## Craigster75

Despite overwhelmingly positive reviews of Yamaha's SQ, I am hesitant to purchase the PRO 500.  It is not because of this lawsuit.  It is because Yamaha chose to copy a poor design that is uncomfortable, heavy and has the appearance of a cheaply made plastic product, not a $400 audiophile headphone.


----------



## SmOgER

They do look very similiar indeed, but when look at them side by side, Yamaha could have done just enough not to lose the case or get away with minimal consequences... :


----------



## Hutnicks

It's all going to come down to the patent itself and what it contains. Is the Yamaha different enough from beats patent? Then again if Yamaha knows anything of prior art and can show beats really did not invent anything new here all bets are off.


----------



## JuanseAmador

Ok, this is hypocrisy at its best. Look at the Beats logo and Anton Stankowski's logo from 1971. 



Then, BigFix and Priority Parking:



And finally, British Paints and Pagan Osbourne.



See, the "b" used in the Beats logo is a rip off, and it's a multiple rip off.


----------



## LizardKing1

I think it's not just about copying a logo, you have to prove how that stolen logo is being used in the same market as the logo from the original company and is taking away customers from them. I read somewhere that it comes down to proving wether the copied logo was able to lead customers into buying from one company thinking it's another one. Since no one will buy a can of paint thinking it's a pair of Beats headphones (then again I don't expect much from Beats customers, maybe Dre can convince them paint has swag). Can anyone confirm this?


----------



## applebook

Monster Beats has no integrity, but like Lizard says, those trademarked symbols are from completely different industries and aren't competitors. Is there a trademark lawyer in the house? Surely, a few of those owners would have sued by now if they could (they should too).


----------



## applebook

Quote: 





earfonia said:


> This happen when people cares more of the appearance than the sound
> I guess when they sound the same, using same driver, but difference appearance, no one will care to file a lawsuit...


 
   
  It's all about profits. Beats is supposedly selling really well (I haven't seen the figures), so even some of the big boys like Yamaha want in. 
   
  Denon did enough with its new design to differentiate itself from Beats yet still manages to capture some of the similarities. Unfortunately, Denon also chose to mimic the Beats sound signature and has ruined what was a great line of fun but still hi-fi cans.


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





applebook said:


> *Monster Beats has no integrity*, but like Lizard says, those trademarked symbols are from completely different industries and aren't competitors. Is there a trademark lawyer in the house? Surely, a few of those owners would have sued by now if they could (they should too).


 
  While I am not a fan of their headphones, this is a very strong statement.  What is your premise for stating this?


----------



## LizardKing1

Quote: 





craigster75 said:


> While I am not a fan of their headphones, this is a very strong statement.  What is your premise for stating this?


 
   
  While I don't hate Monster, things like this make me seriously doubt their integrity. It's a story that's been around for some time, that one has pictures.


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





craigster75 said:


> While I am not a fan of their headphones, this is a very strong statement.  What is your premise for stating this?


 
   
  Quote: 





lizardking1 said:


> While I don't hate Monster, things like this make me seriously doubt their integrity. It's a story that's been around for some time, that one has pictures.


 

 Fair enough regarding Monster.  Please keep in mind Beats is now a completely separate company with no affiliation to Monster currently.


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





lizardking1 said:


> I think it's not just about copying a logo, you have to prove how that stolen logo is being used in the same market as the logo from the original company and is taking away customers from them. I read somewhere that it comes down to proving wether the copied logo was able to lead customers into buying from one company thinking it's another one. Since no one will buy a can of paint thinking it's a pair of Beats headphones (then again I don't expect much from Beats customers, maybe Dre can convince them paint has swag). Can anyone confirm this?


 
   
  You might want to have a look at the ruling over the use of the word (sic) Ipad , and how it confounded apple. Copyright is different from patent and copyright infringement transcends industry. Again prior art and intellectual property assertions rule here. See WWF vs WWF (world wildlife fund) there could be no two industries on earth more disparate and "who got there first" one out. The only thing Beats has that is unique is the Name and I do not see Yamaha by Dre anywhere.
   
  The patent issue intrigues me, as other than a flat cable (which Yamaha was foolish enough to use) I cannot see any technical innovation whatsoever in any of the Beats products. Once again I'd love to see what exactly the patent states. If Yamaha has any prior art proof whatsoever the Beats patent could be challenged leaving them to rely on copyright, which as shown elsewhere here is on shaky ground itself.  This looks like specious litigation at its best. Anyone know if Dre has some new bassbloated product coming out soon?


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





hutnicks said:


> The patent issue intrigues me, as other than a flat cable (which Yamaha was foolish enough to use) I cannot see any technical innovation whatsoever in any of the Beats products.


 
   
  That's because Beats' patents are what are called design patents, which simply cover the "looks" of something, not utility patents which are for functional innovations.
   
  se


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> That's because Beats' patents are what are called design patents, which simply cover the "looks" of something, not utility patents which are for functional innovations.
> 
> se


 
   
  I get that, but still there must really be some feats of literary description there to cover off what is essentially nothing new. If they are relying on that teardrop shape to save them, I suspect they are in for a pretty rude awakening.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





hutnicks said:


> I get that, but still there must really be some feats of literary description there to cover off what is essentially nothing new. If they are relying on that teardrop shape to save them, I suspect they are in for a pretty rude awakening.


 
   
  I posted a list of all of Beats' design patents in this post, so you can pull them up and take a look at them for yourself:
   
  http://www.head-fi.org/t/651161/news-beats-in-a-lawsuit-with-yamaha/195#post_9187718
   
  I don't think there are going to be any rude awakenings. I think there are just some lawyers who are going to make some money on both sides. This may not even get to court.
   
  se


----------



## blasjw

Quote: 





mheat122134 said:


> I find those look like soul by ludacris more.


 
  I totally agree.  I have the Ludacris and the first time I saw the Yamahas my first thought was "Yamaha makes Ludacris???"


----------



## catspaw

False Advertising is basicly the only form of advertising there is left.
  I dont think Sennheiser or Hifiman or even Stax needs a huge investment in ads since their products actually are good.
  Since they are, people will talk about them.
  But beats and yamaha need publicity to sell, becouse otherway probably noone would care for them.
   
  In todays World, companies even buy forums to spread ads (and that falls into false ads, as well as fraud since its mascarading an ad as a personal opinion, not to mention that you are faking to be many people while its the same person writing).
   
  If we add to this things like Spams, scams, and so on, the only way to beat this system is to "pave people you can trust".
   
  So basicly, i hope this niche that we have right now wont get too big, or someday it will probably be bought by apple or something like that (Perfect example of this is Tomshardware.com, once a great site for hardware, today a marketing system).


----------



## Steve Eddy

Uh oh. Looks like TDK's getting into the act now.
   
  http://www.tdkperformance.com/en-us/Headphones/
   
  Look at the "High Fidelity" models.
   
  se


----------



## droido256

ok, I dont see it. The headband looks different and more solid, earcups look better than beats, and different. Yamaha's design is nothing like beats.
  What we have here is one of the worst headphone makers, suing one of the best, simply because they want more money. I sure hope Yamaha's lawyers takes beats to the floor.
   
  (note I maaaayyybe a little biased seeing as I cannot stand beats, and am a Yamaha fan, however I do not see enough of a resemblance, nor any kind of infringement on beats crap by Yamaha.)


----------



## Armaegis

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> Uh oh. Looks like TDK's getting into the act now.
> 
> http://www.tdkperformance.com/en-us/Headphones/
> 
> ...


 
   
  I know the ST800 has been out for quite some time. Not sure about the 750 though.


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> Uh oh. Looks like TDK's getting into the act now.
> 
> http://www.tdkperformance.com/en-us/Headphones/
> 
> ...


 

 They look nothing like Beats; they're.................silver???


----------



## applebook

It's pretty obvious what TDK, Yamaha, Denon, and others are doing. Carmakers and other companies in every industry do this all the time. Take a look at what "smartphones" looked like prior to the iPhone, and what many of them look like afterwards. IMO, being able to copyright a basic shape just adds fuel to the fire against patent laws, which have become ridiculous. 
   
  For Beats to rip off those logos is a bigger encroachment, IMO.


----------



## streetdragon

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> Uh oh. Looks like TDK's getting into the act now.
> 
> http://www.tdkperformance.com/en-us/Headphones/
> 
> ...


 
  and i thought that akg K550 had no bass until i tried their ST800/ST700. (forgot which one i tried)
 Absolutely rubbish, dry and not even clear.


----------



## droido256

I never thought TDK made anything good except cd's, and cassettes......ah cassettes.....I miss thee. All their headphones I've tried sucked lol.


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





droido256 said:


> I never thought TDK made anything good except cd's, and cassettes......ah cassettes.....I miss thee. All their headphones I've tried sucked lol.


 

 Yes the TDK's ,the Maxell's, sure  Memorexwil have a go too. You would think that given the ability of Superlux to knock out decent sounding cans for cheap, these guys could at least do as well. Boggles the mind why they just don't rebrand them and save the agro. Then again never underestimate a large corporations ability to asses an overcrowded market, say "me too" and jump right in.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





craigster75 said:


> They look nothing like Beats; they're.................silver???


 
   
  I'm not talking about the photo at the top of the page. I'm talking about the headphones in their "High Fidelity" range down below. The ST750, STi710, ST800 and ST700.
   
  http://www.tdkperformance.com/en-us/Headphones/High-Fidelity-Headphones/ST750-High-Fidelity/
  http://www.tdkperformance.com/en-us/Headphones/High-Fidelity-Headphones/STi710/
  http://www.tdkperformance.com/en-us/Headphones/High-Fidelity-Headphones/ST800-High-Fidelity-Headphones/
  http://www.tdkperformance.com/en-us/Headphones/High-Fidelity-Headphones/ST700/
   
  se


----------



## Craigster75

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> I'm not talking about the photo at the top of the page. I'm talking about the headphones in their "High Fidelity" range down below. The ST750, STi710, ST800 and ST700.
> 
> http://www.tdkperformance.com/en-us/Headphones/High-Fidelity-Headphones/ST750-High-Fidelity/
> http://www.tdkperformance.com/en-us/Headphones/High-Fidelity-Headphones/STi710/
> ...


 

 I know, it was my poor attempt at humor


----------



## iPaintCode

So many rip-off artists around now, Google and Samsung been getting into bed with each other basically copying all things Apple. It's not a secret Johnny Ive had a lot of inspiration from Diter Ram's Braun work. But one thing Apple does, they reinvent and make better by adding their own signature, big difference. Chromebook pixel launch video even copies Apples launch videos but wait they used a dark background instead of white. Take a look at the Chromebook Pixel site, it looks exactly like a mash between the last MacBook Pro site and the current landing MacBook Pro page, from product shoots, to CSS3 transitions. It's obvious from images like this Google and Samsung are just straight ripping and butchering Apples design: 
   





   
   
  Funny part is, all these Apple ripoffs are full of cheap plastic, crappy hardware, horrible screens, twice the weight, 1/2 the battery life if lucky, the absolute WORST trackpads and the list goes on. But hey they cost 1/3 - 1/2 of a new MacBook Air/Pro. Not to mention silver metal looking wann-be aluminium chassis, black streamline keyboard, black glossy trim on LED and the list goes on. Then you have the new Chromebook Pixel, 1299 for a browser... I'm all for someone challenging Apple but this is just straight up calling for a Steve Jobs come back from the grave ass whipping. Sadly if Steve was around this would have never happened.
   
  Sadly I've noticed this trend in the headphone world. Welcome to a world of plagiarism, and people wonder why patent laws are so out of control...


----------



## droido256

Go get em Yamaha, you have my support. At least Yamaha makes audio equipment that sounds good, unlike the many hi-fi posers out there.


----------



## applebook

Off topic but there are plenty of really good ultrabooks out there. Yes, Apple was the first to popularize it, just like the smartphone and the tablet, but I would much rather have a 1080p IPS screen ZenBook, which isn't made of cheap materials either.


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





ipaintcode said:


> So many rip-off artists around now, Google and Samsung been getting into bed with each other basically copying all things Apple. It's not a secret Johnny Ive had a lot of inspiration from Diter Ram's Braun work. But one thing Apple does, they reinvent and make better by adding their own signature, big difference. Chromebook pixel launch video even copies Apples launch videos but wait they used a dark background instead of white. Take a look at the Chromebook Pixel site, it looks exactly like a mash between the last MacBook Pro site and the current landing MacBook Pro page, from product shoots, to CSS3 transitions. It's obvious from images like this Google and Samsung are just straight ripping and butchering Apples design:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

 Think you might find RIM developed and held the smartphone market long before Apple Me Too'd there way in. Whining about Samsung or anyone else horning in on their action really brings turnabout being fair play to mind. Apple of all organizations should be the last to throw stones. Then again were it not for the iPhone and that found money cash cow known as itunes, they'd still be scratching around for 8 per cent of the computer market. If you're lucky maybe they will re introduce the Newton for you.


----------



## applebook

Quote: 





hutnicks said:


> Think you might find RIM developed and held the smartphone market long before Apple Me Too'd there way in.


 
   
  You might want to a do little research on what "smartphones" looked like before the iPhone came along. BB users kept insisting that physical keyboards were indispensable, and Samsung phones were Razr lookalikes, until the iPhone took off. You seem to forget that Apple had already made enormous profits with the iPod and now with the iPad, so your claim that the company is a one product success story (a one trick pony) is wrong.
   
  Some fanboys just can't over themselves and refuse to give credit even where it's clearly due. It's sort of a shame. I expect to read this sort of ignorance on YouTube, not here.
   
  P.S. I own an Android and 2 Windows PCs, not a single Apple product these days, but this is getting way off topic.


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





applebook said:


> You might want to a do little research on what "smartphones" looked like before the iPhone came along. BB users kept insisting that physical keyboards were indispensable, and Samsung phones were Razr lookalikes, until the iPhone took off. You seem to forget that Apple had already made enormous profits with the iPod and now with the iPad, so your claim that the company is a one product success story (a one trick pony) is wrong.
> 
> Some fanboys just can't over themselves and refuse to give credit even where it's clearly due. It's sort of a shame. I expect to read this sort of ignorance on YouTube, not here.
> 
> P.S. I own an Android and 2 Windows PCs, not a single Apple product these days, but this is getting way off topic.


 

 I did not forget a thing. With out RIM developing the smartphone market you'd still be listening to mp3's on a gen 2 ipod. Once again, itunes is floating the business and without it there would be no Ipod with a phone built in, now would there. As for fanboism, mirror mirror, perhaps. Gross adulation of Jobs can easily be remedied in 15 minutes of conversation with anyone who ever worked for him. You seem to have not a single molecule of knowledge of Apple pre iEverything and yet you accuse me of ignorance. Shame on you.


----------



## bcschmerker4

Quote: 





ipaintcode said:


> So many rip-off artists around now, Google and Samsung been getting into bed with each other basically copying all things Apple. It's not a secret Johnny Ive had a lot of inspiration from Diter Ram's Braun work. But one thing Apple does, they reinvent and make better by adding their own signature, big difference. Chromebook pixel launch video even copies Apples launch videos but wait they used a dark background instead of white. Take a look at the Chromebook Pixel site, it looks exactly like a mash between the last MacBook Pro site and the current landing MacBook Pro page, from product shoots, to CSS3 transitions. It's obvious from images like this Google and Samsung are just straight ripping and butchering Apples design:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

 From my perspective, Samsung® can keep its Chromebook®.  I'm currently starting the process of acquiring truckmountable computers, and the only manufacturer with qualifiable candidates, as of February 2013, is Matsushta-Kotobuki, the company behind the Panasonic® TOUGHBOOK® so loved in government-fleet circles; Apple® has yet to manufacture portable computers with serious hardpoints, so the Retina Display™ is out of the question.  Same for Asus®, which has fast enough hardware in the ROG® line (including some models with Creative® CA0116 DSP's) but, again, no hardpoints.
   
  Panasonic®, Yamaha®, and TDK® have useful enough headsets for certain tasks that may require some sound isolation; others have already ruled out Dr. Dre beats®, as far as I am concerned, as they boost bass at the expense of midrange.


----------



## catspaw

Funny, soon we will all have things that look the same (seems like government, socity, schools and now companies are trying to make everyone look, talk, and act the same way).
   
  And people seem to like this.... Am i the only one here who really does not want to have any of those lookalike items?


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





catspaw said:


> Funny, soon we will all have things that look the same (seems like government, socity, schools and now companies are trying to make everyone look, talk, and act the same way).
> 
> And people seem to like this.... Am i the only one here who really does not want to have any of those lookalike items?


 

 I think largely what has happened with regard to design is a narrowing of options due to CAD CAM being used. Look at the automotive field right now and it is rife with lookalike products from the new Land Rover which looks like the Lexus which looks like the Nissan... to a Bentley, of all things, that looks like it came off a Chrysler production line from the 3rd quarter view.
   
   Once you put the constraints of method of manufacture into the mix there is a limited amount of design leeway a computer system allows. Personally I find the whole "optimized for manufacture" look to be disconcerting. Can hardly wait for someone to rediscover the drafting board and pencil
   
  Perhaps the new patent infringement defense could be "Solidworks told us to do it"


----------



## Theogenes

Quote: 





hutnicks said:


> Perhaps the new patent infringement defense could be "Solidworks told us to do it"


 
   
  Nice


----------



## applebook

Quote: 





hutnicks said:


> I did not forget a thing. With out RIM developing the smartphone market you'd still be listening to mp3's on a gen 2 ipod. Once again, itunes is floating the business and without it there would be no Ipod with a phone built in, now would there. As for fanboism, mirror mirror, perhaps. Gross adulation of Jobs can easily be remedied in 15 minutes of conversation with anyone who ever worked for him. You seem to have not a single molecule of knowledge of Apple pre iEverything and yet you accuse me of ignorance. Shame on you.


 
  It's obvious who the fanboy here is. I don't own a single Apple product and haven't ever been a fan of the iPhone/iPod/ or iPad. I prefer Android and will not pay a premium for a Mac desktop either, but I'm objective and know basic facts. Whether or not Steve Jobs was a great human being isn't the issue. We're speaking about Apple products, so save your personal attacks about Jobs for another discussion. 
   
  Funny how you credit RIM for revolutionizing the smartphone but fail to give Apple the same due tip of the hat. If not for the iPhone, your smartphone today would be a BB clone, probably wouldn't even have a touchscreen and would likely require a stylus if it did. If not for the iPhone, BB wouldn't have released what is essentially an iPhone of its own with the Z10 or whatever it's called. The same thing can be said about the tablet market. Prior to Apple's entrance, few made a tablet anything like the iPad, and now everyone has one with similar features. I don't care for the iPhone or the iPad, but I'm not blind to their influence on the market, just like I'm not blind to the musical influence of people like Hendrix despite not being a fan of his. 
   
  I expect more informed discussion on here. I suppose iPaintCode started it with his pro Apple rant, but this doesn't give you the right to invent nonsense to satisfy your Apple hatred. Take it to YouTube or a PC forum for the thumbs up from other uninformed posters.


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





applebook said:


> It's obvious who the fanboy here is. I don't own a single Apple product and haven't ever been a fan of the iPhone/iPod/ or iPad. I prefer Android and will not pay a premium for a Mac desktop either, but I'm objective and know basic facts. Whether or not Steve Jobs was a great human being isn't the issue. We're speaking about Apple products, so save your personal attacks about Jobs for another discussion.
> 
> Funny how you credit RIM for revolutionizing the smartphone but fail to give Apple the same due tip of the hat. If not for the iPhone, your smartphone today would be a BB clone, probably wouldn't even have a touchscreen and would likely require a stylus if it did. If not for the iPhone, BB wouldn't have released what is essentially an iPhone of its own with the Z10 or whatever it's called. The same thing can be said about the tablet market. Prior to Apple's entrance, few made a tablet anything like the iPad, and now everyone has one with similar features. I don't care for the iPhone or the iPad, but I'm not blind to their influence on the market, just like I'm not blind to the musical influence of people like Hendrix despite not being a fan of his.
> 
> I expect more informed discussion on here. I suppose iPaintCode started it with his pro Apple rant, but this doesn't give you the right to invent nonsense to satisfy your Apple hatred. Take it to YouTube or a PC forum for the thumbs up from other uninformed posters.


 
   
  Your screen name suggests otherwise. As for nonsense you are shoveling buckets of drivel the like of which I have not seen in years. Apple did nothing but marry an mp3 player with a phone ,period. Their market share came from iTunes, period and that was marketing genius. You are driven no matter what you do to the iTunes store and that is as good a market capture as has ever been seen  As for a smart phone with touch screen, well Palm was there first now weren't they.  Yet you have the nerve to call me uninformed.
   
     You are the one who brought Jobs into this discussion, not me, but feel free to backpedal all you want.
   
  Very easy for you to talk about hatred isn't it. You are being taken to task over your lack of knowledge and that's the best rebuttal you can come up with? Your complete inability to comprehend Apple's business model and the product line resulting from that is mind boggling.
   
  Troll on somewhere else, I am done polluting this thread with responses to your lack of industry knowledge.


----------



## bonami2

Im new here..
   
  Beats Since 2008 http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beats_by_Dr._Dre      Owner Monster Cable Lol it funny 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




   
   
  Yamaha Since 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 1887 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamaha_Corporation
   
   
  And for apple fanboy
   
  I can build an alienware that are know to be overprized! and they look 20x better and better build than apple laptop..
   
  For 1800$ you are around 2300$ for the same spec in apple..
   
  And Apple laptop are know to overheat with window installed on it.. Airflow.. is bad!!  Just google it..
   
   
   
   
  Yamaha win my vote..


----------



## droido256

Reason being windoze is a resource hog, most Unix OS's are more efficient OSX being no different. I bet running a stable other Unix or Linux on a Mac wouldn't be running hot, tho I've never had a overheat condition on a Mac, and I've been using them since 1997. Still have my first Mac, and use it for journaling, runs great, sans the battery. Hp, dells, asus, etc never seem to last past the warranty. The only windoze machine I've ever liked was a Panasonic tough book. That sucker was nice.


----------



## AzN1337c0d3r

When did this thread degrade into a Windows vs Mac OS X flame war? Both have their merits.
   
  Back to Yamaha vs Beats. Yes, Yamaha is stealing Beats' looks. Yes, Beats has legal standing to sue Yamaha and win.
   
  But ONLY because of the *broken* patent system. IMO you shouldn't be able to patent a "look". I don't care if someone steals the "look" of a product, as long as they are providing choice. And please remember there are many types of choices: price, looks, quality, functionality.


----------



## AHorseNamedJeff

Bonami, you can't base copyright lawsuits based on how old a company is. If Sennheiser were to make a direct copy of a Focal headphone, who do you think would win?? And I'm gonna nip this apple vs windows flame war right in the bud. Each computer fills a niche, and that's all that matters. Go be content with your computer.


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





azn1337c0d3r said:


> When did this thread degrade into a Windows vs Mac OS X flame war? Both have their merits.
> 
> Back to Yamaha vs Beats. Yes, Yamaha is stealing Beats' looks. Yes, Beats has legal standing to sue Yamaha and win.
> 
> But ONLY because of the *broken* patent system. IMO you shouldn't be able to patent a "look". I don't care if someone steals the "look" of a product, as long as they are providing choice. And please remember there are many types of choices: price, looks, quality, functionality.


 
   
  I do not know if the patent system is broken or simply not up to dealing with things that did not exist when it was conceived. The look of a product can be of great importance (B&W nautilus for example) so that needs to be recognized. But when is a product different enough, supposedly when there is no prior art, but that relies on the patent system and its researchers itself and may not go into other intellectual property domains. In other words it is not thorough enough and relies on challenges and suit's to remedy any errors. Where it really breaks down is when design and technical details become involved (in short the system never took into account the accelerated rate of development brought on by the computer and internet ages). There just does not seem to be enough expertise in the Patent Office system(s) to make sound (no pun int) judgements on these type of issues.
   
  So to sum up you have
  A) insufficient information for the PO to draw on
  B) insufficient expertise in the PO to make a reasonable decision
  C) a system which relies on litigation to mediate its own errors.
  D) resulting in a sound retirement fund gold mine for patent lawyers. Doubly so if in fact they have Technological expertise.
   
  The only real way around this would be to use the type of system academia has used worldwide for years WRT new research papers. It has to pass through the peer review system to determine its individual merit and uniqueness.
   
  Can you just imagine the look's on the faces at Sennheiser when the Beats patent came in for review


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





hutnicks said:


> I do not know if the patent system is broken or simply not up to dealing with things that did not exist when it was conceived.


 
   
  The US Patent Office began issuing design patents just 53 years after the ratification of the Constitution (James Madison, father of the Constitution, had been dead only 6 years). The first design patent was for a typeface in 1842. Perhaps the most iconic is the design patent issued to Coca Cola for the design of their bottle in 1915.
   
  So there's absolutely nothing new or unusual about Beats obtaining a design patent for their headphones.
   
  se


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> The US Patent Office began issuing design patents just 53 years after the ratification of the Constitution (James Madison, father of the Constitution, had been dead only 6 years). The first design patent was for a typeface in 1842. Perhaps the most iconic is the design patent issued to Coca Cola for the design of their bottle in 1915.
> 
> So there's absolutely nothing new or unusual about Beats obtaining a design patent for their headphones.
> 
> se


 

 I was not referring to objects per se. Rather it was an inference that the sheer quantity and volume of new goods today is an overwhelming haystack in which to identify the needle of a new design.
  In other words, I believe that were you to try to patent a bottle shape today there would be considerable more work to be done than in 1915 The concepts are certainly not new, however the context has changed rather dramatically.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





hutnicks said:


> I was not referring to objects per se. Rather it was an inference that the sheer quantity and volume of new goods today is an overwhelming haystack in which to identify the needle of a new design.
> In other words, I believe that were you to try to patent a bottle shape today there would be considerable more work to be done than in 1915 The concepts are certainly not new, however the context has changed rather dramatically.


 
   
  Oh sure, you have a Schiit load more prior art to research.
   
  se


----------



## AzN1337c0d3r

Quote: 





hutnicks said:


> I do not know if the patent system is broken or simply not up to dealing with things that did not exist when it was conceived. The look of a product can be of great importance (B&W nautilus for example) so that needs to be recognized. But when is a product different enough, supposedly when there is no prior art, but that relies on the patent system and its researchers itself and may not go into other intellectual property domains. In other words it is not thorough enough and relies on challenges and suit's to remedy any errors. Where it really breaks down is when design and technical details become involved (in short the system never took into account the accelerated rate of development brought on by the computer and internet ages). There just does not seem to be enough expertise in the Patent Office system(s) to make sound (no pun int) judgements on these type of issues.
> 
> So to sum up you have
> A) insufficient information for the PO to draw on
> ...


 

 My disagreements with patents are more fundamental than this. But I will focus on *design* patents, since that is what this thread is created about. To me, design patents (as defined by current US law) should not be allowed. 
   
  The effect of a patent is to grant the patent holder a monopoly on the market. This monopoly is supposed to be used as an incentive to publicly disclose their research, making progress public.

 What companies have done with design patents nowadays is to protect the recognition of their product by consumers. This is not conducive to the patent system's original intent to further human progress.


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> Oh sure, you have a Schiit load more prior art to research.
> 
> se


 

 Now that is priceless


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





hutnicks said:


> Now that is priceless


 
   
  Don't give me too much credit. Schiit puns are a dime a dozen around here. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




   
  What's truly priceless is Jason naming the company Schiit. Since then, I've been patiently waiting for someone to name their headphone-related company Phuuk, so I can use my favorite word of all here without getting into trouble*. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  *I don't believe in "bad words."
   
  se


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





azn1337c0d3r said:


> My disagreements with patents are more fundamental than this. But I will focus on *design* patents, since that is what this thread is created about. To me, design patents (as defined by current US law) should not be allowed.
> 
> The effect of a patent is to grant the patent holder a monopoly on the market. This monopoly is supposed to be used as an incentive to publicly disclose their research, making progress public.
> 
> What companies have done with design patents nowadays is to protect the recognition of their product by consumers. This is not conducive to the patent system's original intent to further human progress.


 
   
  True enough. Altruism in the marketplace is a pretty unknown entity. Who was it, Reagan who tried to implement Leader Follower policy in the defense market by having the developer give away the research to competitors. That simply resulted in the competition being able to create the same product without having to recover the heinous R&D costs.
   
   These days where it is a case of 100 percent better 50 percent cheaper in 18 months should allow the 14 year (on design patents)patent holder to more than profit by their invention. That goes out the window when a knock off product comes out almost immediately and erodes the marker share. I can more than understand where using any means of lawful interference comes into play there. IF and a big if it is, said design is trully original and a radical departure from  the established products in the marketplace.
   
   Now to get to items under scrutiny here does the Beats design differ enough from pre existing designs to stand out on its own. God knows there have been more headphone designs over the years than any person could evaluate in a lifetime so the chances are good somebody went there before. Finding that little nugget may prove to be quite a challenge and the 75 grand might be a better option for a corporation like Yamaho to pay out.
   
  To your overall point I do not think any sane person believes for a minute that Beats brought any "breakthrough" design or technical to the market. This is about market share protection and little else. Brings to mind the legal action between the films Fail Safe and Dr Strangelove where a bogus plagarism suit was invoked in order to delay Fail Safes release as the plot was too similar to Strangelove.
   
  The thing about this deal is the money is a trivial amount so something else is at stake. If this goes against the Tuning Forks, will beats then go after everyone else with a teardrop headphone design?


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





azn1337c0d3r said:


> My disagreements with patents are more fundamental than this. But I will focus on *design* patents, since that is what this thread is created about. To me, design patents (as defined by current US law) should not be allowed.
> 
> The effect of a patent is to grant the patent holder a monopoly on the market. This monopoly is supposed to be used as an incentive to publicly disclose their research, making progress public.


 
   
  So how do you feel about copyrights and trademarks?
   
  Quote: 





> What companies have done with design patents nowadays is to protect the recognition of their product by consumers. This is not conducive to the patent system's original intent to further human progress.


 
   
  What do you mean by "nowdays"? What do you think the purpose of the 1915 design patent on the Coca Cola bottle was?
   
  se


----------



## SmOgER

Quote: 





ipaintcode said:


>


 
   
  This samsung took my attention some time ago, but side by side with macbook this is even more hillarious!! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	







 
  I wonder why Apple didn't sue them, this rip-off is way more obious than touchwiz and SGS1. Heck, it's even more obious than yamaha's dr who headphones 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




...


----------



## catspaw

Probably becouse apple had no patent for that


----------



## applebook

Quote: 





hutnicks said:


> Your screen name suggests otherwise. As for nonsense you are shoveling buckets of drivel the like of which I have not seen in years. Apple did nothing but marry an mp3 player with a phone ,period. Their market share came from iTunes, period and that was marketing genius. You are driven no matter what you do to the iTunes store and that is as good a market capture as has ever been seen  As for a smart phone with touch screen, well Palm was there first now weren't they.  Yet you have the nerve to call me uninformed.
> 
> You are the one who brought Jobs into this discussion, not me, but feel free to backpedal all you want.
> 
> ...


 
   
  And your attitude clearly indicates that you know nothing about the market and are just a typical PC fanboy. My username could be "Dragon-Ball-Demon," but that doesn't make me a demon. Am I lying that I don't have any Apple products, and that overall, I believe that the competition is actually better? Want pictures for proof? LOL.  

 If you want to credit Palm for touchscreen devices, you might want to look up something called the *Apple Newton*. Does Apple get credit for Palm's devices now? Not in your world, you'll just spin this into something else. Capacitive multitouch? How is your smartphone today if it used a stylus and had single touch functionality? 
   
  As for iTunes, you really think that people buy 100s of millions of i-devices for ITUNES?! I hate to break it to you, but there are millions of people who buy iPhones and iPads and avoid using iTunes at all costs. Since the 21st century, Apple's profits have always primarily been derived from its hardware sales.  

 This is my final response on this subject because there is no point in trying to educate an ignoramus who calls someone else the troll when he's the one who began flinging mud at Apple. When you make laughably ignorant and raving statements, don't be too surprised to be called out for them. Take it to Youtube or limit your emotional rants to one-liners - like "Apple is the devil, sucks!" - that warrant no response.


----------



## applebook

Quote: 





catspaw said:


> Probably becouse apple had no patent for that


 
  And they'd have to sue everyone because every manufacturer now has an ultrabook that looks similar. 
   
  I remember when people were telling us all how their netbooks cost only $250, and that the Air was an overpriced piece of junk. Now every company is on the ultrabook bandwagon. You can't and shouldn't be able to patent a basic design. Can you imagine if some of our most important technologies were patented? Only one manufacturer is allowed to make TVs?


----------



## peaceful1

O.K guys I have posted a few irrelevant post it's not my fault when it come to beats it freaks me out 
   
  just wanted to remind you today is Justin Berber's birthday don't you see the intimacy 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
   

   
  http://forum.trshady.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=112238
   
  OMG!!!:  http://www.bohomoth.com/?p=29445
   
   
  for more pictures check out:  http://bit.ly/WtWMX7
  ------------------------
   
  seriously I blame pure & Nobel Brands like Grado , Klipsch , Kose ,Sennheiser , AKG , &... for not providing low-end but nice designed IEMs & cans so the youths won't be so enthusiastic for these colorful junks like Beats,Monster,skullcandy,SMS Audio,....


----------



## streetdragon

Quote: 





peaceful1 said:


> O.K guys I have posted a few on relative post it's not my fault when it come to beats it freaks me out
> 
> just wanted to remind you today is Justin Berber's birthday don't you see the intimacy
> 
> ...


 
  i'm pretty sure sennheiser has a few...
 cant say anything about grado though lol


----------



## AzN1337c0d3r

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> So how do you feel about copyrights and trademarks?


 
   
  I'm all for open-access of all information, so I frown upon *most* copyrights. Copyrights on things of entertainment value, however, are probably a necessary evil.

 Trademarks are basically a patent on words. It's the same deal with design patents.
  
  Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> What do you mean by "nowdays"? What do you think the purpose of the 1915 design patent on the Coca Cola bottle was?


 

 I meant the now rife abuse of the design patent.

 The purpose of the Coke bottle is brand recognition protection. I don't see that protection by the law as something that is necessary, or even beneficial to society.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





azn1337c0d3r said:


> I meant the now rife abuse of the design patent.


 
   
  What rife abuse? I don't see design patents today being any different from design patents over a century ago.
   
  Quote: 





> The purpose of the Coke bottle is brand recognition protection.


 
   
  Yes. Which is no different than Beats' design patents.
   
  Quote: 





> I don't see that protection by the law as something that is necessary, or even beneficial to society.


 
   
  Ah well.
   
  se


----------



## Hutnicks

I'm curious to get Mr Eddy's opinion on the part of this suit which is specifically targeted at the point that Beats have become signature jewellery among the rap scene to the point that being worn around the neck is a fashion statement They seem to be making a large point of that fact with a view (it seems to me) to use that as a method of determining the uniqueness of the product. Is there precedent for this in this type of action?
   
  On the plus side maybe the damn things will get classified as jewllery and be out of the audio sphere
   
   
   
  I can hardly wait for the Catherine Zeta Jones Platinum Plated Stax fashion statement to come out.


----------



## Seidhepriest

SIGH. And here the hope was that Yamaha sued Beats...
   
  Both designs are ugly though. Somehow the shape reminds of fecal matter. If anything it's a big plus for Yamaha the "beatish" design gets replaced with something nicer. Seriously, something that obnoxiously ponderous with an ugly "push-at-you-while-ignoring-you" low-class commoner attitude ought to be trashed.
   
  About Samsung notebooks... Been there, tried that, the Samsung ripoff is obnoxious especially as instead of using normal-feel plastic coat and a decent action keyboard it's been replaced with nasty Apple-style hollow keyboard action and metal... It's what's always irritated me about Apple's notebooks (other than the single-button touchpad), the awful-feel keyboard and metal casing. Metal just doesn't feel organic. Plastic or even better, rubberised plastic is OKish when warmed up and felt, but metal? Meh. Someone has to release a notebook in a wooden case (and treat the wood somehow it doesn't get cracked). And with nice-feel deep-travel keys.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





hutnicks said:


> I'm curious to get Mr Eddy's opinion on the part of this suit which is specifically targeted at the point that Beats have become signature jewellery among the rap scene to the point that being worn around the neck is a fashion statement They seem to be making a large point of that fact with a view (it seems to me) to use that as a method of determining the uniqueness of the product. Is there precedent for this in this type of action?


 
   
  Haven't read the filing but it certainly sounds like something a lawyer would put forward to bolster the argument as to the distinctiveness of the design and how it relates to brand identity.
   
  Quote: 





> On the plus side maybe the damn things will get classified as jewllery and be out of the audio sphere


 
   
  Hehehe.
   
  Quote: 





> I can hardly wait for the Catherine Zeta Jones Platinum Plated Stax fashion statement to come out.


 
   
  Keep the headphones. I'll settle for Catherine Zeta Jones. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




   
  se


----------



## AzN1337c0d3r

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> What rife abuse? I don't see design patents today being any different from design patents over a century ago.


 
  The number of design patent lawsuits back then pales in comparison to the number we have now, hence *rife*.

 Furthermore, I feel it is *abuse* because companies are using the system in a way that it was not intended as I've expounded in an earlier post.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





azn1337c0d3r said:


> The number of design patent lawsuits back then pales in comparison to the number we have now, hence *rife*.


 
   
  The number of products back then pales in comparison to the number of products we have now. Your point?
   
  Quote: 





> Furthermore, I feel it is *abuse* because companies are using the system in a way that it was not intended as I've expounded in an earlier post.


 
   
  What do you mean that *companies* are using the system in a way that was not intended? It was* the system itself* which extended patent protection to non-utility designs. This occurred in the Act of 1842 (with design patent D1 being issued later that same year):
   
_And be it further enacted, That any citizen or citizens, or alien or aliens, having resided one year in the United States and taken the oath of his or their intention to become a citizen or citizens who by his, her, or their own industry, genius, efforts, and expense, may have invented or produced any new and original design for a manufacture, whether of metal or other material or materials, or any new and original design for the printing of woolen, silk, cotton, or other fabrics, or any new and original design for a bust, statue, or bas relief or composition in alto or basso relievo, or any new and original impression or ornament, or to be placed on any article of manufacture, the same being formed in marble or other material, or any new and useful pattern, or print, or picture, to be either worked into or worked on, or printed or painted or cast or otherwise fixed on, any article of manufacture, or any new and original shape or configuration of any article of manufacture not known or used by others before his, her, or their invention or production thereof, and prior to the time of his, her, or their application for a patent therefor [sic], and who shall desire or obtain an exclusive property or right therein to make, use, and sell and vend the same, or copies of the same, to others, by them to be made, used, and sold, may make application in writing to the Commissioner of Patents expressing such desire, and the Commissioner, on due proceedings had, may grant a patent therefor, as in the case now of application for a patent: Provided, That the fee in such cases which by the now existing laws would be required of the particular applicant shall be one half the sum, and that the duration of said patent shall be seven years, and that all the regulations and provisions which now apply to the obtaining or protection of patents not inconsistent with the provisions of this act shall apply to applications under this section._
   
  Companies today are using the system *exactly* as was intended by the system itself. So if you want to blame anyone, blame the 27th Congress and President John Tyler.
   
  se


----------



## AzN1337c0d3r

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> The number of products back then pales in comparison to the number of products we have now. Your point?
> 
> se


 

 That is exactly my point. Companies are just patenting every shape of every product they have and for what, so they can protect their products and restrict consumer choices?
   
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> What do you mean that *companies* are using the system in a way that was not intended? It was* the system itself* which extended patent protection to non-utility designs. This occurred in the Act of 1842 (with design patent D1 being issued later that same year):
> _..._
> 
> Companies today are using the system *exactly* as was intended by the system itself.


 
   
  The long spiel you quoted has nothing to do with the *intent *of the system. Since you obviously cannot be bothered to go read my earlier post addressing this, I will quote it for you here:
   
  Quote: 





> Originally Posted by *AzN1337c0d3r*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
   

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   
  Quote: 





> Originally Posted by *Steve Eddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif
> 
> So if you want to blame anyone, blame the 27th Congress and President John Tyler.


 
   
  Grow up, no one is blaming anyone. All I'm saying is that the patent system is broken and needs reform.


----------



## PinoyPogiman

not too much different to Beatsaudio/Monster in cohoots with the Fanny Wang lawsuit.
   
  and it does seem NOT like a fresh idea anymore to have the design of some plastic pair of Beats headphones.
   
  i really dont know who to side in this, i dislike the actions of Beatsaudio but i also dont like how Yamaha has to implement the design.
   
  although i see the Beatsaudio company to be pretty nitpicky with its design policy. and it just seems unfair at times but im sure there are more innovative headphone designs out there...


----------



## Kamakahah

None this surprises me. When we are willing to let corporations patent forms of life and the food we eat, little things like this seem insignificant in comparison.


----------



## roma101

I just want to state, for the record, that the Yamaha PRO 500 sounds worlds-apart, exponentially better than any beats plastic toy and is actually worth the price. I, for one, am not a fan of the beats-esque consumer look as I find it downright tacky (I find the HD25s, Grados, and anything by V-MODA way more fashionable and pleasing to the eye). That said, when you see the PRO series in person IMO they feel more substantial and look quite elegant with the Yamaha logo vs. your average beats-esque consumer can.

My theory is that Yamaha did all this on purpose. I find it hard to believe that they didn't do their homework in regards to beats patents - what they could essentially do with the final design and what they couldn't. They're also blatantly taunting beats in their ad. For this reason and apparent planning, I think they baited Beats intentionally ( for more exposure and publicity) and may end up winning. This headphone shouts, "This is what your beats should have been like in the first place - with actual SQ and BQ worth the price." And essentially, this is why beats is suing them. I'm sure they heard the Yamahas and inked themselves. Or at least I'd like to believe that :-D

In the end I could care less for looks. The only sad thing here is that I'd imagine that many HFiers might lump the Yamahas right in with beats and not give them a chance because of the looks. The PRO 500 is the BEST closed headphone I have heard yet and should not be overlooked just because of its aesthetics. The headphone is more like a Yamaha instrument in my book. Go audition them if you can.


----------



## Armaegis

*ding*ding*ding* give the lady a prize. I'm pretty sure this is all just a calculated publicity move. And Beats suing for the marginal $50k (I think that was quoted somewhere earlier) is really nothing and is just a token move because it'll look like rolling over if they don't do *something*. I'll bet the lawyer fees on either side is higher than the suit amount.


----------



## roma101

Yeah I am sure they were stuck between a rock and hard place there. If they don't sue, they look like they have their tails between their legs but if they do, it gives Yamaha way more exposure. I think they would have benefited if they had chosen not to sue. Most people who have beats will more likely than not, continue buying them since that 'b' is pretty much indelibly branded in their brains. Now that beats is suing Yamaha, they're actually acknowledging them as a threat and more importantly, as an equal - something they haven't done with any other headphone brand I can think of. I think Yamaha just pulled a fast one. It'll be interesting if they do win or what terms they might settle on.


----------



## Theogenes

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> So if you want to blame anyone, blame the 27th Congress and President John Tyler.
> 
> se


 
*FINALLY!!!! *Somebody actually says what we're all thinking:


----------



## bcschmerker4

Quote: 





roma101 said:


> I just want to state, for the record, that the Yamaha PRO 500 sounds worlds-apart, exponentially better than any beats plastic toy and is actually worth the price. I, for one, am not a fan of the beats-esque consumer look as I find it downright tacky (I find the HD25s, Grados, and anything by V-MODA way more fashionable and pleasing to the eye). That said, when you see the PRO series in person IMO they feel more substantial and look quite elegant with the Yamaha logo vs. your average beats-esque consumer can.
> 
> My theory is that Yamaha did all this on purpose. I find it hard to believe that they didn't do their homework in regards to beats patents - what they could essentially do with the final design and what they couldn't. They're also blatantly taunting beats in their ad. For this reason and apparent planning, I think they baited Beats intentionally ( for more exposure and publicity) and may end up winning. This headphone shouts, "This is what your beats should have been like in the first place - with actual SQ and BQ worth the price." And essentially, this is why beats is suing them. I'm sure they heard the Yamahas and inked themselves. Or at least I'd like to believe that :-D
> 
> In the end I could care less for looks. The only sad thing here is that I'd imagine that many HFiers might lump the Yamahas right in with beats and not give them a chance because of the looks. The PRO 500 is the BEST closed headphone I have heard yet and should not be overlooked just because of its aesthetics. The headphone is more like a Yamaha instrument in my book. Go audition them if you can.


 
  Tell that to the recording-industry pros that have already standardized on the AKG® Q701 (covered in more detail in the Summit-Fi forum).  And Yamaha® had best watch out for a solicitor from London - the British Broadcasting Corporation will probably not take too kindly to the "Dr....who?" ads either, as they hold copyright on "Doctor Who" from 1967 to the present day.  Hold off Dr. Dre only to be pwned by the BBC?  Could happen all to easily; as one of the BBC's scriptwriters for the series cited would put it:
  Quote: 





> Just - the Doctor.


----------



## Armaegis

I'm still waiting for Yamaha to pull out David Tennant or Matt Smith as celebrity endorsers, just to legitimize those ads and give a figurative finger to the Beats lawyers.


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





armaegis said:


> I'm still waiting for Yamaha to pull out David Tennant or Matt Smith as celebrity endorsers, just to legitimize those ads and give a figurative finger to the Beats lawyers.


 

 Come on now, theres only one Dr and thats Tom Baker


----------



## Armaegis

Maybe... but they're targeting the Beats generation right? (though there probably isn't much overlap in the demographics... but I shouldn't generalize there)


----------



## peaceful1

OMG forget this nonsense lawsuit stick to this strange news:
   
   

   
   
   
   


> Performance is in our DNA. And when it comes to sound, AMG definitely ranks among the best. The cooperation with Monster Products®, the world’s leading manufacturer of high-performance sonically superior headphones, is truly inspired on a technical level with a special multi-driver technology enabling a totally new audio experience. The engineering maxime “form follows function” does not indicate a lack of style – The Monster DNA Headphones Inspired by AMG are available in a design to match the new A 45 AMG. How do you like the carbon-fibre look?


 
   
   
  http://on.fb.me/XJUVdD
   
  my favorite comment :
   
   


> Aren't Monster the company that sell £1000 audio cables that cost £3 to make, and try to justify their ridiculous prices with dodgy pseudoscience? Hopefully they've changed their ways if AMG deem them worth linking up with.


----------



## catspaw

I remmber a movie with Nicolas Cage where he said something like: Im not stealing from people, they choose to give me their money.
   
  Well... I guess its the same thing with those monster cables.
   
  You could say that if people want to buy it, they are free to do so, but i personally hope for something better from humans (i think there might be more than 1 race of humans by now...).
   
  Im guessing that there are companies like Bosch, that go for the 30% benefit from their products and thats it, and then there are companies like...apple?  that go for something a bit higher (no idea how high).
   
  If you buy from the companies that have a strict profit rating, im guessing their products should be very good as a rule of thumb.


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





peaceful1 said:


> OMG forget this nonsense lawsuit stick to this strange news:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

 Hmmm, Maybe AKG should sue them.


----------



## BarryAC26

Quote: 





ipaintcode said:


>


 
  Samsung is practically mocking Apple with this!
   
   
  I can't believe Beats isn't trying to get more money out of Yamaha than they are. Seems like a pretty pathetic attempt at a suit...


----------



## peaceful1

it remind me of this:
   
   http://www.cnet.com/8301-33369_1-57358890/dr-dre-gives-dodge-charger-tight-tight-sound/
   
  also see here:
   
  http://www.chrysler.com/en/2012/300s/innovation/
   
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------
   
  about the lawsuit sad to say I'm sure beats is more noun than the giant music instrument builder Yamaha,


----------



## bfchang

Everyone wants a piece of the mass-market pie


----------



## zorin

That is a preposterous lawsuit.
  There is copying of a specific technology and then there is copying of a shape of a product. If Yamaha disassembled the offended headphones, studied its technical design and details and started to mass produce and sell the copies then the suing company has the case. I do not think it has one as there are reports that Yamahas sound better than Beats and that means that there has not been any copying of technical aspects of Beats headphones. There is also the fact that why would Yamaha Corporation / Yamaha Pro Audio risk damaging their reputation by manufacturing and selling straight copies of sonically substandard headphones ? They would risk being laughed at. Anybody who is a bit smart would pirate and copy a good product and not a semi-junk.
  The Beats headphones are not an audio world phenomenon, they are a fashion phenomenon. Young urban simpletons buy and wear them mainly because it is considered to be cool to do so at the moment. To be a fashion accessory is the primary function of these headphones and then comes the secondary one, to be a medium through which the awfulness of our decayed culture's some-kind-of-music bang-o-noise enters the brains of its addicts.
  The copying of a design, of a physical shape, is a very old industrial practice. How many korean auto makers were sued for copying german or italian car shapes ? The Chinese are copying everything, if it were designs only and not the actual technology itself.
  This lawsuit has a small chance of being successful. If I were a Yamaha executive I would make this lawsuit to go to a jury trial and then I would tell the defense lawyer to stack the jury with some audiophiles. After listening to both headphones no audio smart jurors would agree that Yamaha copied the Beats. 
  Added later. I found an info that Beats manufacturer managed to patent its headphones design, It almost smells of bribery.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





azn1337c0d3r said:


> That is exactly my point. Companies are just patenting every shape of every product they have and for what, so they can protect their products and restrict consumer choices?


 
   
  Shape _is_ the design. A design patent can't cover anything functional. That's what utility patents are for.
   
  Quote: 





> The long spiel you quoted has nothing to do with the *intent *of the system. Since you obviously cannot be bothered to go read my earlier post addressing this, I will quote it for you here:


 
   
  The intent of the system can be found in Article I, Section 8, clause eight, which grants Congress the power "To promote the progress of science and *useful arts*, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries."
   
  Are you saying that design is not among the useful arts?
   
  Quote: 





> Grow up, no one is blaming anyone. All I'm saying is that the patent system is broken and needs reform.


 
   
  And all I'm saying is that I don't see that it's any more broken than when the Patent Act of 1790 was signed into law. At least in the context we're discussing here.
   
  se


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





zorin said:


> That is a preposterous lawsuit.
> 
> Added later. I found an info that Beats manufacturer managed to patent its headphones design, It almost smells of bribery.


 
   
  Yes, it's called a design patent, which is separate from utility patents. Design patents have been issued by the US Patent Office since 1842. The first design patent (D1) was issued to George Bruce for a new typeface.
   
  And here's D150, which was issued for the design of a spoon:
   

   
   
  So there's absolutely nothing unusual about this lawsuit.
   
  se


----------



## AzN1337c0d3r

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> Shape _is_ the design. A design patent can't cover anything functional. That's what utility patents are for.
> 
> 
> The intent of the system can be found in Article I, Section 8, clause eight, which grants Congress the power "To promote the progress of science and *useful arts*, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries."
> ...


 
   

 I'm well aware of the difference between utility patents and design patents. I have already argued that design patents shouldn't be allowed precisely because they don't follow the intent of the Constitution which gives Congress the power to allow patents.

 Are you kidding me that the shape of Beats headphone is *useful* arts? Please elaborate on how the teardrop shape has any use?

 You also seem to imply that the teardrop shape implies design where none exist. If you saw a teardrop in nature, would you say it was designed too?
   
  I should also note that from Wikipedia:
  


> An actual shield of a given shape, for example, can be cited as prior art against a design patent on a computer icon with a shield shape. The validity of design patents is not affected by whether or not the design is commercialized.


 
   
Beats headphones were definitely not the first objects with a teardrop shape.


----------



## zorin

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> Yes, it's called a design patent, which is separate from utility patents. Design patents have been issued by the US Patent Office since 1842. The first design patent (D1) was issued to George Bruce for a new typeface.
> 
> And here's D150, which was issued for the design of a spoon:
> 
> ...


 
  Thanks for the effort and for the good flow of information.


----------



## zorin

Quote 

 AzN1337c0d3r

Are you kidding me that the shape of Beats headphone is *useful* arts?
   
Maybe because as an artistic design it can be classified as 'art' and then because as a piece of 'art' it does not hang within a frame on a wall but is used regularly as a combined art & technology object, therefore "useful arts" moniker can be slapped on this object/headphones.
  The nagging questions are - how come a common sense shape of an object can be described as 'art' ? The design of the Beats headphones is nothing revolutionary original and beautiful and the idea of it is not original at all; how come it was approved under the patent law as original and the exclusive rights to these headphones' shape given to the manufacturer? Why didn't the manufacturer sued the other transgressors before ? If I came to the patent office with an idea of a two wheeled vehicle with a combustible engine [a motorcyle] whose wheelspokes would be in the shape of four arms of a swastika [it would look artistic, no question about it] would I get it approved as a piece of art and then get  the exclusive rights to it and then be able to sue any motorcycle manufacturer making motorcycles whose wheels use the four thick wheelspokes design ?


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





azn1337c0d3r said:


> I'm well aware of the difference between utility patents and design patents. I have already argued that design patents shouldn't be allowed precisely because they don't follow the intent of the Constitution which gives Congress the power to allow patents.
> 
> Are you kidding me that the shape of Beats headphone is *useful* arts?


 
   
_Design_ is among the useful arts as it is part and parcel of a useful item, in this case a set of headphones. Design is an example of what's known as the applied arts.
   
  Quote: 





> You also seem to imply that the teardrop shape implies design where none exist. If you saw a teardrop in nature, would you say it was designed too?


 
   
  Your myopic obsession with "teardrop shape" is little more than an obfuscation.
   
  Monster didn't design a shape. They designed a _headphone_. And a rather distinctive looking one at that, unless you would care to show me another headphone that could easily be confused with the Beats (logos notwithstanding) and existed _prior_ to the introduction of the Beats.
   
  Dieter Rams designed the TP1 portable radio and record player for Braun back in the 1950's.
   

   
  It too is very distinctive. But if you look at it simply as "shapes," it's just circles and rectangles.
   
  Looking at design simply as shapes is like looking at music simply as notes or a book simply as words, which is utterly absurd.
   
  The design of the Beats came together fundamentally no differently than a piece of music or literature. Various elements were brought together in a creative way to produce something new and distinctive. And to that end, I don't see that it's any less deserving of protection than a new piece of music or literature.
   
  se


----------



## King of Pangaea

I too began to consider conspiracy theories a few days ago, ie; Yamaha intentionally putting out the cosmetics to draw Beats into a battle, but unlike the other motivations posited here concerning money, it just would be for the publicity.  Who knows about Yamaha headphones anyway.  They don't have much of  a presence on the consumer horizon, and while I have been using their receivers for about 25 years, I have never heard of, much less investigated their cans.  I am happy with my Senns, and while there are many other brands intersecting my knowledge base, Yamaha to me is an electronics Mfr., not a headphone Mfr.  Granted, they have long made a line of me-too speakers, but mainly to sell along with their other products to round out their stable.  Why not phones, but I have never been aware of this and I doubt most people have either.  The head-fi market, while growing, still is not large enough to attract the mass sales numbers major manufacturers are looking for. 
   
  So you want publicity, irritate the competition with a well placed cosmetic kick in the pants and maybe you will get some.  Seriously though, is the issue important enough to merit all the dialog and clamor over who is right and/or wrong.  Sure Beats are junk.  I haven't heard Yamaha cans so I can't comment quality-wise, but why care about a tempest in a teapot cause like this.  There are plenty of good cans to listen to and debate the relative merits thereof, rather that argue and speculate about concerning the legal outcomes of what should be a minor issue.


----------



## King of Pangaea

Quote: 





azn1337c0d3r said:


> You also seem to imply that the teardrop shape implies design where none exist. If you saw a teardrop in nature, would you say it was designed too?


 
  Some would say that a teardrop is evidence of intelligent design.  Does that mean Beats phones were made by God?  Just adding fuel to the fire here.


----------



## Armaegis

Quote: 





king of pangaea said:


> Some would say that a teardrop is evidence of intelligent design.  Does that mean Beats phones were made by God?  Just adding fuel to the fire here.


 
   
  That's not fuel to the fire. That's just...


----------



## ForShure




----------



## Hutnicks

Hmmmm. Searching madly for tinfoil hat emoticon.......................


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> _Design_ is among the useful arts as it is part and parcel of a useful item, in this case a set of headphones. Design is an example of what's known as the applied arts.
> 
> 
> Your myopic obsession with "teardrop shape" is little more than an obfuscation.
> ...


 

 Found my tinfoil hat I'm going to take a shot at this just for laughs.
   

   
  Is there a huge difference here?
   

   
  One of my all time favourites.. Paint it red throw a b on it and...

   
  You come to this "b" logo from a ways back, and curiously enough for a headphone.
   

   
  Hey look it's even red.
   

   
  Hmmm from the shack.
   
  I think that a real research effort sponsored by good ol legal dollars can turn up enough to cast doubt on the beats uniquness.
   
  PS I hereby pledge to cowtow and buy a pair of 800's if Senni takes a pop at beats in the courtroom


----------



## dryvadeum

I think the major issue is the blatant copying of the "unibody" design of the headphone.


----------



## SmOgER

I can understand Yamaha very clearly. It's quite good marketing from all this fuss (just look at the ads, they are doing it on purpose), but what about Shure???


----------



## streetdragon

Quote: 





smoger said:


> I can understand Yamaha very clearly. It's quite good marketing from all this fuss (just look at the ads, they are doing it on purpose), but what about Shure???


 
  Shure is just quietly doing their own business in the studio sector of the market, so i don't think beats has anything to do there.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 (afterall they don't advertise much too)


----------



## SmOgER

It's just kinda not cool and turns their brand off...  What is the purpose of such a HPs? There should be some chinese logo on them, NOT Shure. What's more, as stupidly as it sounds, but by doing that they are unintentionally showing that Beats are reference point for (/ above) Shure.


----------



## streetdragon

Quote: 





smoger said:


> It's just kinda not cool and turns their brand off...  What is the purpose of such a HPs? There should be some chinese logo on them, NOT Shure. What's more, as stupidly as it sounds, but by doing that they are unintentionally showing that Beats are reference point for (/ above) Shure.


 
  Well but their higher end headphones look nothing like beats. Its only this lowest end one that happens to look like beats.


----------



## peaceful1

http://www.bauma.de/baumatools/promotion_area/promo_area.swf
   
  this b just goes around & around just like that,


----------



## droido256

I just tried all three of the Yamahas, besides sound absolutely awesome, they look and feel NOTHING like the crappy beats. The only problem I had was the 400 model was too big for my head! Lolol. Unlike the beats even tho they're plastic they felt well built, sound obviously lightyears better.


----------



## SpiderNhan

There are lots of aesthetic copy cats out there. It's really the sound and reputation of Yamaha that is making Beats Audio squirm. Check out these gems.
   
  http://www.idanceaudio.com/product_list_blue300.php


----------



## SmOgER

Quote: 





spidernhan said:


> There are lots of aesthetic copy cats out there. It's really the sound and reputation of Yamaha that is making Beats Audio squirm. Check out these gems.
> 
> http://www.idanceaudio.com/product_list_blue300.php


 
  Although this brand seems pretty crappy, I wouldn't say these are looking like beats. They even fold differently, and cups are nothing like beats unibody design and similiar slick headband in used in numerous headphones, we could even include XB300's there


----------



## AzN1337c0d3r

steve eddy said:


> _Design_ is among the useful arts as it is part and parcel of a useful item, in this case a set of headphones. Design is an example of what's known as the applied arts.




Are you kidding me? The teardrop shape is *part and parcel* of a useful headphone? Damn, Sennheiser must not be making headphones, they don't have the teardrop shape! They designed a headphone, and then applied a shape to it. The shape application was to purposefully file a patent which is used to restrict consumer choice. There was no design here, because there isn't even a hint of a process by which Monster arrived at such a shape.



steve eddy said:


> unless you would care to show me another headphone that could easily be confused with the Beats (logos notwithstanding) and existed _prior_ to the introduction of the Beats.




Did you read my last post? This is completely irrelevant.



			
				Wikipedia said:
			
		

> An actual shield of a given shape, for example, can be cited as prior art against a design patent on a computer icon with a shield shape. The validity of design patents is not affected by whether or not the design is commercialized.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



steve eddy said:


> Dieter Rams designed the TP1 portable radio and record player for Braun back in the 1950's.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Except that the TP1 is as you admit, a *collection* of shapes. As far as I know, that *collection* of shapes have never been put together in such a manner before.


----------



## Steve Eddy

You're just not worth it.
   
  se


----------



## thefred

I think Yamaha should make a new product line called "Dr.Gaga" to avoid any problems.
   
  Actually, combining any of the names that have released their own brand of headphones is quite amusing.
   
  Have a go!
   
  Some of the celebrities who have come out with branded headphones in recent years: *Dr. Dre*, *Lady Gaga*, *Ludacris*, *Quincy Jones*, *Snooki*, *Pauly D*, *Miles Davis*...


----------



## Maxx134

Oooooo look more companies for beats to sue! 
Haha


----------



## thefred

oh great....


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





thefred said:


> I think Yamaha should make a new product line called "Dr.Gaga" to avoid any problems.
> 
> Actually, combining any of the names that have released their own brand of headphones is quite amusing.
> 
> ...


 

 Tony Bennett and Julia Mancuso of all people for Koss. Then theres that line of cheapos that has licenced every image from Bowie to Elvis.
   
  Wonder how they all missed the boat on Lance. Could well have imagined bright canary yellow cans. Could have called em Cheat's


----------



## roma101

droido256 said:


> I just tried all three of the Yamahas, besides sound absolutely awesome, they look and feel NOTHING like the crappy beats. The only problem I had was the 400 model was too big for my head! Lolol. Unlike the beats even tho they're plastic they felt well built, sound obviously lightyears better.




Yes! And this is what's driving beats crazy. I have the PRO 500 and yes they are worlds apart in sound and quality. While I wish they were a little more incognito and head-conforming style-wise, I still think they look more elegant than any beats can.


----------



## zorin

xxxx


----------



## Dangerous

This type of stuff pisses me off. Like the incidence when apple sued samsung for "coping" their curved edges on their cell phones. Like come on. And I hounestly think it's a good thing for beats to be introduced to some competition, because it will cause monster to actually attempt to improve the sound quality and not have the price so freaking jacked up, like c'mon $200 for mediocre phones! BS


----------



## Theogenes

I generally find it difficult to separate the merits of this case from my loathing of Beats. My utter lack of knowledge on patent law doesn't help much either. 
   
  I really want Beats to lose at life, not just this lawsuit (as I'm sure I have no understanding of the consequences of such a ruling).


----------



## lyric

10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago , since people began wearing headphones, there have been thousands of headphones that look like one another. Every era has has its 'look' and there must have been one pair that came first. These patent wars have become ludicrously normal over the past 20 years or so and have begun to permeate aspects of technology that are no longer of functional significance. If Beats are suing on the look of their headphone, that, to me, is an admission that they're nothing more than a piece of fashion.
   
  Fashion patents? Get real.
   
  Not that I encourage loose patent laws, but the way we're going in NA and the EU is mind-boggling.


----------



## SmOgER

Right, but as far as I know during those years there wasn't any hypo about overpriced HPs. Patents are nothing unusual in this case.


----------



## Owenpri

Wonder what the Yamaha pair sounds like.


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





lyric said:


> 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago , since people began wearing headphones, there have been thousands of headphones that look like one another. Every era has has its 'look' and there must have been one pair that came first. These patent wars have become ludicrously normal over the past 20 years or so and have begun to permeate aspects of technology that are no longer of functional significance. If Beats are suing on the look of their headphone, that, to me, is an admission that they're nothing more than a piece of fashion.
> 
> Fashion patents? Get real.
> 
> Not that I encourage loose patent laws, but the way we're going in NA and the EU is mind-boggling.


 

 A mouthful there. Here is an anonymous quote from "some other board"
   
   
  "Y'know, you just can't win with this stuff.

 While working at Company A back in the 90's, another guy and I came up with a simple solution to a problem. We applied for and received a patent - part of the job.

 Fast forward to the, ahh, teen's. Now working at Company B, I looked at a product made by another group in the new company. Lo and behold - I see a copy of the little widget we came up with 10 plus years ago. Actually, there was a half dozen. Per unit.

 So, I take a stroll through the on-line patent office filings and find at least three other copies of the original patent! The new patent holders just reworded the original. A little. With no additional anything. Entirely ignored the first patent.

 Some friggin system."
   
  Now if that can happen with a physical electronic design, Imagine what is possible within the nebulous boundaries of a "Design Patent". I am hoping the big Y digs in here with an "Where the Hell was This Dre guy let alone Monster when we were builidng our first concert grand" attitude and spends the money to defeat this specious action.
   
     Cause in the end everyone who ever watched a film knows..........The Japanese do Monster better than anyone


----------



## FullCircle

Quote: 





maxx134 said:


> Oooooo look more companies for beats to sue!
> Haha


 
   
   
  I wonder if Pepsi will sue Coke for haveing similar bottles. both are tallish, slim, and use a cap....  and by golly serve the same purpose!!!!!


----------



## audiofreakie

beats model fever.
  with my eyes closed I will choose Yamaha... LOL...


----------



## airo

A headband, 2 circular earcups, and a "b" on either side...
   
  what is there to sue?


----------



## Owenpri

From this angle, they look pretty similar, don't they?


----------



## SmOgER

Mr obious...
  HP by Dr. who.. should look the same as HPs by Dr Dre, don't you think?


----------



## zorin

The cat is finally out of the bag. Now we know who has been [and hiding] the head of the 'Beats' headphones design studio. We introduce to you --- LeBron James, the 'Beats' designer.
   
   
 Beats By Dre PowerBeats In-Ear Headphones  $114 for a Pair of Official Beats By Dre PowerBeats In-Ear Headphones Designed by NBA Superstar LeBron James ($164 Value)   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   




   
  Some snippets of the sales pitch - 

 Crisp and impressive sonic clarity helps you get the most out of your music.
 The incredible result of brainstorming between music mogul Dr. Dre and King James himself!
 The latest and greatest earbuds from one of the world’s most famous headphones manufacturers.

 Is Michelle Obama on the 'Beats' design team as well ?


----------



## Steve Eddy

Yeah, if you thought LeBron James was impressive with a basketball, you should see what he can do with SolidWorks. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  se


----------



## Owenpri




----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





zorin said:


> The cat is finally out of the bag. Now we know who has been [and hiding] the head of the 'Beats' headphones design studio. We introduce to you --- LeBron James, the 'Beats' designer.
> 
> 
> Beats By Dre PowerBeats In-Ear Headphones  $114 for a Pair of Official Beats By Dre PowerBeats In-Ear Headphones Designed by NBA Superstar LeBron James ($164 Value)
> ...


 
  I paid considerably less than the 164 bucks for those. Thumbnail review Incredible result?? Would have loved to have been a fly on the wall in that "Design" session. Great earclip if they'd coated it with something soft, fits well, the only earhook thus far that I can stand. Incredibly (there's that word again) these are not bass sledgehammers pounding the anvils of  your ear. Obviously LeBron was not a fan of the beats signature sound. Build quality is really poor, cabling in specific is dismally put together.  For the 35 - 50 dollar price bracket these would be a deal.
   
  Now can I squeeze a pair of monoprice drivers in there somehow


----------



## zorin

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> Yeah, if you thought LeBron James was impressive with a basketball, you should see what he can do with SolidWorks.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
  Somebody should tell him that we need the cure for cancer.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





zorin said:


> Somebody should tell him that we need the cure for cancer.


 
   
  HA!
   
  se


----------



## Detex

yeah, there are so many out there that are WAY more of a copy then that! guess this is because Yamaha is big enough to matter


----------



## koikoi

I know Yamaha produces headphones now. Well done Beats.


----------



## roma101

owenpri said:


> Wonder what the Yamaha pair sounds like.




Really, really, really good. I hope more people get to listen to them and disregard the looks.


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





roma101 said:


> Really, really, really good. I hope more people get to listen to them and disregard the looks.


 
   
  I have to scratch my head at that one. I can see the Yamaha entry level phones in that series being styled that way. Styling the 500 (a 400 dollar product) in that manner just makes me want to pass it by. A beats buyer won't give it a second look and most audiophiles don't want to be seen wearing a beats type phone. I wonder what the market share thinking was.


----------



## roma101

Well after hearing many headphones in and around the price range, these sound like they could be priced higher - better than any headphone I have owned yet in terms of detail, timbre accuracy, imaging and overall resolution. I am one of those people that is not a fan of the looks - I prefer a low-key head-conforming look. But the sound is too good to my ears. Again, I think if anyone overlooks these quickly solely based on looks, IMHO it's just as bad as an everyday misinformed consumer passing by a pair of DT 1350s, Momentum, HD25, SRH-840, etc. because they don't have a b on the side.

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





roma101 said:


> Well after hearing many headphones in and around the price range, these sound like they could be priced higher - better than any headphone I have owned yet in terms of detail, timbre accuracy, imaging and overall resolution. I am one of those people that is not a fan of the looks - I prefer a low-key head-conforming look. But the sound is too good to my ears. Again, I think if anyone overlooks these quickly solely based on looks, IMHO it's just as bad as an everyday misinformed consumer passing by a pair of DT 1350s, Momentum, HD25, SRH-840, etc. because they don't have a b on the side.
> 
> Just my 2 cents.


 

 Thats rather my point. It is a shame that these will be overlooked because of their resemblance to beats, and that is what makes me question Yamaha's strategy here. Maybe they need to offer a 500 pro "classic" model with a metal headband


----------



## jazzman7

+1 on both of the above posts.  The Pro 500s sound great, look a bit goofy, and are a misfire in terms of their market.  I use them often despite their looks -- and funnily enough, they are a stay-at-home headphone for me because they simply aren't durable on multiple fronts.   
   
  Yamaha should have gone with a mix of leather and metal instead of pleather and shiny plastic -- then they would be compared to Momentums and B&W P5s and other luxury headphones that have a similar sonic character.  This would be closer to Yamaha's roots, anyway -- think "musical instruments" all the way.


----------



## Blinxat

related.


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





blinxat said:


> related.


 

 Now that right there should get some form of post of the day award.


----------



## areinike

Dr. Who?  classic ... almost like Yamaha was asking for it.  That's what you call publicity, my friends, good or bad, I bet their sales have gone up.


----------



## miceblue

I have inadvertently discovered a conspiracy.....just kidding.


----------



## Father Schu

Is the BBC suing Yamaha too?


----------



## zomgpront

Seeing as Dr. Dre's Beat's company is seeking $75,000 (at a minimum), the settlement shouldn't go much higher than a low 6-figure payout.  $75,000 is a slap on the wrist.  Im guessing their case was mostly for publicity.


----------



## ThinkAwesome

Hopefully the publicity backfires when everyone realizes that the Yamaha's sound better. *dreams*


----------



## GREQ

Next beats will sue this German drugstore (this is their own-brand shower gel that they frequently re-brand/re-name every few months with new smells/colours etc)
 I've never seen such blatant copyright infringement in my life


----------



## BlueRain

Quote: 





mheat122134 said:


> I find those look like soul by ludacris more.


 
  Yeah, I see that but they look better than the Soul to me.


----------



## streetdragon

I wonder if they're any updates to the lawsuit... it's been a while now.


----------



## BassDrop

Too similar to beats...why yamaha whyyyyyy... They look sleek but they could have taken the inspiration from beats and go on their own design from there. that is just too similar to beats line


----------



## WhiteCrow

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> Uh oh. Looks like TDK's getting into the act now.
> 
> http://www.tdkperformance.com/en-us/Headphones/
> 
> ...


 

 okay, they have to use the same company that makes the blanks then dolls them up. they just look WAY WAY to similar.


----------



## Kizu

Oh Jesus, I really dont like dr. beats plastic headphones :s Anyway for Yamaha this is a step backward


----------



## roma101

Hold them, listen to them, and then decide.


----------



## Deltaechoe

I completely lost it when I saw the Dr who ad, only thing I could think of was both of those headphones are probably more destructive (to your ears) than a sonic screwdriver (to machines)


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





deltaechoe said:


> I completely lost it when I saw the Dr who ad, only thing I could think of was both of those headphones are probably more destructive (to your ears) than a sonic screwdriver (to machines)


 

 Yes, but I bet they'd look cool on a Sontaran


----------



## DefQon

These two companies still going at it?


----------



## Tsujigiri

I'm curious about this, too. This could turn into a very long legal battle...


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





tsujigiri said:


> I'm curious about this, too. This could turn into a very long legal battle...


 

 No news, good news?
   
  There does not seem to be any update since Feb 13. I do notice that links to the claim itself have disappeared from several articles I had bookmarked.


----------



## barleyguy

Quote: 





greq said:


> Next beats will sue this German drugstore (this is their own-brand shower gel that they frequently re-brand/re-name every few months with new smells/colours etc)
> I've never seen such blatant copyright infringement in my life


 
  Trademark infringement you mean.
   
  Copyrights, Patents, and Trademarks are all different things, with different laws.  Mixing them up just perpetuates that confusion.
   
  I think Beats has an uphill battle on this one from a legal perspective.  To uphold a patent on the shape of a headphone they have to prove that there's no "prior art", as in the shape they chose is unique.  They can only win on trademark infringement if Yamaha is using their name, or their product is truly likely to be confused by a reasonable consumer with the real thing.


----------



## GREQ

Quote: 





barleyguy said:


> Trademark infringement you mean.
> 
> Copyrights, Patents, and Trademarks are all different things, with different laws.  Mixing them up just perpetuates that confusion.
> 
> I think Beats has an uphill battle on this one from a legal perspective.  To uphold a patent on the shape of a headphone they have to prove that there's no "prior art", as in the shape they chose is unique.  They can only win on trademark infringement if Yamaha is using their name, or their product is truly likely to be confused by a reasonable consumer with the real thing.


 
  I actually didn't mix anything up - I simply don't know anything about any of that stuff.


----------



## bcschmerker4

Quote: 





barleyguy said:


> ....I think Beats has an uphill battle on this one from a legal perspective.  To uphold a patent on the shape of a headphone they have to prove that there's no "prior art", as in the shape they chose is unique.  They can only win on trademark infringement if Yamaha is using their name, or their product is truly likely to be confused by a reasonable consumer with the real thing.


 
  I concur on this sentiment.  _Dr. Dre Beats_ v. _Yamaha Corporation_ looks heavily tilted in Defendant's favor, as Dre's design-patent evidence is sketchy; earlier posts noted that several manufacturers' headsets fold in a manner consistent with Shure Incorporated's entry-level SRH series headsets, which need portability for use by audio engineers in the field.  On the other hand, _British Broadcasting Corporation_ v. _Yamaha Corporation et al._ could be open and shut in the BBC's favor, as the PRO 500 magazine advertisement ("Dr....who?") is clearly stepping on the toes of BBC scriptwriters involved in the ongoing sci-fi drama _Doctor Who_.


----------



## droido256

Lol I was at frys checking out some AKGs for a buddy of mine, and a coworker I noticed was rambling on to his friend about the beats hahahaha I literally dragged him to the Yamaha display and slapped a pair of the 400s on him. Heheheheheh the look on his face was priceless. And he walked out with a pair.


----------



## bcschmerker4

Quote: 





droido256 said:


> Lol I was at frys checking out some AKGs for a buddy of mine, and a coworker I noticed was rambling on to his friend about the beats hahahaha I literally dragged him to the Yamaha display and slapped a pair of the 400s on him. Heheheheheh the look on his face was priceless. And he walked out with a pair.


 

 ¡GOL! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 More to headsets than meets the eye, after all; with so many budget headsets in similar frames, one needs his ears to pick a winner, something Yamaha® and worthy competitors look for.


----------



## droido256

I have half my family and close friends converted to AKG, my aunt poor thing, thought skull candy headphones were "the best" I facepalmed and let her try my K701 (a rare honor I might add) only one other but her and I have even touched them. 
She went for the K412, still has them.


----------



## Anewills

Quote: 





greq said:


> This only re-enforces what we all suspected - beats are only interested in profits, not sound.
> If they were certain of the superiority of the sound quality of their product, they would let the public decide by ear.
> 
> But their business model is based on merchandising, branding and marketing. They've created something to make people believe they need it.
> There have been a small number of other headphones from VERY small companies that have similar looks to the beats, but as previously mentioned, as soon as a high-roller comes along it's a different story.


 

 Honestly, from a business stand-point, more power to Beats if they can sell a cheap looking product off as if people "need it."  They're after one thing. Profits.  Mission accomplished.


----------



## GREQ

Quote: 





anewills said:


> Honestly, from a business stand-point, more power to Beats if they can sell a cheap looking product off as if people "need it."  They're after one thing. Profits.  Mission accomplished.


 
  I agree with your point, but I don't agree with what beats are doing. 
 They've done just as much good for the popularization of headphones and portable sound as the bad they have done to damage peoples understanding of what 'good sound' is and the distorted POV of what 'the artist wants you to hear'.


----------



## Anewills

Quote: 





greq said:


> I agree with your point, but I don't agree with what beats are doing.
> They've done just as much good for the popularization of headphones and portable sound as the bad they have done to damage peoples understanding of what 'good sound' is and the distorted POV of what 'the artist wants you to hear'.


 

 Good sound is subjective though.  For a lot of types of what people call "music," ridiculous amounts of bass are what they're after.  Some people judge sound quality based on amounts of bass.  I didn't put this together to recently, and reputable companies wouldn't sell-out and ruin their name to make money.  But, most people don't do their research and are completely misinformed.  So all these quality audio companies are after that limited market of people who do the research.  Beats clearly has tapped into the other "majority," market, and they're making a killing off it. Once again, mission accomplished for them.


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





anewills said:


> Good sound is subjective though.  For a lot of types of what people call "music," ridiculous amounts of bass are what they're after.  Some people judge sound quality based on amounts of bass.  I didn't put this together to recently, and reputable companies wouldn't sell-out and ruin their name to make money.  But, most people don't do their research and are completely misinformed.  So all these quality audio companies are after that limited market of people who do the research.  Beats clearly has tapped into the other "majority," market, and they're making a killing off it. Once again, mission accomplished for them.


 

 I think they call that "Cerwin Vega" syndrome


----------



## GREQ

Quote: 





anewills said:


> Good sound is subjective though.


 
  I disagree. Although perhaps I should have been more clear, as I was referring to good QUALITY sound, rather than the subjective aspects of sound signatures. 
  Putting aside the quantity of the bass, nothing in the whole sound has anything to do with "what the artist intended" or high fidelity audio products.


----------



## Anewills

Quote: 





greq said:


> I disagree. Although perhaps I should have been more clear, as I was referring to good QUALITY sound, rather than the subjective aspects of sound signatures.
> Putting aside the quantity of the bass, nothing in the whole sound has anything to do with "what the artist intended" or high fidelity audio products.


 
  Quality sound though still differs from person to person.  Even if something has better "quality sound," still doesn't make it everyones cup of tea, and they still may prefer beats over it.  Again, I'm not saying your wrong and I'm far from a beats fan, but not everyone's after the same thing


----------



## streetdragon

"better" here in head-fi generally means the ability of the headphone to produce a more accurate and wider soundstage, but "better" to some may be having all the sound coming from inside your head.
 It's easy to dismiss something as 'understood'/'of course' to be better because almost all of us agree it is 'better'.
 But if we talk about the headphone's ability to 'better' reproduce the sound more accurately instead then it is a different story than being 'better' to someone's vision of perfect sound.
 Some preferences appear to be 'bad' because their reference points are skewed. Their vision is bassy boomy over the top bass as being high quality. Ours are more of based on what headphones we have heard before and other places. This is also the reason it is not really advicable to jump from ibuds to HD800 and LCD3 in one go, because we haven't built our reference point and trained out ears to fully appreciate the details and soundstage the high end gear has to offer.

 Everyone hears differently. Isn't that why we have so many headphones around and so many discussions about what headphone to choose?


----------



## GREQ

Quote: 





anewills said:


> Quality sound though still differs from person to person.  Even if something has better "quality sound," still doesn't make it everyones cup of tea, and they still may prefer beats over it.  Again, I'm not saying your wrong and I'm far from a beats fan, but not everyone's after the same thing


 
  Ok, just to make myself perfectly understood - I mean "scientifically measurably better sound" - meaning that through science, measurements prove that the technical abilities of a headphone can give a good indication of the 'quality' of the sound - no opinions, no bias, no preference or taste. Just plain old facts. 
  And in this case, the 'scientifically proven quality' of the sound does not justify the price or the misleading slogans attached to the packaging.


----------



## ForShure

greq said:


> Ok, just to make myself perfectly understood - I mean "scientifically measurably better sound" - meaning that through science, measurements prove that the technical abilities of a headphone can give a good indication of the 'quality' of the sound - no opinions, no bias, no preference or taste. Just plain old facts.
> And in this case, the 'scientifically proven quality' of the sound does not justify the price or the misleading slogans attached to the packaging.



But don't you know? Beats put back the quality lost in modern file compression. That's totally scientific right


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





forshure said:


> But don't you know? Beats put back the quality lost in modern file compression. That's totally scientific right


 

 Nothing like an overwhelming bass thump to clear up the mp3 warble


----------



## droido256

streetdragon said:


> "better" here in head-fi generally means the ability of the headphone to produce a more accurate and wider soundstage, but "better" to some may be having all the sound coming from inside your head.
> 
> 
> It's easy to dismiss something as 'understood'/'of course' to be better because almost all of us agree it is 'better'.
> ...




I made the mistake of:

Jumping from a old pair of Sony 10 dollar earbuds that were waaaayyy over bloated bass, to a AKG K-701 then trying to drive said AKGs directly from a iPod touch. Once I aquired a cowon a2 and was able to drive the k701s properly a whole new world blossomed. However I shouldn't have jumped to something like that right away, as it took a bit to acclimate. What I was hearing was not noise not defects. It was ACTUAL instruments, it was the clack of drumsticks on cymbals, a bass drum hit that actually sounded like a bass drum, not a dull thud. Actually hear a vocalist's exhale on the microphone. However I picked them poorly(thank goodness it was a good decision) I just saw the 350 dollar price tag and thought "oh these must be divine!(thankfully they were)" Buy! I knew nothing about AKG then nor how to judge a good headphone. 
However first listen to them, I was disappointed, I was thinking ooommmggg 350 dollars, and how big they are they must blow my head off with visceral, subwoofer bass. However I found I had to crank the iPod to max to even get volume, then everything sounded screechy. I was thinking What did I just blow 350 bucks on, I was ready to send them back. Luckily I read up on them and their power requirements, and went for the cowon. Whoooo wow what a difference. I went back to those Sony earbuds to compare them....... And I absolutely hated the earbuds. Sounded like I had felt and pillows shoved in my ears. Now I can't stand low grade headphones, all my older headphones(mostly 20 dollar sonys or aiwas) sounded like crap. Aaaaaannnd now I'm here. 

One downside to the AKGs lol were my badly recorded and low grade music files sounded like crap(they pulled out every defect in the compression that was in there) >_< 


....... I'm not good at speaking


----------



## Theogenes

droido256 said:


> ....... I'm not good at speaking




I think ya did great, bro


----------



## droido256

theogenes said:


> I think ya did great, bro



Lol thanks


----------



## zorin

Look at this folks,.. the Beats cancer is spreading and is now striking the car industry. What is next, the Beats sponsoring the Vienna Philharmonic or the Olympics ?
  - http://www.autoedizione.com/sound-fiat-500l-by-beats-by-dr-dre/
  - http://blog.fiatusa.com/lifestyle/beats-audio-premium-audio-system/


----------



## HairyEars

Beats bite!


----------



## King of Pangaea

If Fiat has Beats shouldn't Porsche and Ferrari have Senns, and BMW have Audeze?


----------



## streetdragon

Quote: 





king of pangaea said:


> If Fiat has Beats shouldn't Porsche and Ferrari have Senns, and BMW have Audeze?


 
  I'm pretty sure they have their own respected speaker counterparts since Senns and Audeze don't really make speakers and work with car acoustics.
 (but i bet beats doesn't care about car acoustics, they probably just care about putting a massive red 'b' logo on their speaker grill and keeping the bass knob at +5 for its lowest setting
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




)


----------



## droido256

Pfffft it's prolly just the logo really. The typical speakers in the car with the bass like you said and a extra sum of money for the red "b"


----------



## ThinkAwesome

Quote: 





droido256 said:


> Pfffft it's prolly just the logo really. The typical speakers in the car with the bass like you said and a extra sum of money for the red "b"


 
  Maybe the sum of money saved from not having to reproduce over half of the frequencies that normal cars have to will balanced out the money for the red "b."


----------



## BetaWolf

Quote: 





thinkawesome said:


> Maybe the sum of money saved from not having to reproduce over half of the frequencies that normal cars have to will balanced out the money for the red "b."


 

 Say what? Your typical car has pretty lousy audio. My 08 Sentra has the tinny mids and overblown bass. It's unbearably inaccurate and boomy even with the EQ on the lowest setting. I get better sound out of my $10 Philips earbuds!


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





betawolf said:


> Say what? Your typical car has pretty lousy audio. My 08 Sentra has the tinny mids and overblown bass. It's unbearably inaccurate and boomy even with the EQ on the lowest setting. I get better sound out of my $10 Philips earbuds!


 

 Hmmm................................................


----------



## Theogenes

Quote: 





hutnicks said:


> Hmmm................................................


 
   
  We should definitely trade cars.


----------



## tintin220

Not a lawyer by any means, but I am an engineer with some background in patent law. 
   
  Beats will lose this one, and badly, unless this is a suit regarding trade dress and that customers are confused. I can't imagine any patents regarding *functional* design that Yamaha could have violated, and any they may possess will likely be thrown out for failing non-obviousness. With trade dress, they might have a point, but that's notoriously hard to prove, as the Apple v Samsung case proved (where Samsung literally copied even the packaging and wall warts), and the second point, misleading customers, is even harder to prove without an extensive customer survey and guest paid consultant experts. 
   
   
  What Beats is really trying to do is get Yamaha to settle. Neither actually wants this to go into trial, because even if Yamaha wins, it'll have to pay its lawyers, as unfortunately, unlike many other countries, there aren't automatic implicit "loser pays" rules (and by loser pays, I mean plaintiff pays). Fortunately, there are some lawmakers in Congress pushing for patent law reform, and we might see a sort of plaintiff pays rule come into effect, which in theory should substantialize reduce the amount of trolling. As it is, however, no one wins but the lawyers making a payday if this goes to trial, so expect a settlement.


----------



## tintin220

Double post: I can't read, it is for trade dress, not a patent after all. Still going to be very hard to actually win. 99% chance they just settle.


----------



## streetdragon

Thanks for the info


----------



## scrypt

Quote: 





tintin220 said:


> Not a lawyer by any means, but I am an engineer with some background in patent law.
> 
> Beats will lose this one, and badly, unless this is a suit regarding trade dress and that customers are confused. I can't imagine any patents regarding *functional* design that Yamaha could have violated, and any they may possess will likely be thrown out for failing non-obviousness. With trade dress, they might have a point, but that's notoriously hard to prove, as the Apple v Samsung case proved (where Samsung literally copied even the packaging and wall warts), and the second point, misleading customers, is even harder to prove without an extensive customer survey and guest paid consultant experts.
> 
> ...


 

 Could the absence of a rule compelling losers to pay have something to do with financial disparities which could be used by high-echelon thieves to discourage legal action?  Take the hobbyist inventor who believes that a major corporation has stolen hir work: To the foont who confects anti-gravity paperweights in hir quiet room, losing and then having to pay for the defense of Frantic Dynacosms Ltd (a multi-trillion-dollar company located in the State of Refined Intoxication) might seem a wee Thaddeus intimidating.


----------



## orky87

Who's sensible enough to buy Monster/Beats audio. OK I get the fashion side of things but that's where it ends. I hope they lose Yamaha has way better reputation and respect from all around the world.


----------



## Hutnicks

Quote: 





orky87 said:


> Who's sensible enough to buy Monster/Beats audio. OK I get the fashion side of things but that's where it ends. I hope they lose Yamaha has way better reputation and respect from all around the world.


 

 Simple math really. For every one person who has heard of Sennhiser, Beyerdynamic AKG etc there are thousands who know the beats brand. In your face market saturation has it's benefits.


----------



## streetdragon

Quote: 





hutnicks said:


> Simple math really. For every one person who has heard of Sennhiser, Beyerdynamic AKG etc there are thousands who know the beats brand. In your face market saturation has it's benefits.


 
  unfortunately so, its really annoying when one walks into the audio shop and asks "how does bla-bla-bla compare with the beats tours? Will bla-bla-bla sound better than the beats pros? Are bla-bla-bla a better buy than beats solos? Does it have active noise cancelling like the beats studios?"


----------



## miceblue

streetdragon said:


> hutnicks said:
> 
> 
> > Simple math really. For every one person who has heard of Sennhiser, Beyerdynamic AKG etc there are thousands who know the beats brand. In your face market saturation has it's benefits.
> ...




If you're an average person shopping for headphones, do you seriously expect them to say "how do these compare to the H800 or SR-009?"


----------



## Theogenes

Quote: 





miceblue said:


> If you're an average person shopping for headphones, do you seriously expect them to say "how do these compare to the H800 or SR-009?"


 
   
  Expect? Not all all. Hope, wish, pray and dream? You betcha!!


----------



## droido256

Honestly I think many of those who buy beats haven't even heard of AKG, Sennheiser, Beyerdynamic, Grado or Audio Technica
Hell I didn't even know AKG, or Sennheiser existed until I was looking through a Mars Music


----------



## helmutssss

I think there are headphones that are even more similar to Beats. But somehow, they don't sue them.


----------



## compuryan

Yamaha makes some incredible instruments, equipment, bikes, jet skis, and they're such an older and mature company than.... beets


----------



## streetdragon

Quote: 





helmutssss said:


> I think there are headphones that are even more similar to Beats. But somehow, they don't sue them.


 
  Because they are not big enough of a company to get the beats's attention.


----------



## goodvibes

Quote: 





helmutssss said:


> I think there are headphones that are even more similar to Beats. But somehow, they don't sue them.


 
  It has to do with market share and advertising off the beats brand. Unless this is just the US Yamaha division named, I doubt they settle unless Yamaha feels it's a no win. I suspect Yamaha Japan wouldn't want to admit to it.


----------



## koiloco

...and what makes you all think that the Yamaha design team did not get a nod or input from their legal department even before design phase->production of these headphones?  We are talking about a company that has been around for decades here.  On the site note, beats won't get no where with this case.  They are doing this probably to scare the smaller guys.  Since they got to spend some $ on lawyer, why not get some publicity by suing a big guy, right?  Legal department's decisions from both sides.


----------



## bcschmerker4

I concur on Dr. Dre's long odds of winning a design-infringement case against Yamaha®.  But I can't help holding my breath not because of Dr. Dre, but due to the threat of a potential plaintiff that *can* take Yamaha Corporation, and the advertising firm that developed the "Dr.....who?" ads, down - the BBC!  British Broadcasting _owns_ the "Doctor Who" trademarks and scripts, remember---and they've the wherewithal to *pwn* Yamaha®, should they see a blatant enough case with the ads.


----------



## droido256

Dr.who? Taken in a different context of the show. If the used a tardis, or the Dr.Who font or something else clearly showing they were using the actual show, then I don't see a lawsuit, plus knowing the BBC they would've already been after Yamaha. Then again Yamaha could've paid royalty to BBC, to use Dr.Who in their advertisement. Personally I like the ad, lol it's witty, and lol actually true.


----------



## roma101

droido256 said:


> Dr.who? Taken in a different context of the show. If the used a tardis, or the Dr.Who font or something else clearly showing they were using the actual show, then I don't see a lawsuit, plus knowing the BBC they would've already been after Yamaha. Then again Yamaha could've paid royalty to BBC, to use Dr.Who in their advertisement. Personally I like the ad, lol it's witty, and lol actually true.




Agreed. And once you actually hear these cans, it is a night and day difference between these and Beats. They are incredibly detailed, resolving and natural-sounding.


----------



## ckeyler

Quote: 





roma101 said:


> Agreed. And once you actually hear these cans, it is a night and day difference between these and Beats. They are incredibly detailed, resolving and natural-sounding.


 
  2nd that, this is ludacris


----------



## koiloco

Quote: 





ckeyler said:


> 2nd that, this is *ludacris*


 

 roflmao! good one 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



  The Yammies indeed sound quite good.  I tested them out at Fry's not long ago.


----------



## ozzi

More people walking around with stupid headphones = a bigger grin in my face every morning


----------



## bonami2

Ahahah i laugh each time i see people with beat thing on there head...


----------



## kurochin

roma101 said:


> Agreed. And once you actually hear these cans, it is a night and day difference between these and Beats. They are incredibly detailed, resolving and natural-sounding.


 

 +1
  
 I had the opportunity to audition the Pro 500 model the other day, and it's probably the best sub $500 pair I've tried in recent years, sometimes punching way above it's price when the music style suited it. Not quite summit-fi level, but definitely upper tier high-fi sounding. The bass was strong but well-controlled. It could go quite low, but never got muddy or out of control with the bassy deep house and dub-techno I was listening to. The mids were really quite sweet. All this was achieved while driving it from my iPhone, no amp, no dac. Definitely a coloured sound, but not as much as you'd think, and overall a highly euphonic set of cans.
  
 Not the most comfortable, sadly, and I'm not really a fan of the looks either. I tried the black version, and although (imho) better looking than the blue and white version, it was still way too shiny and "loud" for my aesthetic sensibilities. If it were a bit more nondescript (like say, the Fostex Th600's matte black finish), didn't have a gigantic bright logo on the cups or big-ass wordings on the top of the headband, and was a bit more ergonomic, I'd probably have bought it. Build quality seemed quite sturdy too.


----------



## roma101

Agreed as much as I love the sound, the comfort could be better and I'm a fan of discreet, head-conforming cans. I would love it if Yamaha took these drivers and put them in a better package ergonomically speaking. I'd be all over that. Until then however, I will still be enjoying my 500s. Btw euphonic is a great word to describe them. For this reason, I find them very emotionally-involving while they still remain very detailed.


----------



## derp4life

Though I agree that Beats headphones' quality are not bad at all (but highly overpriced)...I hate the design itself so much, for me they are just the worst kind of necklace that those "cool" school kids could wear


----------



## 2015071

Commercialism sucks, so Yamaha should win.


----------



## vantt1

Yamaha was kinda asking for it. If you've seen a Yamaha Pro in real life, you would also not be able to ignore the fact that they look almost exactly like Beats. The plastic construction, tri-fold design, the headband cushion and the brackets that surround it, and the stainless steel headband extensions all look like they were taken straight from the Beats. Strangely enough, the Beats have a higher build quality than the Yamahas. At least Beats took the effort to use stainless steel brackets on either side of the headband cushion. If you compare the Beats Solo's headband extensions to the Yamaha's, you'll notice that the Solos use a much sturdier steel, but leave the cable exposed.


----------



## vantt1

If I could locate the pair that I used to have, I'd also have some side-by-side comparison pictures.


----------



## Jeso

Has Yamaha come out and say anything in the matter? It looks ridiculous to me that they wouldn't even try that? and whats with the add lol? its like on your face mocking Monster.


----------



## talisman42

ckeyler said:


> 2nd that, this is ludacris


 

 yeah. maybe they should just settle for 50 cent


----------



## Incompetency

The parent company of Beats, Monster, sues anyone who brands their merchandise with the term "monster."


----------



## Golden mark

d=.=b  what are different between two headphone?


----------



## Hutnicks

incompetency said:


> The parent company of Beats, Monster, sues anyone who brands their merchandise with the term "monster."


 

 Monster is not the parent of Beats. They had an agreement to manufacture for Beats which ended some time ago. Beats new "parent" may well be Apple. In which case you can look forward to lawsuits galore.


----------



## GREQ

First wait for the ridiculous patents to be filed, that's always a good laugh.


----------



## JapPhonoPhil

Talking about Beats and Japanese companies.
  
 They have just released Japanese Limited Edition "Samurai Studio V2" Model to support Samurai Blue fans.
  
 Can't post pictures yet, so will just leave a link here: http://news.kakaku.com/prdnews/cd=kaden/ctcd=2046/id=39382/


----------



## vantt1

Darn, just as I got the boring matte black ones...


----------



## cb3723

vantt1 said:


> Darn, just as I got the boring matte black ones...




Don't worry - I got the garish bright yellow Brasil 2014 World Cup edition of Studios - just to wind up the audio snobs that shamelessly slag beats cans off without a care that it could be viewed as offensive to people that actually appreciate beats cans for what they are, and make their own informed decision to buy beats or not (takes a big gasp of air) 


​
You know what?

I like Beats cans - a lot, but many here do not, and there's no problem with that.

But the constant slagging off of beats is pretty brutal - "I laugh at people with those things on their heads" - whaaat?

I've just caught myself there before I go completely off topic, so my apologies, let me get back on topic - I'll just need a moment to compose myself and take a couple of anti-rant pills.........ahem...

So, isn't this Beats Vs Yamaha thing not settled already?

The Yamaha's have been available for quite a while now.

I do like the design of the Yamaha cans, because they look like beats - which I also like, so I'm not even interested in these two global players duking things out in the courts.

The reviews of the Pro500 have particularly peaked my interest and I'm going to audition a pair to see just how good they are. I think they are also priced similarly to beats studio's also.

I'm amazed if this legal battle is still going on as it's been a couple of years now since it all started?


----------



## vantt1

cb3723 said:


> Don't worry - I got the garish bright yellow Brasil 2014 World Cup edition of Studios - just to wind up the audio snobs that shamelessly slag beats cans off without a care that it could be viewed as offensive to people that actually appreciate beats cans for what they are, and make their own informed decision to buy beats or not (takes a big gasp of air)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
 Any pics of it out of the box?


----------



## cb3723

vantt1 said:


> Any pics of it out of the box?




Coming shortly - I'll put them up on my album in gallery


----------



## ruthieandjohn

cb3723 said:


> Don't worry - I got the garish bright yellow Brasil 2014 World Cup edition of Studios - just to wind up the audio snobs that shamelessly slag beats cans off without a care that it could be viewed as offensive to people that actually appreciate beats cans for what they are, and make their own informed decision to buy beats or not (takes a big gasp of air)
> 
> 
> ​
> ...




I have a pair of the Yamaha Pro 500s coming to me, and I already have the Beats Pro and Beats Studio 2013s. I plan to post a three way review using the 10 systematic comparison tests that I've used before, once I get them. 

And if you haven't seen it, here is the Yamaha ad that spawned the lawsuit...


----------



## cb3723

ruthieandjohn said:


> I have a pair of the Yamaha Pro 500s coming to me, and I already have the Beats Pro and Beats Studio 2013s. I plan to post a three way review using the 10 systematic comparison tests that I've used before, once I get them.
> 
> And if you haven't seen it, here is the Yamaha ad that spawned the lawsuit...




Ha!

That Yamaha ad pretty much tells the tale of what's what - clearly Yamaha have done as much provoking with that ad in a calculated marketing exercise to increase their cans awareness through publicity this court action has produced.

There is no way Yamaha could put out such an ad and not expect court action instigated by beats to quickly follow, but beats will also no doubt know Yamaha's game but don't really have any option but to play the game that's almost like pantomime theatre.

Yamaha will likely have calculated into their overall costings any payout that a final verdict would land them with as this all looks like it was planned by Yamaha's marketing dept looking to go for a short cut in media coverage interest in reporting this beats v Yamaha legal story, which has clearly gone to plan for Yamaha as if not we wouldn't all be commenting here on a thread dedicated to it all.

So I guess we are all but pawns being played in Yamaha's publicity game....I feel dirty! :rolleyes:

But reading good reviews of Yamaha's cans and look forward to any first impressions you give on your Pro 500's for sure 

But on a different note - have you heard the expression "capitalism gone wrong"? - somebody said this regarding beats meteoric domination of the headcan market but when you think about it, Yamaha have encapsulated this term fully by knowingly exploiting the legal system by infringing on beats intellectual properties purposely for self gain.

But who cares as long as they and other manufacturers keep churning out the headcan goodies we are drawn to and lap up?

Now that's pretty deep - take a moment.... 


[VIDEO]http://youtu.be/9grWoCEZHFI[/VIDEO]​


----------



## iAmCodeMonkey

armaegis said:


> Or maybe I'm just being overly academic here and assuming too much of the public. *After all, an educated public wouldn't have been such sheep to begin with right?*


 
  
 I Agree. Ignorance is bliss in the eyes of the masses.


----------



## ruthieandjohn

zorin said:


> Look at this folks,.. the Beats cancer is spreading and is now striking the car industry. What is next, the Beats sponsoring the Vienna Philharmonic or the Olympics ?
> - http://www.autoedizione.com/sound-fiat-500l-by-beats-by-dr-dre/
> - http://blog.fiatusa.com/lifestyle/beats-audio-premium-audio-system/


 

 Look folks.... someone actually *bought* a FIAT infested with the Beats cancer...
  

  
 Is a head-fi.org intervention in order??
  
 (I bought the first FIAT Abarth Cabrio sold in the Great State of Michigan (headquarters of FCA fka FIAT Chrysler Automobiles. Choices at the time were the Alpine stock audio system, the Bose, and the Beats.  Why not the Bose?  It was widely described among its FIAT purchasers as being underpowered for the automobile (and lacking in bass).  Remember, the FIAT is small and admits lots of road noise... it is easy to see why extra audio power is needed.  I am delighted with my automotive Beats system in the FIAT.   I shall be proudly driving it this Saturday for five hours to the ChiUniFi headphone meet, filled with... yep... Headphones!)


----------



## ruthieandjohn

ruthieandjohn said:


> I have a pair of the Yamaha Pro 500s coming to me, and I already have the Beats Pro and Beats Studio 2013s.* I plan to post a three way review using the 10 systematic comparison tests that I've used before, once I get them.*
> 
> And if you haven't seen it, here is the Yamaha ad that spawned the lawsuit...


 
 Here is the three-way comparison I promised... of the Beats Pro, the Yamaha Pro 500, and the Beats Studio 2013...
  

  
 Here is a link explaining the 10 tests and what methods and source material were used:  http://www.head-fi.org/t/723136/battle-of-the-bassys-beats-pro-yamaha-pro-500-and-beats-studio-2013-compared#post_10634722


----------



## zorin

ruthieandjohn said:


> Look folks.... someone actually *bought* a FIAT infested with the Beats cancer...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
 You could have put your own player and speakers in this car, a fairly simple procedure.


----------



## vantt1

zorin said:


> You could have put your own player and speakers in this car, a fairly simple procedure.


 
 But if one was looking for adequately powerful bass, Beats would've probably been the best option out of the three choices available, wouldn't it?


----------



## SpiderNhan

Edited: Nevermind. I figured out the 3 choices you're talking about are the default speakers in the FIAT.


----------



## Ninjiaw

i dont think beats has anything hear because they have different demensions.


----------



## vantt1

spidernhan said:


>


 
 I find that the stock audio system in a car rarely has enough bass to overcome the road noise, so even without listening to the system in the Fiat, I'd choose Beats by default solely for the heavier bass that it'd undoubtedly have. 
  


ninjiaw said:


> i dont think beats has anything *hear *because they have different demensions.


 
 Not sure if play on words or complete confusion...


----------



## zorin

vantt1 said:


> But if one was looking for adequately powerful bass, Beats would've probably been the best option out of the three choices available, wouldn't it?


 
 Why are so many so fixated on the Beats junk ? A swindler who goes by the name Dr. Dre did not invent the bass sound, no matter what he tells everybody. Long before the Beats came on the scene the young urban subhumans have been driving around and annoying everybody with their loud extreme bass sound systems in their cars.


----------



## vantt1

zorin said:


> Why are so many so fixated on the Beats junk ? A swindler who goes by the name Dr. Dre did not invent the bass sound, no matter what he tells everybody. Long before the Beats came on the scene the young urban subhumans have been driving around and annoying everybody with their loud extreme bass sound systems in their cars.


 
 I don't know, you tell me. 
  
 Bass isn't new, and nor did Dr. Dre invent it; Beats marketed their "Studio Sound" well, made millions, gained an army of fans, and drew the attention of everyone else with it. You can easily turn down the bass on any Beats hardware, and turn up the bass on any other hardware with a simple equalizer. What makes one more junk than the other? Beats were meant to be massively consumable, and ended up being much more of a lifestyle personal audio brand than, needless to say, an audiophile brand. Sure, if Beats were marketed towards the audiophile market, then it's junk. But it isn't, so simply saying it's junk is wholly unjustified. 
  
 Now Sony, on the other hand, takes the hit-and-miss method all too often. They gain market share by quantity, so many of their products really do end up as junk. But because they make so many different models, the outstanding few that just so happen to be quite favorable covers Sony's numerous failures in its shadow.


----------



## Macedo

Don't know if somebody already said this, but I have to say that the smartest approach to the beats market was sennheiser's approach. I can't comment on the sound because I never tried any sennheiser momentum , althought if I had to choose a product only based on looks (something I would never do!) I would go with the momentum's they are beautiful and scream quality. I think Yamaha made a mistake with the design of the pro's. This doesn't make any sense specially in a company like Yamaha, all their motorbikes are just gorgeous! They could have been smart and done an headphone based on one of their super bikes that would appeal to a larger market share and would for sure be stunning.


----------



## Blinxat

macedo said:


> I can't comment on the sound because I never tried any sennheiser momentum


 
  
 I am glad I sold it fast. It is nice to touch, elegant, seems well made, but the sound isn't on the same level. It is quite resolving but the sound has no authority, to little bass and too dry bass, vocals don't sound natural, highs meh. It has no head bobbing factor to it at all. It is not a fun sound in general. If you like vocals through a curtain maybe these are your cans.
  
 It is also not very efficient even though it is low ohmed.


----------



## groovyd

i think it is a shame in general that more companies don't just focus on doing one thing and doing it right.  motorcycles -and- headphones? how about motorcycles -or- headphones instead.


----------



## Macedo

Yamaha motorcycles are great 4 out of 5 motorcycles we have at home are yamahas, their musical instruments are great too from all the saxophones I ever played yamaha's are the best, for jazz at least, and the pianos are good too grand pianos and upright pianos. They make a studio monitor that is the industry standard. I don't know about their headphones never tried them, but all the Yamaha products I have used are great products.


----------



## NNate

Yamaha makes about everything you can think of.  My trumpet made by them is excellent.


----------



## kurochin

Plus, Valentino Rossi rides Yamaha and he's way cooler than Dr. Dre. Not sure about Italian rap music though.


----------



## GREQ

blinxat said:


> I am glad I sold it fast. It is nice to touch, elegant, seems well made, but the sound isn't on the same level. It is quite resolving but the sound has no authority, to little bass and too dry bass, vocals don't sound natural, highs meh. It has no head bobbing factor to it at all. It is not a fun sound in general. If you like vocals through a curtain maybe these are your cans.
> 
> It is also not very efficient even though it is low ohmed.


 
 I love the Momentum, but at no point do I feel the bass is not enough or the vocals are 'through a curtain'. 
 Vocals are perfect to my ears. None of the usual high-mid emphasis on female vocals that ruins vocals by making them sound nasal.
 Treble is there, it's sparkly and detailed, just a little quiet. 
   





blinxat said:


> I am glad I sold it fast.


 
 Please don't trash-talk about a headphone if you havn't even spent much time with it.


----------



## takato14

blinxat said:


> macedo said:
> 
> 
> > I can't comment on the sound because I never tried any sennheiser momentum
> ...


 
 um
  
 the bass is nearly 10dB above the treble, are you insane
  
 its also very linear up until the bottom of the upper midrange so vocals should sound wonderful
  


greq said:


> Please don't trash-talk about a headphone if you havn't even spent much time with it.


 
 also this


----------



## Blinxat

Voicing an opinion is not trash talking.

A week and half with a headphone including an 11 hour train ride is sufficient to judge it in my book.

Do you own the headphone? Not all headphones sound like their frequency response graph suggest. I think this is true for the Momentum.

But lets not derail the thread.

I think the goldenears interpretation of its sonic qualities is spot on. Nothing special. Thats all.


----------



## takato14

blinxat said:


> Voicing an opinion is not trash talking.
> 
> A week and half with a headphone including an 11 hour train ride is sufficient to judge it in my book.
> 
> ...


 
 A week and a half is not enough time to decide whether you like a headphone. I've had my Pioneer Monitor 10-II for nearly 2 months and I'm only just now starting to realize how amazing it is.
  
 I do not own the momentum, but I have heard it; a friend of mine has a pair. If it did anything right, it was bass and vocals. Tyll Hertsens' graphs support this.
  
 It was a bit slow and lacked impact, and had a little bit of reflection/resonance in the cups. The graphs support this as well. 
  
 I didn't think it was anything special either, but not because of the reasons you listed. I wanted more treble, better seperation, better control, and better comfort. 
  
 The original conversation topic of this thread was resolved a long time ago. I'm pretty sure no one cares if a couple people talk about something else here instead of making a new thread specifically for us to debate in.


----------



## Blinxat

I love Tyll's reviews! My headphone bible, but he is a sennheiser fanboy


----------



## zorin

groovyd said:


> i think it is a shame in general that more companies don't just focus on doing one thing and doing it right.  motorcycles -and- headphones? how about motorcycles -or- headphones instead.


 
 Yamaha makes great motorcycles and great pianos. They should go into an ice cream business too.


----------



## Hutnicks

zorin said:


> Yamaha makes great motorcycles and great pianos. They should go into an ice cream business too.


 

 They also led the competive archery world for years until they decided to get out. Their bows are the stuff of legends and fetch a fortune today.


----------



## zorin

If Beats are suing Yamaha, what are they going to do about these new 'rip-offs' ?
  





Syllable G04 Noise Cancellation DJ Dynamic Headphones
  
  




CNP-8803 Professional HD Folding Style Headphones [...all for 12 dollars and 31 cents, including shipping. The mailing would cost like 10 dollars; that means these headphones are worth about 2 dollars. The materials, the manufacturing costs, the transport/distribution costs and the retail cut of the price would take almost everything from the remaining 2-3 dollars. Now what kind of a driver, costing pennies, is in these headphones, what kind of sound does it make ? The sales pitch says "professional" and "High Definition" sound]


----------



## vantt1

zorin said:


> If Beats are suing Yamaha, what are they going to do about these new 'rip-offs' ?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
 Nothing! Beats can't do anything about those (not new) knock-offs. If a factory closes down, another will quickly take its place. Tough luck, since the Syllables are pretty much 1:1 A grade replicas of the real thing, just without the red b logo. People only pay for that logo anyway, so Beats probably doesn't see the point in spending time and money to do something about it.
  
 The Professional HD folding ones are probably D grade replicas that only look the part, and use low quality plastic (even for the hinges that are meant to be stainless steel) and super thin wiring.
  
 In terms of the speaker driver, the A grades will have something similar to the ones pictured on the left, and the D grades will have something similar to the ones pictured on the right.
  

  
 The A grade drivers have a thicker, denser diaphragm and a larger, stronger neodymium magnet. They also have an overall better build quality than the D grade ones. Some A grade replicas even replicate the ANC circuit, complete with bass boost and dual electret condenser mics for the ANC, but because they don't use Monster's titanium coated drivers, they generally sound better than the originals.
  
 The D grades, jokes aside, do not sound better than the genuine article. They lack detail (even Beats' selective detailing does better; sorry, haters) and sound like they have a range of 200-10,000 Hz.


----------



## zorin

Dr. Dre and the Beats are being sued by Monster for theft.
  
 http://gizmodo.com/monster-is-suing-dr-dre-over-beats-fiasco-1677881925


----------



## bcschmerker4

zorin said:


> Dr. Dre and the Beats are being sued by Monster for theft.
> 
> http://gizmodo.com/monster-is-suing-dr-dre-over-beats-fiasco-1677881925


 

 In which case, the ravens may have found their roost.  _Monster LLC et al._ v. _Beats Electronics LLC et al._ (Does I through XXV being reserved for persons unknown having an equitable interest in Beats Electronics LLC, HTC America Holding, and their properties), Case No. CIV 531991 in the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo, should make for a fascinating case study.  I wonder whether the United States will get involved in criminal proceedings against Defendants Young, Iovine and Wachter, resulting in the case being moved into a U. S. District Court?


----------



## SmOgER

zorin said:


> Dr. Dre and the Beats are being sued by Monster for theft.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



 


Interesting, frankly I had no idea that Monster designed and made these headphones from scratch while Beats basically only promoted them and took all the credits... Kinda makes sense now why they sold this brand to Apple.


----------



## Peeko2

Yeah I remember finding out Monster did these and was shocked as well


----------

