Myford monopoly ??



I suppose that if we're being technical about this it's Myford Limited that are getting Ebay to take this action. It's a different legal entity from RDG Tools Ltd. However we all know that it's the same people who are behind it and it is shoddy.
Whilst this is my favoured forum online I'd strongly suggest that making this point in other places would help. I personally despise the Model Engineer website because they fell into the trap of creating about 30 different "sections" and life is too damn short to read through hoping to find something useful. However the "Manual Machine Tools" section would be appropriate. And the big US site will make sure that RDG and Myford's folly in line of attack gets to the top end of the search results quickly
Charles
Charles
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It's on the ME forum at http://www.model-engineer.co.uk/forums/postings.asp?th=55289&p=1 Also on the Model Engineers Clearing House http://modeleng.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=6590 Alan from RDG has recently replied on the ME forum and made it clear that it's personal. The way Ebay works in that you have to fill a form in called a VeRO and this has to be done manually and for each item you want removed.
It is not an automatic process.
I feel very flatted that the 8 items we sell that are Myford related are causing RDG / Myford so much grief.
Long / short is all they are getting is bad press, so far not one post in support. Also after all the explanation not one reference on why Jim Marshall who only sells genuine second hand Myford parts has been roped into this farce.
John S.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John S wrote:

SS.11(2) Trade Marks Act 1994:
"(2)A registered trade mark is not infringed by—
[...]
(b)the use of indications concerning the kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, value, geographical origin, the time of production of goods or of rendering of services, or other characteristics of goods or services, or
(c)the use of the trade mark where it is necessary to indicate the intended purpose of a product or service (in particular, as accessories or spare parts),
provided the use is in accordance with honest practices in industrial or commercial matters."
As far as I can tell there is no infringement in John's use of the Myford trademark.
It's also not passing off or misrepresentation. So there is no legal requirement on eBay to remove John's listings. I think there is a legal requirement on eBay to _not_ remove the listings, but this is very much more complex.
However John could certainly sue RDG/Myford, and win. An injunction preventing RDG/myford from asking eBay to remove the listings should be easy to get, if a little expensive.
Peter Fairbrother (not a lawyer, just a sometime legal analyst) --
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Don't wish to rain on your parade Peter, but that's exactly what I said 3 days ago.
David
--
David Littlewood

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It's a very interesting thread here and more so on the Model Engineer forum. Over there Alan Dickinson from RDG/Myford came on site to defend his stance (brave, I'll admit) After a beating from forum members he gave ground and said that no more Myford parts from John Stevenson ('s wife) or Jim Marshall would be removed from Ebay. This gave a qualified "hooray" but then people piled in reminding RDG/Myford of their double standards and that they shouldn't remove any part from Ebay correctly and lawfully described and certainly not whilst RDG sell Myford rip-off stuff. Nobody liked the RDG/Myford stance, even the limited concessions.
Two things really come into my mind here. Never under-estimate the power of crowds and communication, be that toppling a foreign dicatator or dealing with an unreasonable supplier. Large brands now spend fortunes on "social media monitoring" to avoid losing brand strength in these skirmishes. Second is that Google is smarter than all of us. When I came to this page via "Google Groups" the side bar of contextual advertising offered me a Trademark lawyer.
Charles
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Charles p wrote:

Another bone of contention with ebay is the pigging advertising on pages that THEY are already making money from us for! Still there is a nice off switch - I've removed flash :) Pages now load a lot quicker ... I only use google groups via email so avoid the advertising there anyway.
ebay and paypal are the sort of monopoly that HAS to be broken up, or at least actually monitored by an independent body who can say no when they do things that are actually illegal? It is not fair that they can unilaterally decide on things with no appeals process, but there again they are a financial institute, so think that they are above the law anyway :)
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
RDG / Myford have posted the following on the ME site just now:-
Hi Richard Dickinson from Myford Ltd
A full statement will be issued to all Forums tomorrow lunch time, Please be patient.
Our Statement will set out our intentions and our guidelines and hopes for the coming year,
I did not wish to upset any one, My intention is to simply preserve the Myford company name,
My apologies to everyone this has effected, Myford has started to contact the individuals concerned
***************
We had a phone call from Richard this morning apologising for the hassle which we have accepted.
John S.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 04:07:25 -0700 (PDT), John S

Did he reverse the charges then?
:-)
Mark Rand RTFM
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/09/2011 12:07, John S wrote:

Possibly a reluctant apology John. Just shows a business can only take so much bad press/exposure before the mud sticks ;) Damage is probably done now though at least with some.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

A little too late I've just read an interesting thread on Model Engineer with a Dickinson reply... http://www.model-engineer.co.uk/forums/postings.asp?th=55289&p=2
I reckon that JS qualifies as a small British CNC outfit, only 50miles too far south to be in Yorkshire.
Charles
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/09/2011 08:31, Charles p wrote:

From later in that thread, looks like sanity has returned, good.

I may move back to god's own county one day, left there when I was nearly 10. property cheaper, good beer, lot's of wild countryside and no bollocks attitude...
Regards,
Chris
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Charles p wrote:

LOL It took ages for SWMBO to get the swarf out of her backside!
Bob
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

snip>
After my experiences with the faceplate; crap product, bad and cynical service, they're on my banned list already. Ebay are clearly mis-applying rules in favour of a big seller - now there is a surprise - NOT!
--
Roland Craven
Nr. Exeter, Devon, UK
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In article

The only part of Intellectual Property law which would seem to apply here is Trademark law.
Section 11(2) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 provides that a registered trade mark is not infringed in the case of honest practice by a use necessary to indicate the intended use of the product or service (particularly with regards to accessories or spare parts). This would seem to cover Jim Marshall's position exactly.
As for people selling second-hand Myford machines or parts, it is probably covered by the previous sub-para in 11(2): it exempts indications describing the goods or services, for example kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, value, geographical origin, the time of production of goods or rendering of services, or other characteristic of goods or services.
It seems to me that RDG are trying to abuse their dominant position in the market place. If I were a trader in the position of those mentioned above I would consider a complaint to the OFT. However, as I have no interest in selling any of my Myford stuff (and if I did I would use homeworkshop.org and not eBay) I will not be the one doing this. Difficult to see who is the worst offender here, RDG for abusing their rights or fleabay for falling for it. The kindest view is that both are ignorant of the correct position.
David
--
David Littlewood

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Does that mean that RDGs own eBay adverts that use 'Myford' in the title, where the items being sold are nothing to do with Myford will be scuppered too?
As this eBay example 350490649577
Ian

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Definite Keyword spamming and can be reported on Ebay , small text, report item on same line as Description and Postage Details.
I wouldn't mind but we have been careful when listing and not listing Myford xxx xxx etc "but will fit Myford" which is not a lie.
John S.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John S wrote:

I did wonder what the list of drills that come up with a simply 'myford' search had to do with myford at all? I tend to use google to search nowadays which trims a lot of the crap that ebay list and often actually find an real ebal listing for something I'm looking for.
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ian P wrote:

Talking of annoying words in ebay listings (of which there are too many to list but "lathe" comes to mind) does anyone know how to search for eg 3" - as in 3 inches?
Or even how to search for it on Google?
Peter Fairbrother
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Peter Fairbrother wrote:

You can't - it's a non indexed character, one of any.
Googling "term extraction" will tell you more about this, if you want the gory details.
BugBear
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
bugbear wrote:

Maybe, but it's only a non indexed character because ebay don't index it.
ebay can easily generate a file of 5,346,354 current listings in all categories containing the number 3 , grepping '3\"' from that isn't hard.

I'm familiar with some of them ...
-- Peter
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.