Threat letter from casio's attorney - BUTZEL LONG

[dream beamz]

well here we go, honestly I think Casio is the one in a deep pile of shit here

"has harmed, and continues, to harm, Casio"

I think its nothing more than a stupid "we are bigger than you so listen" letter, i have seen those before.

They had an eBay auction pulled and gave eBay the reason that I was using Casio's name illegitimately saying the product did not come from anything Casio since it was the best reason they could find to have it pulled.

I will most likely end up replying saying I will comply since the things really don't bring me much money.

[heroic]

a) They're right; you shouldn't be using Casio's name. However the FDA does not apply these regulations to bare diodes (only applications and systems.)

b) You can't afford the kind of lawyering it'll take to fight this.

c) I'd recommend keeping a lower profile in future.

[dream beamz]

a) They're right; you shouldn't be using Casio's name. However the FDA does not apply these regulations to bare diodes (only applications and systems.)

b) You can't afford the kind of lawyering it'll take to fight this.

c) I'd recommend keeping a lower profile in future.

I would beg to differ about using Casio's name, it came out of a Casio product, although it is not a Casio diode it is a part that is a direct replacement in a Casio that originally came from a Casio product.

I realized bare diodes are exempt and I definitely agree with your statement B, I just figured I would save some headaches for others. Many people including some famous ones sell diodes here.

[drlava]

Thanks for posting this somewhat unusual cease and desist letter. As unbelievable as the claims seem, there they stand in black and white, exactly as predicted. Casio apparently is trying to minimize the potential of a tarnished name brand caused by a potential publicized accident created with their components. No one knows the brand of boxcutters used on 9/11 but lasers are more esoteric and 'the media' would eat it up. Now that you are caught in the dragnet it's unclear whether removing brand references is sufficient to prevent further action. It's a good although unfortunate warning to others who are also naming that brand, so thanks again for posting.

[dream beamz]

Thanks for posting this somewhat unusual cease and desist letter. As unbelievable as the claims seem, there they stand in black and white, exactly as predicted. Casio apparently is trying to minimize the potential of a tarnished name brand caused by a potential publicized accident created with their components. No one knows the brand of boxcutters used on 9/11 but lasers are more esoteric and 'the media' would eat it up. Now that you are caught in the dragnet it's unclear whether removing brand references is sufficient to prevent further action. It's a good although unfortunate warning to others who are also naming that brand, so thanks again for posting.

We will find out one thing with this auction
Removing the Casio name. Looks like another seller got the same kind of action and decided to try a different approach

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...=260683640658&

Your welcome, its going to be interesting to see how this pans out.

[dnar]

I do not see how harvesting parts from something you buy or re-purposing components could be against the law.

Just curious, is there any mention of removing the casing or replacing parts in the manual? Typically there is and the consequences of doing so are typically stated as "will void warranty". I have never seen a manual that sites "will break the law".

These Cease and Desist letters are written to frighten the bejesus out of the recipient and they typically do. Not that I would actively fight back, my pockets are not that deep.

I can see this leading to sales advertising very non-specific details and relying on buyers in the know understanding what is on offer.

"Class > III sub-447nm light amplified stimulation emitter".

[heroic]

I do not see how harvesting parts from something you buy or re-purposing components could be against the law.

It isn't. Using their brand name, however, is.

[dnar]

It isn't. Using their brand name, however, is.

Sure. Omitting all reference to the "C" name is easy. Problem solved. Next problem?

[heroic]

Sure. Omitting all reference to the "C" name is easy. Problem solved. Next problem?

Next problem is that C@s10's real problem is that Nichia and their reseller network is super pissed that their stock just dropped in value by 95% and, as a consequence, they're looking to stick anyone who's selling projector parts, regardless if their name is on it. Now, since you've received the letter, you can assume they know who you are, and further assume they're watching you.

Now, you *probably* would get away with it, if you fought it in court. But they have better lawyers than you do. Do you want to find out? Really? Including explaining to the CDRH why it's okay for you to sell diodes since they're not capable of actually lasing? Now, I'm sure you could. But how deep are your pockets?

[dream beamz]

It isn't. Using their brand name, however, is.

Let me start by saying I am not going to keep using their brand name

I really do not understand this though, its like going out and buying a Toyota Camry and then selling each part off of it, you have every right to say what brand the part came from.

Of course making something different out of one of the parts and then saying its a Toyota item would violate trademark laws but using their name to say what it came from is a different story.

ie: you do not see anyone with 445nm modules saying its a C@s10 laser module.

But how deep are your pockets?

Not disputing this, I got into a disagreement with someone yesterday that told me to keep doing what I was doing and I explained over and over how a corporation and their attorneys could break a person or small business overnight.