Wess

ILCA gives LPE the boot... seeking new Laser builder

Recommended Posts

Majority of sailors buy RS?  They are the largest manufacturer, but they don't have over 50% market share.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wouldn't surprise me if 50% of new dinghy sales in the UK are by RS. I haven't seen figures but they sell an awful lot of boats here over many classes. The UK isn't the world, obviously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, VWAP said:
 

"ILCA REFUSES TO INSPECT LASERPERFORMANCE’S LASER FACTORY

After indicating that World Sailing and ILCA were willing to jointly inspect LaserPerformance’s Laser UK manufacturing facilities, today LaserPerformance was informed that this will not take place and instead World Sailing informed us that “On 29 May, World Sailing and an ILCA representative will go the LP Long Buckby site to apply the plaques for the Gdynia boats (please note that this will not be a formal inspection of the Long Buckby facility – simply an opportunity to provide and apply the plaques).”

We repeat our request for a joint World Sailing - ILCA inspection of LaserPerformance's Banbury Manufacturing facilities at the earliest convenient date.

Why is ILCA not willing to cooperate and resolve the Laser plaque issue?"

Uh, because they don't want you back... because you are fired LPE!  Gone.  Goodbye.  Finished.  Over and OUT!!  You, LPE, are the dimmest bulb... the elevator that only goes down... the weakest link... and will eventually be a Harvard Business Review case on how to be the worst of the worst. 

Now go see if you can set up your own class and make in-roads at the club level selling more affordable and longer lasting higher quality boats for lower than ICLA prices like the generic Laser sails and parts suppliers did. But this will require an ability in interact with and meet the need of customers so I wish you lots of luck as this does not appear to be one of your strengths.  But perhaps you will surprise me.

Hey @LaserPerformance - you posted in the Sunfish thread and seem to have had success there.  What happened this time?  Nothing to say beyond misleading statements on a facebook page?  Great customer relations!!

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now this from LPE on their facebook page...

"LaserPerformance Supports Competition at the Olympics

LaserPerformance applaud WS’s efforts to ensure the most appropriate boat is in the Olympics by holding equipment trials.

LaserPerformance is cooperating with regards to FRAND policies; we are open to supporting a FRAND policy that is issued and accepted by all builders & trademark holders of Olympic classes. In the document, as World Sailing has clearly stated, the issue of intellectual property rights must be respected. LaserPerformance will work diligently with World Sailing to ensure an appropriate document is issued."

Never before has somebody posted so much so late after so little when it mattered.

Hey @LaserPerformance- Didn't you hear?  You got terminated.  Are you open for some question?  I promise to play nice and be respectful if you can manage to provide honest direct answers to reasonable fair questions.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Dex Sawash said:

Melges is ugliest by a few inches. What do I win?

Image result for you win a kewpie doll images

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Wess said:

And now this from LPE on their facebook page...

"LaserPerformance Supports Competition at the Olympics

LaserPerformance applaud WS’s efforts to ensure the most appropriate boat is in the Olympics by holding equipment trials.

LaserPerformance is cooperating with regards to FRAND policies; we are open to supporting a FRAND policy that is issued and accepted by all builders & trademark holders of Olympic classes. In the document, as World Sailing has clearly stated, the issue of intellectual property rights must be respected. LaserPerformance will work diligently with World Sailing to ensure an appropriate document is issued."

Never before has somebody posted so much so late after so little when it mattered.

Hey @LaserPerformance- Didn't you hear?  You got terminated.  Are you open for some question?  I promise to play nice and be respectful if you can manage to provide honest direct answers to reasonable fair questions.

Oh, so NOW they’re willing to cooperate with and support a FRAND policy. PSJ and PSA agreed back when it mattered. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/13/2019 at 9:11 PM, Emilio Castelli said:

The goal is to keep the boat in the Olympics; WS requires multiple builders and FRAND. LP has so far refused to grant licenses to the Laser trademark so, in order to be able to have multiple builders, the name must be changed.

A vote against a name change will force the boat out of the Olympics.

E

Maybe not, if their recent claim that they can be FRAND compliant is accurate...

 So, problem solved? Let's just reinstate LP, please. Seems daft to dump the biggest manufacturer and create a lot of legal hassle.

 ILCA's job should be to help improve supply outside Europe, not kill it within. 

Cheers,

              W.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
13 minutes ago, WGWarburton said:

 So, problem solved? Let's just reinstate LP, please. Seems daft to dump the biggest manufacturer and create a lot of legal hassle.

LaserPerformance is the WORST dinghy builder in the history of sailing. They have tried for 9 years to kill the Laser, and they have done it very very well.

You Europeans are absolutely hopeless in understanding their is a world outside of your continent.
The Laser / ILCA dinghy can NOT continue with LaserPerformance being involved in any way, shape or form.

There are no spar parts, and often no boats available here, for 9 years running.
You need to understand how terribly they have performed for the class - which is WHY we are here.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aroy210677 said:

Oh, so NOW they’re willing to cooperate with and support a FRAND policy. PSJ and PSA agreed back when it mattered. 

Hi Andy,

 

Be careful what you wish for. FRAND agreements can be very complex.   I carefully read through the interview of Kim Anderson when he explained why WS was advocating for a FRAND policy. I had trouble understanding what WS sought to achieve.  I  think they have good intentions but the process will be more complex than they realize.

In essence a FRAND contract is a contract between a regulatory standard setting organization and the industry members of that organization agreeing that when a standard is established that requires licensing a particular technology from the IP owner, that the members and the regulator have already agreed a policy for licensing terms.  These contracts are extremely complex.

I believe that WS's current counsel are advocating a FRAND contract for all Olympic classes and builders.  It will effectively establish the mechanism for establishing license fees for a builder.  However FRAND is usually based on standard essential patents.  To be effective a WS FRAND contract will need detailed clauses to establish when it is "essential" for a builder to build Lasers.  A FRAND contract which tries to establish a policy that anyone can build a Laser will fail. It is clearly not essential to have 100 builders in North America.  Is it essential to have 2?   There will be much negotiation to establish the process and metrics in the contract for certifying that another builder is essential.   Then there will be more negotiation to agree what process determines the license fee that additional builder pays  .

One component of a FRAND contract that should be fairly easy to agree is a process for determining consistent standard of manufacturing. However, even with a common build book the Laser builders were unable to use the same manufacturing process. A FRAND contract is only as good as the supervisory body that oversees it.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW........I think the ILCA should consider appointing an additional supplier for NA rather than replacing the existing supplier.  It might be a legally safer route, but of course I am not privy to any of the documentation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, IPLore said:

Hi Andy,

 

Be careful what you wish for. FRAND agreements can be very complex.   I carefully read through the interview of Kim Anderson when he explained why WS was advocating for a FRAND policy. I had trouble understanding what WS sought to achieve.  I  think they have good intentions but the process will be more complex than they realize.

In essence a FRAND contract is a contract between a regulatory standard setting organization and the industry members of that organization agreeing that when a standard is established that requires licensing a particular technology from the IP owner, that the members and the regulator have already agreed a policy for licensing terms.  These contracts are extremely complex.

I believe that WS's current counsel are advocating a FRAND contract for all Olympic classes and builders.  It will effectively establish the mechanism for establishing license fees for a builder.  However FRAND is usually based on standard essential patents.  To be effective a WS FRAND contract will need detailed clauses to establish when it is "essential" for a builder to build Lasers.  A FRAND contract which tries to establish a policy that anyone can build a Laser will fail. It is clearly not essential to have 100 builders in North America.  Is it essential to have 2?   There will be much negotiation to establish the process and metrics in the contract for certifying that another builder is essential.   Then there will be more negotiation to agree what process determines the license fee that additional builder pays  .

One component of a FRAND contract that should be fairly easy to agree is a process for determining consistent standard of manufacturing. However, even with a common build book the Laser builders were unable to use the same manufacturing process. A FRAND contract is only as good as the supervisory body that oversees it.

 

Careful.  Logic and level heads don't seem to go far in anything Laser related!  And of course you haven't repeated the same rant 100 times so it can't be valid yet.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gouvernail said:

The route to this is simple. Amend the Constitution and change the rules so the sailing game instead of the brznd name is the mission and non brand name equipment is allowed.

Then see who would like to compete with LP .

Maybe LP would decide to use its might to “better spoil us” than any upstart. 

Regardless, until we change our mission and rules we have two choices:

LP

No toys 

Unfortunately amending the constitution and class rules does not allow us to break the law. It might work in China but not here.

Here our society is governed by the rule of law.

If the ILCA contractually agreed with Person A that they would not appoint another builder without permission from Person A then no matter how unpleasant Person A turns out to be, they have to abide by that obligation. If they did not so agree, then they are free to appoint another builder, but they must still do so in accordance with certain equitable laws of the land.  For example we have (rightly so) a certain body of law which protects businesses from being inequitably interfered with.   You cannot stand outside someone else's store, yelling and screaming to drive away customers, so that they come to your store. You have to be extremely careful if you do anything that prevents an existing business from selling its goods to its existing customers. If the goods are flawed in some way and you are the regulator responsible for ensuring goods meet a standard then , by law, you have to document those flaws very carefully if you prevent customers from buying those goods.  If you unreasonably prevent customers from buying goods from a business you expose yourself to a claim of tortuous interference (like the screamer next to the store) .

So if I certify a shipment of goods going to Poland without inspecting the goods or the manufacture of the goods one week and then the next week refuse to certify the same goods without any inspection......then I am truly walking on thin ice.   Jest saying. 

I'm not saying that is happening here.  I'm just thinking aloud how much easier it is to appoint an additional builder without necessarily prohibiting the existing builder. Of course, that depends on being able to do that without being in breach of contract.

The best outcome would be if Rastegar would simply sell LP to someone else  who actually knows how to run a sports product business.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IPLore said:

The best outcome would be if Rastegar would simply sell LP to someone else  who actually knows how to run a sports product business.

+1.  Best thing I read all day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BlatantEcho said:

...You Europeans are absolutely hopeless in understanding their is a world outside of your continent....

Oh, the irony.

Cheers,

              W.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gouvernail said:

Can somebody explain how this upcoming World Sailing visit to the LP boat warehouse fits in the grand scheme?

International Laser Class Association says they have no idea what LP is building and calling Lasers. 

“You didn’t let us look at how and what you are building so you can’t have our OK to race stickers any more.”

LP: We have a bunch of boats finished 

WS: We will come to your warehouse and apply stickers but WE ARE NOT COMING TO SEE IF THE BOATS WERE BUILT  ACCORDING TO SPEC.

North American Laser Class President:

It isn’t an inspection.

 

LP:

ILCA refuses to inspect 

——-

Huh??

Dozens more potentially out of spec Boats will get stickers??

As I see it: 

Either LP is so reliable and trustworthy there is no need to look.

or

The International Laser Class Association is abandoning an opportunity for a potential Gottcha and solid case for termination of LP. 

 

Can one of you “everything is dandy” guys explain how this is brilliant? 

 

LP's assertion seems to be that they have been so reliable in producing correctly specified boats that ILCA have not bothered inspecting them for years... I imagine that they are absolutely confident that their hulls are within spec.  They further assert, I believe, that by dobbing in PSA to ILCA, they proved that ILCA's inspection policy is less reliable than their manufacturing process... 

 They've asked WS to come (with ILCA?) and agree that some of their stock of boats, presumably built while they were still "approved", can carry plaques and be sold as WS approved Lasers, then (for PR purposes, perhaps?) claimed that this was an "inspection"... forcing ILCA to either agree (cave in) or refute (whereupon they can be accused of being unreasonable in not inspecting).

 Looks to me like they are trying to portray ILCA as being unreasonable in not cooperating with them, and at the same time claiming that they are OK to work with WS, adapt and make Lasers FRAND compliant.

 IMHO... IANAL... FWIW... etc.

Cheers,

               W.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, WGWarburton said:

IANAL

hm what exactly does this one mean (seriously i'm afraid to google it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, dgmckim said:

hm what exactly does this one mean (seriously i'm afraid to google it)

I Am Not A Lawyer.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gouvernail said:

Can somebody explain how this upcoming World Sailing visit to the LP boat warehouse fits in the grand scheme?

International Laser Class Association says they have no idea what LP is building and calling Lasers. 

“You didn’t let us look at how and what you are building so you can’t have our OK to race stickers any more.”

LP: We have a bunch of boats finished 

WS: We will come to your warehouse and apply stickers but WE ARE NOT COMING TO SEE IF THE BOATS WERE BUILT  ACCORDING TO SPEC.

North American Laser Class President:

It isn’t an inspection.

 

LP:

ILCA refuses to inspect 

——-

Huh??

Dozens more potentially out of spec Boats will get stickers??

As I see it: 

Either LP is so reliable and trustworthy there is no need to look.

or

The International Laser Class Association is abandoning an opportunity for a potential Gottcha and solid case for termination of LP. 

 

Can one of you “everything is dandy” guys explain how this is brilliant? 

 

Has ANYONE said "everything is dandy"?  Some of us have said "stop slinging shit without evidence" and "we don't know if the sky is falling - there could be a way forward" but I don't think ANYONE has said "everything is dandy and brilliant".

Probably everyone here would like it if everyone got around the table and sung Khumbaya together and went out to spread peace and (Laser) light in the world. But to just keep on saying that should happen is so obvious that it may not be helping; in fact the inferred insult may hinder the peace process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've said that we do not have enough evidence to conclude, as many have done, that lots of people are doing the wrong thing. That's not saying "everything's dandy".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

I believe we agree the intentions of our Class Officer friends are very good.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Curious said:

Has ANYONE said "everything is dandy"?  Some of us have said "stop slinging shit without evidence" and "we don't know if the sky is falling - there could be a way forward" but I don't think ANYONE has said "everything is dandy and brilliant".

Probably everyone here would like it if everyone got around the table and sung Khumbaya together and went out to spread peace and (Laser) light in the world. But to just keep on saying that should happen is so obvious that it may not be helping; in fact the inferred insult may hinder the peace process.

NOTHING is "Dandy" or "Brilliant" when any kind of pending litigation is a possibility..  Now if LPE just goes along their merry way then IMHO Yes, everything will be "Dandy" right directly.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, WGWarburton said:

I Am Not A Lawyer.

ANAL on the other hand stands for Another Nasty Acrimonious Lawyer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

with Rastegar holding the Trademark on most of the world, its check to WS and ILCA and everyone else.

What a trap they all fell into but, change name to Torch and life continues

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/13/2019 at 8:58 PM, RobbieB said:

It should have been voted down.  If you're 90kg and not competitive it's not your body weight that's hurting you it's your skippering ability!  I'm a touch over 90kg and fully capable of winning races in my district, (and others) in any conditions from drifters to 20+.

However. when I branch out to NA's and other big league championship events I do get sorted into the 20's for results, but it's my skill level in the boat.  Not my weight!  

 

what weight makes a difference then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
 
3
On 5/12/2019 at 1:51 AM, A Class Sailor said:
It's very easy for a small sailmaker to do a Laser sail cheaply. All tghey need is a sewing machine, because they can order the panels cut out by a plotting company and don't even need to order a whole roll of sailcloth, so they can make to order and not have money tied up in stock. The problem comes when you place an order for, say, 500 sails to be delivered in 6-8 weeks. You can't cut sails out one at a time. They need to be bulk cut and that doesn't come cheap. You need a bank of machinists. The capital investment in the plant adds significant cost. You need to buy the cloth and component parts in bulk, in advance. The savings for bulk don't pay for the plant and up front investment in materials. Then there is an issue of quality. People complain about inconsistencies in Laser sails and that is from plants that are ISO9001 certified (which costs a lot to get). Start bulk manufacturing without that sort of standard and process in place and you get a nightmare in quality, as has been seen in the past with other classes. None of this comes cheap and none of this is included in the price of "training sails" and we haven't even started talking about stocking and distribution costs.

I suspect that it might be possible to reduce the cost of sails a bit but I would be very surprised if there really were big savings to be had.

Are you saying that production cost for 500 sails (measured as cost per one sail) for a big sailmaker is larger than the production of a small sailmaker for one sail?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

first time caller, long time listener.

Happen to have some ears on the ground so thought I might add:

WS are only plaquing for Gdynia Champs and nothing else owing to a pre-existing agreement.
When each boat is made it carries a card with weight, rake and build date so they'll only plaque boats made before the termination date so aren't inferring any acceptance of conformity.
Circa 80 boats for Gdynia with a further 250 'non compliant' in stock. They have ramped down production a little but are still producing daily.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ingen said:

first time caller, long time listener.

Happen to have some ears on the ground so thought I might add:

WS are only plaquing for Gdynia Champs and nothing else owing to a pre-existing agreement.
When each boat is made it carries a card with weight, rake and build date so they'll only plaque boats made before the termination date so aren't inferring any acceptance of conformity.
Circa 80 boats for Gdynia with a further 250 'non compliant' in stock. They have ramped down production a little but are still producing daily.

Thanks for posting. Much appreciated.

 Any ideas on what the plan is for the "LaserPerformance UK Laser Open & National Championships 2019" charter fleet, please?

Thanks,

                    W.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ingen said:

first time caller, long time listener.

Happen to have some ears on the ground so thought I might add:

WS are only plaquing for Gdynia Champs and nothing else owing to a pre-existing agreement.
When each boat is made it carries a card with weight, rake and build date so they'll only plaque boats made before the termination date so aren't inferring any acceptance of conformity.
Circa 80 boats for Gdynia with a further 250 'non compliant' in stock. They have ramped down production a little but are still producing daily.

From a legal perspective, ILCA needs to be prepared to explain how they deemed the other 250 boats to be "non compliant" and why they were not issued with plaques.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Gdynia boats plagued a large portion of those hulls were made after the termination.

Would they not have difficulty only in not deeming the remaining hulls made prior to termination plaque-worthy?

Surely any after the termination date are non compliant because of the lack of inspection by the licensing body...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new builders that the ILCA are reviewing have been made public.

In the US the builders that have thrown their hat in the ring include:

Nautor - The distribution subsidiary for a Brazilian manufacturer of metal boat parts. No US boat building facility AFAIK.

Sunfish Laser Johnstone - I'm guessing this is Peter Johnstone's company that sold the Sunfish rights to Vanguard. I doubt they have a manufacturing facility.  J Boats sub contracts all manufacturing.  Distribution is their forte with a network of dealers who are typically used to selling keel boats and yachts.

Fulcrum Speedworks - Dave Clark's newly established boat works that builds the UFO. Supported by Steve Clark the former co-owner of Vanguard, the former builder of the Laser until they sold Vanguard to LP. Really Steve? You want to get back into this?

And the mystery guest who is withholding his or her name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, WGWarburton said:

Thanks for posting. Much appreciated.

 Any ideas on what the plan is for the "LaserPerformance UK Laser Open & National Championships 2019" charter fleet, please?

Thanks,

                    W.

As far as they're concerned and reporting to customers it's business as usual (or will be once they plug the the catastrophic hole in their business (70%)).
Plausible deniability seems to be the name of the game with LPUS giving little to nothing to LPEU so they're able to honestly answer depending on the drip feed and the various omissions of truth systemic in their current approach.
They certainly intend on having a fleet but don't appear to have a plan to sort.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The UK line up includes

A carbon batten manufacturer, a builder of support vessels for wind farms and a hydraulic components manufacturer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IPLore said:

The UK line up includes

A carbon batten manufacturer, a builder of support vessels for wind farms and a hydraulic components manufacturer.

Em...okay
Any names?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ingen said:

Em...okay
Any names?

Customised Composites, C Truk Marine, Phoenix Marine.

From ILCA's letter on the mythical front page.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, IPLore said:

Customised Composites, C Truk Marine, Phoenix Marine.

From ILCA's letter on the mythical front page.

 

 

Screen Shot 2019-05-17 at 7.46.58 AM.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, IPLore said:

Customised Composites, C Truk Marine, Phoenix Marine.

From ILCA's letter on the mythical front page.

 

Hello Mr. Lore, Can you fill me on what is the "mythical front page"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, aroy210677 said:

Hello Mr. Lore, Can you fill me on what is the "mythical front page"?

Some say it is an urban legend, some say it actually exists.

Voyagers who claim to have been there return with stories of a place that is half fact and half fiction, where old orators go to die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, aroy210677 said:

Hello Mr. Lore, Can you fill me on what is the "mythical front page"?

  • On chance its a serious question... I know Canadians are not too bright :P...

 

https://sailinganarchy.com/

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Wess said:
  • On chance its a serious question... I know Canadians are not too bright :P...

https://sailinganarchy.com/

Apologize!   I totally resemble that remark, Wess!  You do know that the sun only shines in the summer here, Eh?  So it's hardly our fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bacq2bacq said:

Apologize!   I totally resemble that remark, Wess!  You do know that the sun only shines in the summer here, Eh?  It's hardly our fault.

I know I know but then you have all those pesky bugs.  They are kinda like LPE; they just won't go away!!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bacq2bacq said:

Apologize!   I totally resemble that remark, Wess!  You do know that the sun only shines in the summer here, Eh?  It's hardly our fault.

3 minutes ago, Wess said:

 

Most people know only whores and hockey players come from Canada.

My Mom was a helluva goalie in her time.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, IPLore said:

Maybe they can divert some of the Brexit protestors from Westminster to Fulham Road. They dont even need new placards.

"Leave means Leave"

and

"Remain"

aptly sum up the choice :rolleyes:


RS Aero sailor outside the World Sailing meeting in London.

2_Brexit.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, aroy210677 said:

Most people know only whores and hockey players come from Canada.

 

The Laser came from Canada.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somebody wake me up on May 23rd.  Interesting stuff in that letter.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Wess said:

Somebody wake me up on May 23rd.  Interesting stuff in that letter.

Not that it matters, but this statement from SA is not correct: "We snagged this document from the ILCA…. (i.e., Update from International Laser Class Association (ILCA).  Someone from WS would have sent it to SA. But again, that's cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, IPLore said:

The Laser came from Canada.

Hang on now.  Ian Bruce is the Daddy of the Laser and he came from Jamacia, Mon!  You know... the place of the world famous winter Olympic bobsled team.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, aroy210677 said:

Not that it matters, but this statement from SA is not correct: "We snagged this document from the ILCA…. (i.e., Update from International Laser Class Association (ILCA).  Someone from WS would have sent it to SA. But again, that's cool.

They should've more correctly said, We snagged this ILCA document from someone at WS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ingen said:

With Gdynia boats plagued a large portion of those hulls were made after the termination.

Would they not have difficulty only in not deeming the remaining hulls made prior to termination plaque-worthy?

Surely any after the termination date are non compliant because of the lack of inspection by the licensing body...

Are you saying that WS and ILCA while at LPE, allowed event boats for Gdynia, that were produced AFTER the termination notice, to be plaqued as class legal?  From your earlier post and last line in this post I am pretty sure you don't mean that and I am misreading the first line in post above.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Wess said:

Are you saying that WS and ILCA while at LPE, allowed event boats for Gdynia, that were produced AFTER the termination notice, to be plaqued as class legal?  From your earlier post and last line in this post I am pretty sure you don't mean that and I am misreading the first line in post above.

Quite, bit of clarity needed on that one.
They have about 300 currently in stock.
Somewhere close to half of those were pre-termination.
Once the 80 are plaqued the majority of the remaining will be post-termination hulls.

Not sure whether the ILCA plan is to release more from LP, depends how you read the letter, though 'contingency' would suggest not:
"In addition, ILCA is working with World Sailing towards a plan to release up to 400 class legal boats over the next 3 months. ILCA has arranged a contingency supply of class legal boats for the Youth Worlds in Gdynia, Poland so no disruption is expected."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ingen said:

Quite, bit of clarity needed on that one.
They have about 300 currently in stock.
Somewhere close to half of those were pre-termination.
Once the 80 are plaqued the majority of the remaining will be post-termination hulls.

Not sure whether the ILCA plan is to release more from LP, depends how you read the letter, though 'contingency' would suggest not:
"In addition, ILCA is working with World Sailing towards a plan to release up to 400 class legal boats over the next 3 months. ILCA has arranged a contingency supply of class legal boats for the Youth Worlds in Gdynia, Poland so no disruption is expected."

OK, thanks.  So its clear you are NOT saying that they have already put plaques on any post termination hulls.  You are saying thus far they have ONLY put plaques on PRE-termination hulls.  But you read the letter to suggest they might do something different in the future.  I read the letter differently but that's OK.  I don't want to put words in your mouth... just trying to understand with certainty what you were saying.

And @Gouvernail - I may need to eat some crow and apologize to you re your rants on vote timing... I gotta re-read that letter a few times and think a bit.  There is some surprising and really pretty radical - for lack of a better word - ideas and things in there.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

• ILCA remains optimistic that when sailors come together to work in the best interest of the sport, they can find a solution to any problem.

A nicely barbed statement in the circumstances I feel...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just how many builders is the ILCA prepared to bring online - One North American, one European, and potentially one South American?  I still wonder about the start-up costs relative to the potential number of boats to be sold, maybe outside Europe.  And LPE seems fairy well entrenched in Europe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Wess said:

OK, thanks.  So its clear you are NOT saying that they have already put plaques on any post termination hulls.  You are saying thus far they have ONLY put plaques on PRE-termination hulls.  But you read the letter to suggest they might do something different in the future.  I read the letter differently but that's OK.  I don't want to put words in your mouth... just trying to understand with certainty what you were saying.

 

No plaques on post-term hulls only on those made before the termination.

The letter do appear to suggest that these are only contingency but I suppose it does change daily so...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wess, do you have any reason to think that there is any material difference in the stock?

 It seems unlikely that LP were sitting there ready to change the production line and/or modify the builds as soon as the letter from ILCA arrived on their doormat. In reality, the only difference between a pre term and post-term hull (at this stage, anyway) will be whether or not it has an officially placed plaque on it. If ILCA need the supply and WS are complicit, then they could likely plaque the entire stock.

 Obviously, if ILCA/WS don't inspect the factory to confirm the builds are compliant, then they can't confirm that.. but then, they hadn't done so for years before they pulled the plug, so that doesn't seem to be a showstopper... If LP concede that they will not be able to produce compliant Lasers in the future, then they could abandon the requirement and build faster/stronger/cheaper boats but for now, they probably (MHO again) think they have more to gain by continuing to produce compliant ones and angling for the winds of change to shift back their way...

 Looking at the list of manufacturers, LP may be feeling less exposed now than they did...

Cheers,

             W.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IPLore said:

Some say it is an urban legend, some say it actually exists.

Voyagers who claim to have been there return with stories of a place that is half fact and half fiction, where old orators go to die.

Some say the Front Page gave birth to Chuck Norris, and that its creator was a hybrid with 20% Hish-qu-Ten blood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, WGWarburton said:

 

 Looking at the list of manufacturers, LP may be feeling less exposed now than they did...

Cheers,

             W.

I would think just the opposite. There are some seriously good companies on that list - Devoti and Fulcrum to name just two. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the full section from which that earlier post was taken

Screen shot 2019-05-17 at 10.57.44 AM.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dgmckim said:

some interesting stuff in that letter

Some interesting footnotes and appendix too...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, WGWarburton said:

 It seems unlikely that LP were sitting there ready to change the production line and/or modify the builds as soon as the letter from ILCA arrived on their doormat.

It is certainly doubtful.
However, (perhaps entirely unrelated) there must have been some shape or form of a plan beforehand.
They made all of their LPEU staff redundant in January (with the exception of two). They have given them 12months to work out their notice but as yet they haven't told them what the plan is or whether any of them will be re-hired.

Probably a coincidence but the battle to force the ILCA to sign a (God awful) new contact had been going on for several years and this happened just before they refused an inspection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Alan Crawford said:

I would think just the opposite. There are some seriously good companies on that list - Devoti and Fulcrum to name just two. 

Fair point... I am guilty of assuming that Devoti was a small builder and not  geared up for volume production, provision of charter fleets etc. but then, that's the way we were, not necessarily the way we will be.

 So, the future is MMOD, not SMOD; boats come from various factories, all approved by ILCA and we can just pick whichever one can supply us at the time and price we want because they will all be identical, anyway... a bit like Optimists- after all, there's no reason anyone would choose to buy a Winner when they can buy a FarEast more cheaply and it's been great to see how successful new arrivals in the market like Laserperformance and Ovington have been.

The future is bright. Illuminated by coherent light...

Cheers,

                W.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WGWarburton said:

Wess, do you have any reason to think that there is any material difference in the stock?

No, but I think there is a material difference for ILCA's prospects in court if they were so stupid as to put a plaque on post termination LPE built boats for any reason.  That would be "LPE refusing an inspection" kinda dumb (and I don't think they are).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Wess said:

No, but I think there is a material difference for ILCA's prospects in court if they were so stupid as to put a plaque on post termination LPE built boats for any reason.  That would be "LPE refusing an inspection" kinda dumb (and I don't think they are).

We did not and would not do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, aroy210677 said:

We did not... would not...

But would you try it with a box rule?
Even here, where puppet-socks rule?

We have here a new game to play!
We call it: Sail ILCA!

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, tillerman said:

@tillerman, @Curious, @IPLore, @sosoomii

Respect your views a lot so interested to hear your thoughts on this letter.  Its a bit nuts at the office so I can't really give it the thought and attention I would like to.  So this is really off the cuff...

I keep falling back to my bias of the club volunteers having no vested interest so I tend to support them somewhat blindly perhaps.  And having no love for BK, PSA, or LPE, its easy to fall in line with the class organization views.  But a quick read of the letter and I came away thinking wow, that is a massive restructuring of commercial rights (and the value thereof) and takes and gives by WS and ILCA all in the name of FRAND and Olympics.  I kinda don't care if it gets rid of a crap builder and replaces it with same or better but then I started thinking beyond Laser.

Lets talk Aero because that is safer (less hate for any one party in the game).  So somebody 'invents" a boat called an Aero and decides to build and support it and entice customers to sail and race it.  Not important who the who is, but because a boat can't (with some rare exceptions) be patented most anyone could build an Aero copy, they just can't call it an Aero.  Somebody owns the trademark and that and the goodwill associated therewith is really the only thing the inventor or builder or whomever actually owns.  So whomever that is, invests lots of time and money - and maybe the trademark even is sold to somebody for lots of money and the Aero class becomes a success. Such a success that its selected to be the Olympic boat to replace the ILCA dinghy down stream in a decade or so.  Everyone is happy.  The Aero class... lets call them IACA is happy and the Aero sailors are happy but how does the trademark owner and builder feel?  Wondering because this whole Laser mess seems to set a precedent where the class and WS can act in concert, while owning nothing of value, and destroy a business.  All IACA has to do is say we ain't sailing Aero's anymore and instead we are sailing IACA dinghies that are generic copies of Aeros and we are going to appoint a new builder of those generic Aeros!?  Those new builder pay a "fee" to IACA and WS for stickers and the right to be class legal boats.  Meanwhile whoever "invented" the Aero and built it, and invested heavily to have value in that trademark, is kicked to the curb.  Kick LPE to the curb and I don't care.  But am I short-sighted here?  What stops a class association and WS from acting in concert and doing this to anyone all in the name of FRAND? 

By bottom line question...  if the Laser precedent plays out to the script and the way many want it to... how does the holder of Aero rights, or Melges rights, or so on, protect themselves from having a class organization and WS do the same to them?  Does the trademark holder need to ensure they control the class?

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Wess said:

@tillerman, @Curious, @IPLore, @sosoomii

Respect your views a lot so interested to hear your thoughts on this letter.  Its a bit nuts at the office so I can't really give it the thought and attention I would like to.  So this is really off the cuff...

I keep falling back to my bias of the club volunteers having no vested interest so I tend to support them somewhat blindly perhaps.  And having no love for BK, PSA, or LPE, its easy to fall in line with the class organization views.  But a quick read of the letter and I came away thinking wow, that is a massive restructuring of commercial rights (and the value thereof) and takes and gives by WS and ILCA all in the name of FRAND and Olympics.  I kinda don't care if it gets rid of a crap builder and replaces it with same or better but then I started thinking beyond Laser.

Lets talk Aero because that is safer (less hate for any one party in the game).  So somebody 'invents a boat called an Aero and decides to build and support it and entice customers to sail and race it.  Not important who the who is, but because a boat can't (with some rare exceptions) be patented most anyone could build an Aero copy, they just can't call it an Aero.  Somebody owns the trademark and that and the goodwill associated therewith is really the only thing the inventor or builder or whomever actually owns.  So whomever that is, invests lots of time and money - and maybe the trademark even is sold to somebody for lots of money and the Aero class becomes a success. Such a success that its selected to be the Olympic boat to replace the ILCA dinghy down stream in a decade or so.  Everyone is happy.  The Aero class... lets call them IACA is happy and the Aero sailors are happy but how does the trademark owner and builder feel?  Wondering because this whole Laser mess seems to set a precedent where the class and WS can act in concert, while owning nothing of value, and destroy a business.  All IACA has to do is say we ain't sailing Aero's anymore and instead we are sailing IACA dinghies and we are going to appoint a new builder.  Those new builder pay a fee to IACA and WS for stickers and the right to be class legal boats.  Meanwhile whoever "invented" the Aero and built it, and invested heavily to have value in that trademark, is kicked to the curb.  Kick LPE to the curb and I don't care.  But am I short-sighted here?  What stops a class association and WS from acting in concert and doing this to anyone all in the name of FRAND? 

By bottom line question...  if the Laser precedent plays out to the script and the way many want it to... how does the holder of Aero rights, or Melges rights, or so on, protect themselves from having a class organization and WS do the same to them?  Does the trademark holder need to ensure they control the class?

 

Great questions.

No doubt, lawyers are going to make a lot of money in the coming years fighting over these matters.


I am sure @Gantt will have something to say.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Wess said:

@tillerman

By bottom line question...  if the Laser precedent plays out to the script and the way many want it to... how does the holder of Aero rights, or Melges rights, or so on, protect themselves from having a class organization and WS do the same to them?  Does the trademark holder need to ensure they control the class?

 

There are many routes to protecting the intellectual property of a boat design, and I'm pretty sure the RS folks have it covered. The history of ownership of necessary IP for the Laser is a total shit show, I doubt we'll see anyone go down that road again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

The history of ownership of necessary IP for the Laser is a total shit show

At this point?  Open-source it!        Wishes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bacq2bacq said:

At this point?  Open-source it!        Wishes...

+1

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its awfully ironic that open source software in IT depends on copyright for the concept to work!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, tillerman said:

Great questions.

No doubt, lawyers are going to make a lot of money in the coming years fighting over these matters.


I am sure @Gantt will have something to say.
 

I see what you did there wise *ss.  Pretty funny.  But I have the lawn mower on ignore so you canntt win at your game, LOL.

And Clean, you lost me.  Doesn't seem to matter how well protected the trademark is.  This precedent makes the trademark/copyright/etc... kinda worthless no?  The only protection a builder would have from a class and boat name change to a generic copy would be to essentially own and control the class, no?  Or to keep sailors happy enough (#failbyLPE) that they would vote with their feet??

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, tillerman said:

I am sure @Gantt will have something to say.

Not really.The ILCA, World Sailing and other parties are following a process to resolve an issue.

Maybe the only comment I'd like to make is that this is potentially putting in place the decades old vision of having more builders worldwide, which came to a halt in part by the registration of the Laser trademark decades ago. So when Rastegar bought some Laser production rights, what he thought he was buying, and what he was actually buying in my view were two different things.

Today, while the ILCA are in between a rock and a hard place, so are LPE. LPE must weigh up continuing building the Laser /ILCA dinghy, or risk losing all production by pursuing legal action. I'd say that LPE may continue production of approved if they play ball - but the ILCA/World Sailing no doubt have a builder's agreement on the table where LPE supply western Europe (the world's biggest Laser market at the moment) on the basis they do not pursue legal action.

In the mean-time, there are some interesting developments. Consider Jean-Pierre Kiekens' latest blog, where he attempts to rewrite history to not include the significance of the legal action - instead, talks up what he call "the Torch experiment". Which was more significant - the legal action or Kirby's proposed solution?
https://optimist-openbic-sailing.blogspot.com/2019/05/laser-name-change-and-new-builders-is.html

Jean-Pierre Kiekens is correct to draw attention to Europe, however incorrectly framing it, and ignoring the influence of LPE in the European associations does not help. He also talks up the importance of the Trademarks.

There are people here on this forum and beyond who say they support the ILCA, but in fact are more interested in retaining Rastegar's perceived rights (based on Trademarks) to build Lasers everywhere but Japan/South Korea (PSJ) and Oceania (PSA).

Right now, those interests seek to misinform sailors to try and stop the inevitable ILCA vote for change from being successful.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wess said:

I see what you did there wise *ss.  Pretty funny.  But I have the lawn mower on ignore so you canntt win at your game, LOL.

And Clean, you lost me.  Doesn't seem to matter how well protected the trademark is.  This precedent makes the trademark/copyright/etc... kinda worthless no?  The only protection a builder would have from a class and boat name change to a generic copy would be to essentially own and control the class, no?  Or to keep sailors happy enough (#failbyLPE) that they would vote with their feet??

 

There's nothing in this fact pattern that lends itself to precedent.  The problem with the Laser is that the different IP was split up, and then poorly managed and maintained.  

 

If a boat designer/initial manufacturer is responsible, they will:

a) Write the class constitution and rules and own the copyright for them,

b) own the design patent

c) own the trademark for the name/logo and try to get one for the actual shape of the boat

d) Probably something about a construction manual but that's beyond my research

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Gantt said:

 

In the mean-time, there are some interesting developments. Consider Jean-Pierre Kiekens' latest blog,

Who the hell is Jean-Pierre Kiekens?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Who the hell is Jean-Pierre Kiekens?

Belgian Bloke whose blog has been linked to front page of sailing anarchy in several occasions recently. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Who the hell is Jean-Pierre Kiekens?

Jean-Pierre Kiekens writes blogs, contributes to Laser World, Sailing Anarchy, and publications like Sailing Illustrated.

This from Sailing Illustrated:

Quote

Jean-Pierre Kiekens (BEL/CAN) is a Montreal-based former university lecturer in development and agricultural economics. One of his present areas of interest is the development of sustainable and healthy food policies. He is also a sailor, having competed in the Laser and the Snipe in his native Belgium while at university, and as a master sailor in North America at various national and international events. For the past years, Jean-Pierre has followed the evolution of his son, Jean-René, who is now 14 and represented Canada at the 2018 Optimist Worlds in Cyprus - check his Facebook page http://fb.com/jrsailing. Jean-Pierre previously followed the evolution of his daughter, Alexandra, who is now 19 and who sailed the Club 420 and, briefly, the Laser Radial, after the Optimist, and who has temporarily put on hold her sailing to focus on her industrial engineering studies.  M. Kiekens' views are not necessarily those of Sailing Illustrated or your Ed., but then again they may be; regardless J-P provides some refreshing insight that we thought deserved airing here. Our appreciation to Jean-Pierre for his continuing contributions.   –TFE

https://www.sailingillustrated.com/single-post/2019/01/24/TFE-LIVE-Fridays-guest-–-Jean-Pierre-Kiekens-BELCAN-live-via-Skype-from-Montreal-with-his-plan-for-the-2024-Olympic-sailing-classes-and-the-latest-on-the-Laser-Class-and-the-three-other-singlehanders-vying-to-replace-it

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites