Jump to content

Lasers - Applying a Blow Torch


Recommended Posts

2% @ how many thousand new boats per year??

If you do not consider that amount of money owed to you to be worth your attention ....?

May I "borrow" $100,000 per year from you??

Seen a legal bill, LOL?

 

Would even make Britney blush.

 

Do the math Gouv. Its all knowable. Not much in it.

 

Remember we are not talking about all 200,000 of them. Just a few recently in the dispute and future ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 4.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

When are they going to make a decision? I need to know whether I should be training in my RS Aero or my Laser for Paris 2024.     

@WCB  i seriously doubt there is a soul contributing to this thread who honestly disagrees with my perceptions or the reasoning behind my effort to establish an AERO fleet in Texas and at my home

Yes. This looks incredibly similar  to the recent dispute that LP had with the Sunfish class.  When it came time for the Sunfish class to renew their license to use the various trademarks belongi

Posted Images

Think you might be under-estimating it Gouv. Even on post-tax basis I would guess its more.

 

Alas, you gotta pay the legal bills w pre-tax $s and by the time this is done... want take a guess at the legal bill?

Link to post
Share on other sites

For the lawyers? Probably not millions. And if one side wins big enough the other will be stuck with all the legal bills

 

And @2% on $7000 boats the $140 each looks even sweeter

Yea, and you can find # of boats per year and timing of the dispute. Add a tax rate and you have the possible winnings to compare to the costs.

 

I don't want to comment on legal costs other than to say neither side seems inclined to try to minimize costs.

 

According to reports, Kirby rejected arbitration on multiple occasions when the class and LPE agreed. Not a cheap litigation for sure!

 

Hey I want to catch the end of the game and go celebrate the streak continuing (I hope) w a few old friends.... and then go frostbite my non Kirby, ILCA/ISAF sailboat in a Laser race tomorrow, so I gotta sign off.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another party apparently wants the leverage that comes from contracts forced by a rule that demands money for nothing to be used for whatever purpose it deems fit.

This is where we clearly differ. It is not money for nothing. It is an income stream to replace the potential income stream that would have been there if everything was structured differently. For instance, BK could have kept hold of all the trademarkst to the "Laser" name and demanded a royalty for the use of the name. Or he could have set up his own boat building network to profit from the Laser. Or any other thing he wanted. the bottom line is that he didn't have to give up the rights he did.

 

The key to this is that the royalties are the "consideration" for all the rights he simply gave away. The contract could have been different - he could simply have got a one off consideration. However, that would not have seemed a very good deal for the builders. Which would you have rather done? Paid millions of dollars up front for the trademarks and rights to build or would you rather pay a small amount of each sale going forward..

 

As one would imagine, the latter was the route chosen because it was best for all parties. What you are now saying is that they have paid for long enough. It's like an insurance company stopping paying an annuity because they feel you have lived too long.

 

If your view of the world holds true, then I assume that if the Laser had stopped being produced at some point, BK would have been entitled to get a lump sum because he hadn't been adequately compensated for giving up his rights, which of course is a ridiculous idea, as is the idea that perpetual royalties based on sales should have an "end by' date and are money for nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your view of the world holds true, then I assume that if the Laser had stopped being produced at some point, BK would have been entitled to get a lump sum because he hadn't been adequately compensated for giving up his rights, which of course is a ridiculous idea, as is the idea that perpetual royalties based on sales should have an "end by' date and are money for nothing.

 

Having worked for a company that sold licenses to designs as one of its primary products, I can tell you that it is quite common to have a limit on such royalties, either in the form of a monetary limit, or a time limit.

 

However, the contracts related to building Lasers don't have such a limit, so the builders should pay the royalties that Kirby is entitled to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, can't play today. Frostbite and familty dinner. So quickly, Simon, yes, we do disagree. Are you not aware that what you call could of, actually was? The trademark was sold for millions. The right to build was sold (multiple times if I recall).

Wess :
How can a Laser be non Kirby ?

Winner, winner chicken dinner. That is the real question isn't it. We will find that out after the litigation case but I guess its:

 

1.) With the Laser trademark that was sold long ago and is not held by Kirby,

2.) With a revised Laser construction manual held by ISAF/ILCA.

3.) With an ISAF approved class rule that says they are class legal Lasers.

4.) With the plaque the class is currently using,

5.) And with the lack of any not expired IP owned by Kirby.

 

Que the smoke screen and mirrors.

 

Remember, as many have noted on this thread it is very easy to make a Laserious boat that is like the old Kirby boat in every way without violating anything - you just can't sell it as a Laser without the trademark (which was sold long ago and not owned by Kirby).

 

Very few folks dispute that anyone can build an exact copy of a Laser and sell it today (just can't call it a Laser). Que smoke and mirror re termination.

Very few folks dispute that the trademark was sold and is not owned by Kirby and that his attempt to invalidate the trademark in court has failed.

Very few folks dispute that a class can be constituted and set up any rules it wants as to what boat is and is not alllowed in the class.

 

All is strictly my opinion but I suspect that the Laser boats made and sold in the past few months are not Kirby sailboats. I suspect the recent ones are ISAF/ILCA sailboat LASERS. Which is why I don't think what is left of the case matters much at all to class members. Its now just a royalty contract dispute between two parties being resolved in court.

 

I am still betting on a settlement that retains the 2% royalty for some finite period but removes the ultimate leverage that existed before, to stretch that into perpetual payment for all time using an old class rule. Plus maybe even an additional lesser royalty for a longer period to use Kirby's name on the plaque again. Then it can still be a Kirby sailboat, and everyone saves face. My SWAG is that this was the likely outcome of arbitration. Alas, reports say Kirby refused arbitration, that LPE and the class were willing to accept on multiple occasions.

 

The courts will tell us.

 

OK off to sail by Laser whatever it is decided it is!

 

Small Craft Warnings posted so perhaps I will get to see Britney!!

 

Cheers,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, can't play today. Frostbite and familty dinner. So quickly, Simon, yes, we do disagree. Are you not aware that what you call could of, actually was? The trademark was sold for millions. The right to build was sold (multiple times if I recall).

Again, you totally miss the point. It doesn't matter how many times the trademarks or the right to build have been sold, they weren't sold by BK to the then builders. After the trademarks and building rights were initially set up via the contract now in dispute, BK gained no benefits from the subsequent sales of those trademarks and building rights. To BK, it is irrelevant how many times those items have been bought and sold because the contracts remain the same as if there had been no sale.

 

I really don't understand where you are coming from on this. You acknowledge that the trademarks and rights have serious value, yet you think that BK is getting money for nothing. Consider it another way. When BK set up the current structure, he (and his associates) owned certain trademarks and rights which they sold via this contract. They could have chosen a lump sum or an income stream. This is exactly the same as happens when you look at pensions. You can choose to take a lump sum or a life annuity. What you are suggesting is that somebody who chooses a life annuity should stop being paid if they live too long.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Sorry, can't play today. Frostbite and familty dinner. So quickly, Simon, yes, we do disagree. Are you not aware that what you call could of, actually was? The trademark was sold for millions. The right to build was sold (multiple times if I recall).

Again, you totally miss the point. It doesn't matter how many times the trademarks or the right to build have been sold, they weren't sold by BK to the then builders. After the trademarks and building rights were initially set up via the contract now in dispute, BK gained no benefits from the subsequent sales of those trademarks and building rights. To BK, it is irrelevant how many times those items have been bought and sold because the contracts remain the same as if there had been no sale.

 

I really don't understand where you are coming from on this. You acknowledge that the trademarks and rights have serious value, yet you think that BK is getting money for nothing. Consider it another way. When BK set up the current structure, he (and his associates) owned certain trademarks and rights which they sold via this contract. They could have chosen a lump sum or an income stream. This is exactly the same as happens when you look at pensions. You can choose to take a lump sum or a life annuity. What you are suggesting is that somebody who chooses a life annuity should stop being paid if they live too long.

Did BK ever own the trademark? Anyway, it's irrelevent because the trademarks were bought out of bankruptcy some years ago. Any prior claims of royalties on the trademark would have been extinguished in the bankruptcy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is another class I am involved with with a similar set of contracts.

When the boat was developed around 1970, the designer wanted to sell the design outright to the builder for something like $5000. Builder pushed for $200 per hull forever. Designer agreed to that. Something like 5000 hulls and six different builders later, the designer won big in the long run. Builder still pays the $200 per hull to the designer's estate.

 

Similar 3-way arrangements of class assoc, builder and designer.

 

Designer's estate doesn't have knowledge of boats so the class is missing the 3rd spoke of the wheel now.

Would have been nice if he had estate planned to get the contracted rights and responsibilities to a new benevolent dictator to guide class and builder so that neither blows up the game. Hasn't been any problems yet though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If your view of the world holds true, then I assume that if the Laser had stopped being produced at some point, BK would have been entitled to get a lump sum because he hadn't been adequately compensated for giving up his rights, which of course is a ridiculous idea, as is the idea that perpetual royalties based on sales should have an "end by' date and are money for nothing.

 

Having worked for a company that sold licenses to designs as one of its primary products, I can tell you that it is quite common to have a limit on such royalties, either in the form of a monetary limit, or a time limit.

 

However, the contracts related to building Lasers don't have such a limit, so the builders should pay the royalties that Kirby is entitled to.

 

Time limits may be included in some contracts, but is definitely not the case for the two builder's contracts that Kirby has posted in his Legal action. The last one was signed and renewed in 2005 relating to LPE. (Do you have access to the contracts SM123? I am happy to send you or anyone else a copy of the contracts if personally messaged an email address.) For the record and in response to SM123's last post, Kirby never owned the original Laser trademark, Ian Bruce did. There are many posts on this previously.

_____________________________________________________________________

 

My most recent take on what happened with the ILCA has softened based on rereading a lot of the information available.

 

There are contracts that Laser Performance has with the ILCA to supply events with boats, as evidenced in the discovery documents with some emails between the ILCA and Laser Performance. I suspect that Laser Performance, armed with a termination advice from Global Sailing sometime around 2010 convinced the ILCA to push the fundamental rule change through in order to secure supply for specific events. The ILCA did not know the content of the builder's contracts, so did not know that in the event that a contract was terminated that supply for existing contracts was guaranteed by the termination agreement.

_____________________________________________________________________

 

There have been few developments of recent months, though we are close to discovery closing (19 December), a few days away.

 

The questions in the next few months relating to the ILCA / Laser community is which way they (the ILCA) or we (all persons interested in Kirby Sailboats) will move forward. Six major potential ways forward include:

  • With Laser Performance with a renewed licence from Kirby (Probably with new owners for this to be a legitimate option)
  • With a Kirby Sailboat, licensed through Kirby and re-branded as a Torch (With the ILCA or a new association)
  • With a Kirby Sailboat, not licensed and re-branded. (Independent of Kirby and Laser Performance)
  • With Laser Performance, without the ability to manufacture a Kirby Sailboat as per their termination agreement. (Can't see how this would work without changing the hull design).
  • With Laser Performance, with the ability to manufacture a Kirby Sailboat. (ie - they win in court).
  • Through a new builder, not licensed by Kirby and branded a Laser.

The ILCA plays an important part in most of these outcomes. The critical time will be March 2015 when the trial ends.

_____________________________________________________________________

 

For me, I would happily rejoin an ILCA that sees a solution that:

  • retains the small royalty payment of 2% of the value of the wholesale hull to Kirby;
  • is more committed to open communication and robust voting systems and;
  • ensures that ILCA officers/staff declare all financial interests in the ILCA and Laser related suppliers (including parts and events).

I'd also support a better system than the current one, however for me, then does not include any that would screw Kirby out of his royalty payments. (Am OK with any new system that Kirby agrees to).

 

Recently, Gouv invited me to rejoin the ILCA, to which I declined for political reasons. I now extend the invitation for Gouv and others to resign from the ILCA for the same reasons I gave not to rejoin. (I imagine Gouv's resignation would have far more impact than my decision not to rejoin.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mostly I post here to troll and see the responses.

You guys don't really seriously give a shit about all this . Really! You couldn't!!

I know Wess is just trolling too.

And Bill4

I am gonna go rig up and ride around for a while

No, I don't really give shit about all this. It's quite sad really. I doubt the designer of the Kirby saiboat - or anybody else for that matter - could have imagined how successful the Laser would be. But success attracts money and money attracts greed so I suppose nobody should be too surprised if people's actions are less than altruistic. So, now the class is fucked up.

Concerning all the discussion about the agreements, nobody really knows what the fuck is going on - at least not according to each other... But no wonder - a well written contract brings certainty to future events. It seems none of these contracts did a very good job of this, hence the lawsuits. So the contracts are flawed. Not even the brainpower in this thread can figure them out. So, as stated a zillion times, the courts will interpret them and some version of justice will prevail.

In the meantime, there are some attractive boats gaining some traction - at least in the UK - and the Laser naysayers are having a hay day. But I think the Kirby sailboat will survive. I hope BK is right and the boat stays a Laser.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the Laser class if fucked yet. Certainly the model that has been so successful to date is gone, regardless of the outcome of the court case. It will be interesting to see if a viable model can emerge from the ashes.


If not, then the class will slide into slow decline. The choice of single hander for the 2020 Olympics will be interesting, there are plenty of other boats that can fill the Laser's boots.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, by the way, Gantt. I am surprised you haven't been crucified for your, uh, interesting suggestion people resign from the ILCA. What would that do other than disqualify them from participating in sanctioned events?

Link to post
Share on other sites

[ But no wonder - a well written contract brings certainty to future events. It seems none of these contracts did a very good job of this, hence the lawsuits. So the contracts are flawed.

Having read a good number of the contracts I don't know that they are badly written. All reads fairly clear to this non lawyer, all parties having a mix of rights and obligations that kept the game together for 40 years and a good number of voluntary and involuntary changes of ownership.

 

Now, for whatever reason, they are getting tested in court. Maybe they'll stand up. One aspect of the contracts I read in, though, could be paraphrased as 'play nice or we all lose',which was the incentive to play the game for mutual benefit. One side, maybes both, stopped playing the game nice and lookee, all are losing. But I'm not sure it's a fault of the contracts, I think they were deliberately difficult to disentangle to give stability to all parties.

 

But I'm no lawyer, so may be talking nonsense. In spite of claims though I'm not sure how many posters on this thread have both read the relevant documents and are better placed to understand that than I am. There are a number of posts where I've thought WTF, how can you say that if you've read the stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, by the way, Gantt. I am surprised you haven't been crucified for your, uh, interesting suggestion people resign from the ILCA. What would that do other than disqualify them from participating in sanctioned events?

He is perhaps not aware that most posters here are not class members and don't even sail in the class. The term pissing into the wind comes to mind...

 

As for actual class members, actually sailing the boat, you might have noticed they have not abandonded the class, the boat, or called for the removal of the leaders that have twice now sent us on this path and then doubled down while we are on it. There is a reason for that.

 

Simon - sorry I was away and really I don't think there is a way we will agree, but maybe you can ask yourself this. Do you really think that after so many years of everything working OK and if anything some justified complaining about the builder LPE, that the entire class woke up one day and together said, lets partner with this builder and go screw Kirby over 2%? Does that seem even remotely realistic? If no then can you accept that there is perhaps some reasonably rational reason they are all united on and not deviating from this path? Do you really think the entire class was duped and then remained duped in the face of Kirby's PR, and endless Canntt posts; all of us too dumb, stupid and lazy to shift course? Just think for a moment. There is maybe a good reason for this path.

 

This was all going fine for years then something changed and it all went to h*ll. What was the event that set it all off? Its easily knowable. Who sold what to whom? Who did what with what they bought? The royalty does not matter, but no way the class is going back to a situation where a class rule can be used to precipitate that. The class was a hostage that got to hold the gun to its own head. So we put down the gun and locked it up. We voted it gone.

 

The Laser class is not dead. Not even sick. Its not going to change at all. Its still going to be the same Laser it always was and still called a Laser; its just (likely without settlement) not going to be a Kirby sailboat as defined on some piece of paper and the reason for that he can find in the mirror or by answering who sold what to who and what did they did with what they bought. That is when the fight started and the Genie can't go back in the bottle anymore.

 

All just my opinion and silly wild *ss uneducated likely wrong guess offered up purely for the amusement of those partaking in this non-fact based humorous discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Too much speculation, argument and crap above for me to be bothered reading it.

 

Regardless of the outcome of the legal action, at a minimum the two builders will not be talking to each other, and the association will be on bad terms with one of them. At worse one builder will no longer build lasers.

 

The success of the class has been that boats built around the world are identical and that the big builders provide big fleets to all major regattas. This would seem to be in doubt for the future if the builders are not talking and one builder deviates form the standard and/or if one builder no longer supports the association's need for regatta boats.

 

Its hard to see the class continuing to be so dominant if people in different countries get boats of differenet standards, quality, rig, or name. Its also hard to see the huge regattas continuing if, like all other classes, Laser sailors have to freight their own boats.

 

Sorry but I think the wheels have come off what was the biggest success in dinghy sailing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the biggest support of the ILCA's actions is Wess, then I'm afraid I agree with you Phil S, the wheels have indeed come off.

 

Unfortunately he's not the only one with his head in the sand. Wess is keen to label this discussion as non fact based, as he knows to base it on the facts (that have been shared here) he is fighting a losing battle. He trolls and baits for the fun of it. And Wess, the word is "ass" (Though I'm not surprised that Wess is particularly sensitive about that specific word.) I think Wess is trying to set a record for writing the most posts in thread (7 on this page alone), ironically pointing the finger at me for endless posts (this is my 4th this page). Good one Wess. Some of us don't think the future of the Laser class is a joke.

 

Fortunately, there's enough of us who sail Kirby's sailboat, who seriously care. I'm hoping that the ILCA take notice of those who have not renewed their membership because of the ILCA's actions - a few of whom (like Lu from Germany) have been very vocal in other forums.

 

The next six months, particularly the time immediately after the legal action, are critical for the class.

 

Only two more days until discovery ends.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only two more days until discovery ends.

What are you expecting at the end of discovery?

 

It's going to take time for the parties to analyze the discovery materials that they receive and perhaps start writing new motions for the court. In other words, it's only the insiders who are affected by the end of discovery.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Laser class is not dead. Not even sick. Its not going to change at all. Its still going to be the same Laser it always was and still called a Laser; its just (likely without settlement) not going to be a Kirby sailboat as defined on some piece of paper and the reason for that he can find in the mirror or by answering who sold what to who and what did they did with what they bought. That is when the fight started and the Genie can't go back in the bottle anymore.

 

I would disagree with you there. My local club used to have a healthy turnout of Laser around 10-15 regular sailors for weekend sailing. Since the issues a few years back with parts availability and the continued wrangling over the class some of them have decided to not rejoin the CA. Other (like me) have voted with our feet and changed to other classes that are more supportive of the game we want to play. There are now maybe 1 or 2 regular sailors of the Laser (or Kirby Sailboat) at my local club.

 

It is not just my club either, one of the largest inland venues in the UK is not far from me and their Laser fleet is also in sharp decline with people switching to other classes wholesale.

 

Do you really think the class is still in rude health worldwide?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I would disagree with you there. My local club used to have a healthy turnout of Laser around 10-15 regular sailors for weekend sailing. Since the issues a few years back with parts availability and the continued wrangling over the class some of them have decided to not rejoin the CA. Other (like me) have voted with our feet and changed to other classes that are more supportive ... There are now maybe 1 or 2 regular sailors of the Laser (or Kirby Sailboat) at my local club.

 

It is not just my club either, one of the largest inland venues in the UK is not far from me and their Laser fleet is also in sharp decline with people switching to other classes wholesale.

What has happened to the lasers that used to sail? Have they become yard art lasers?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a fact that most clubs in the UK have large numbers of boats of all classes for which fees are paid but which are rarely used. However if they were all used our club infrastructures would almost certainly be inadequate, so these folk are subsidising the active minority.

 

My club's Laser fleet isn't strong at the moment. However fleets do wax and wane. Not brave enough to predict whether it's a National trend. The Portsmouth Yardstick participation numbers may give us a clue next spring.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I would disagree with you there. My local club used to have a healthy turnout of Laser around 10-15 regular sailors for weekend sailing. Since the issues a few years back with parts availability and the continued wrangling over the class some of them have decided to not rejoin the CA. Other (like me) have voted with our feet and changed to other classes that are more supportive ... There are now maybe 1 or 2 regular sailors of the Laser (or Kirby Sailboat) at my local club.

 

It is not just my club either, one of the largest inland venues in the UK is not far from me and their Laser fleet is also in sharp decline with people switching to other classes wholesale.

What has happened to the lasers that used to sail? Have they become yard art lasers?

 

They get sold on usually to people who have an older boat who are wanting to upgrade (in my experience). The true factor I would guess is sales of new boats as this will be an indicator if the fleet is growing or shrinking nationally. If sales of new boats are not outnumbering the boats that are getting 'retired' for one reason or another (accidents, age, being buried in a pile of nettles to never be seen again).

 

There are certainly less Lasers in the boat park where I sail that there was and most of those have not moved in years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The Laser class is not dead. Not even sick. Its not going to change at all. Its still going to be the same Laser it always was and still called a Laser; its just (likely without settlement) not going to be a Kirby sailboat as defined on some piece of paper and the reason for that he can find in the mirror or by answering who sold what to who and what did they did with what they bought. That is when the fight started and the Genie can't go back in the bottle anymore.

 

I would disagree with you there. My local club used to have a healthy turnout of Laser around 10-15 regular sailors for weekend sailing. Since the issues a few years back with parts availability and the continued wrangling over the class some of them have decided to not rejoin the CA. Other (like me) have voted with our feet and changed to other classes that are more supportive of the game we want to play. There are now maybe 1 or 2 regular sailors of the Laser (or Kirby Sailboat) at my local club.

 

It is not just my club either, one of the largest inland venues in the UK is not far from me and their Laser fleet is also in sharp decline with people switching to other classes wholesale.

 

Do you really think the class is still in rude health worldwide?

Sorry, I should clarify. Yes, I think the issues in years past with the builder has negatively impacted the fleet in some instances. I noted that in my respnse to Simon as it frankly says something that the class is viewed as picking that builder as the lesser of the evils in current litigation (they really didn't; they just picked an exit).

 

My point was that this litigation has not and will not kill the class. If Kirby took down the trademark there would be an issue. But he failed in his attempt to do that so...

 

There was an individual who posted after me and before Devil (since deleted) that said it exactly right. The only white knight in this is the class and all the class wants are boats called Lasers that are the same (in all aspects impacting performance) as they ever were. The royalty is not an issue for the class and its great that the court will sort it out. Its either due or its not; it makes no difference. The class wants boats, and as the deleted post indicated, to not go back to the old rule which allowed this mess to be created. Really, most that have followed it closely in the class don't think there is any issue (from the litigation) any more. There will be boats - just as there is now - and the class rules are staying the same - as they are now. Beyond that the lawyers and fat cats and go fight to their hearts content. Those in the class just go sailing.

 

The sky really is not falling. That is just my opinion of course; others will say I canntt be correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sky never seems to fall around here anymore. Our lake is 58 feet down from when we hosted our last big masters regatta.

What are these deleted posts? Has it to do with fencing??

I sailed a Columbia Sabre a few times. Is that fencing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Only two more days until discovery ends.

What are you expecting at the end of discovery?

 

It's going to take time for the parties to analyze the discovery materials that they receive and perhaps start writing new motions for the court. In other words, it's only the insiders who are affected by the end of discovery.

 

Actually what I'm expecting is an application for an extension.

 

Also am expecting (hoping) for more information so we can confirm what we already know - that Laser Performance / Rastegar / Crane are attempting wriggle out of a legal and binding contract. I can't say that they will succeed for sure yet.

 

 

The whole seems to boil down to Kirby claiming he is due unpaid royalties and Rastegar claiming he has paid royalties previously that he ought not have. Was the clause that required royalties to be paid valid and is it still so?

Accountants could settle that question in fifteen minutes. So what's the real question?

 

Are people in the sailing community going to stand by and watch Kirby being robbed?

 

Kirby owns the right to license the Kirby Sailboat (Laser) that he designed with the contracts that he drafted. Those who are happy for the minimal royalties (about $60 per boat) to end are happy for something that Kirby owned to suddenly be worthless. That is tantamount to theft.

 

Worse, having a non ILCA party with the ability to terminate builder's contracts meant when things went wrong (and things have gone wrong with Laser Performance), then they first can receive a warning, then later have their builder's license terminated. Currently, there is no 'system', or at least if there are new contracts between the ILCA and the builders, the ILCA members have not been notified. What will the sport of Laser racing be like when the likes of Rastegar and Crane are controlling the ILCA?

 

Wess and others are happy for Kirby to be robbed of his very reasonable, small royalty - yet have not said what the new arrangement is - rather believe in 'blind faith' of the ILCA exec who have been widely criticized by their own membership - though admittedly there are some members who support the ILCA's position.

 

By summing up my position as that the 'sky is falling' is weird, though it probably is Wess trolling, something that he describes as fun. This is the same person that enjoys Kirby not being paid what is due to him. Good one Wess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is fun. Its not every day you find someone wlling to say things like:

 

* You love the class but are not willing to join the class and everyone should quit the class, and you are unwilling to set up a new class.

 

* You are not a member of the class but voted in the class.

 

* We are robbing someone who is not claiming we are robbing him (Hint, the claim is that LPE is robbing him not the class; try to keep up).

 

* That I am a sock puppet for everyone from Bill Crane to many other posters (or they mine?) on the thread who disagreed with you.

 

Gantt you please tell me why your hero reportedly refused arbitration time and time again while all the other parties agreed? After all you claim to be in direct contact with the key players (that you can't name).

 

Fish on!

 

I am not Bill Crane and I approved this message (while in control of ILCA per above from Canntt).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if that LPE astroturf sourced rumour about arbitration is actually true why would you expect Mr Kirby to accept arbitration? I'm damn sure as far as he's concerned its just a case of maintaining the status quo. From his viewpoint I should have thought arbitration would be a no win situation for him and a no lose situation for LPE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is fun. Its not every day you find someone wlling to say things like:

 

* You love the class but are not willing to join the class and everyone should quit the class, and you are unwilling to set up a new class.

 

* You are not a member of the class but voted in the class.

 

* We are robbing someone who is not claiming we are robbing him (Hint, the claim is that LPE is robbing him not the class; try to keep up).

 

* That I am a sock puppet for everyone from Bill Crane to many other posters (or they mine?) on the thread who disagreed with you.

 

Gantt you please tell me why your hero reportedly refused arbitration time and time again while all the other parties agreed? After all you claim to be in direct contact with the key players (that you can't name).

 

Fish on!

 

I am not Bill Crane and I approved this message (while in control of ILCA per above from Canntt).

 

Of course you have got so many things above wrong in your fucked up attempts to troll yet again - it doesn't come close to representing what I think. Nothing that I have written above is new - even talk of not renewing or resigning from the ILCA is not new.

 

You should find another room to continue your trolling masturbation in private.

 

For the record, I never believed that Wess was Bob Crane, though there was a moment when I suspected that your dear friend IPLore might be - though it was more likely that I had picked up on his incredible similarities to what Crane had written; he was most likely cutting and pasting what Bob Crane had written. The thought that I somehow represent Kirby is even more ridiculous. Perhaps what is scary to Wess is that I exist - that people who aren't members of the ILCA actually have a viewpoint and do care about the Laser class. The majority of Laser sailors do not belong to the ILCA. The majority of Laser racing is not in ILCA sanctioned events.

 

Even if that LPE astroturf sourced rumour about arbitration is actually true why would you expect Mr Kirby to accept arbitration? I'm damn sure as far as he's concerned its just a case of maintaining the status quo. From his viewpoint I should have thought arbitration would be a no win situation for him and a no lose situation for LPE.

 

It was true, Kirby did turn down some arbitration because from memory the 'offer' had limitations that hugely favoured Rastegar. There were other attempts at arbitration that Rastegar turned down - both are inconsequential in the big picture. (Sorry Wess, I know it's your big point - it's actually Rastegar's - but like their countersuits there is nothing of significant substance). Bottom line is that there are contracts, that the court is satisfied that there is a case to hear and nobody know what the outcome will be - though the unofficial word from two lawyers unrelated to the case over a cold one (who sail Lasers) is that Kirby's case looks strong. But we all have to wait. The real speculation is over what the ILCA will do if (when?) Kirby wins.

Link to post
Share on other sites

God this is fun.

 

So through this litigation does BKI get a court order that forces ILCA/ISAF (not a party to the litigation any more right?) to reverse course on the rule change to go back to the "status quo?"

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was true, Kirby did turn down some arbitration because from memory the 'offer' had limitations that hugely favoured Rastegar.

How, exactly, do you know what the offer was?

 

There was at least one mediation session, but the discussion was not public.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BK countered with : Three camels, 6 buckets of sand, a half interest in rastegar's Somali pirate operation, and a $2 royalty on each buggy with the condition that Gantt is appointed exec director of the ILCA.

 

Rastegar said Okay to the camels, the sand, the pirates and the royalty but the Laser class balked at letting Gantt anywhere near the class association.

 

BK offered that he would come down to two camels, 3 buckets of sand and Rastegar could keep the pirates and the royalties if someone, anyone, would give Gantt any kind of job so he could get a life and leave BK alone.

 

The other parties took the view that Gantt was BK's problem, not theirs. Negotiations broke down. Court papers were filed and the rest is history.

Link to post
Share on other sites

rumir has it, Rastegarv offered two camels, a bucket of sand, and half interest in two not yet drilled ISIS oil wells in exchange for rights to build a Laser shaped baby buggy ...

 

 

OK it isn't funny. But my day job sucks

 

 

BK countered with : Three camels, 6 buckets of sand, a half interest in rastegar's Somali pirate operation, and a $2 royalty on each buggy with the condition that Gantt is appointed exec director of the ILCA.

 

Rastegar said Okay to the camels, the sand, the pirates and the royalty but the Laser class balked at letting Gantt anywhere near the class association.

 

BK offered that he would come down to two camels, 3 buckets of sand and Rastegar could keep the pirates and the royalties if someone, anyone, would give Gantt any kind of job so he could get a life and leave BK alone.

 

The other parties took the view that Gantt was BK's problem, not theirs. Negotiations broke down. Court papers were filed and the rest is history.

 

You guys owe me a keyboard. Damn that is funny. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I probably shouldn't post while driving but I Gantt get my new phone out of its case without an iplore so I am hurrying to the store a few miles Wess of my shop.

Yesterday I found my old pointer pen and stuck new batteries in it. Mostly I have forgotten how it works, and I plan on spending some time fiddling with it but just this morning. My laser discovery ends today.

Anyway.....

 

You left out the part where Kirby, Usher, and Rastegar went fishing to spend a day working out their differences.

When, after a day of bitching at each other while catching nothing, it was time to fire up the outboard and head in.

Kirby went back to fire up the motor and when he pulled the starter string the outboard came completely off the transome and fell in the lake.

The lake was so clean they could see the motor lying on the bottom.

"Fuck Bruce!! You are useless. That's no way to start a motor." Rasty dove down and grabbed the motor on the bottom

With one hand and commenced pulling the starter cord himself.

Although he knew Rasty couldn't hear him at the bottom of the lake, Usher decided to start trying to help solve the problem. Tracy bent over the side of the boat, cupped his hands at the water surface and screamed as loudly and clearly as he coukd, " You gotta pull out the choke."

Link to post
Share on other sites

The North Koreans apparently hacked the Laser.....

 

Write your own punchlines

But our southern hemisphere friends just laughed and said "Idiots; that's not how you take over the world and accomplish a global consolidation."

 

OK, looking for the door and vest to go sailing. Happy Holidays.

Link to post
Share on other sites

any resolution on this yet ??

Gouv that sounded a little snobbish

 

As to resolution there appears to be a Gnat in the ointment. See these updates from above

 

Posted 18 December 2014 - 11:00 AM

Gouvernail, on 17 Dec 2014 - 23:18, said:snapback.png

rumir has it, Rastegarv offered two camels, a bucket of sand, and half interest in two not yet drilled ISIS oil wells in exchange for rights to build a Laser shaped baby buggy ...

 

 

 

IPLore, on 18 Dec 2014 - 08:04, said:snapback.png

BK countered with : Three camels, 6 buckets of sand, a half interest in rastegar's Somali pirate operation, and a $2 royalty on each buggy with the condition that Gantt is appointed exec director of the ILCA.

 

Rastegar said Okay to the camels, the sand, the pirates and the royalty but the Laser class balked at letting Gantt anywhere near the class association.

 

BK offered that he would come down to two camels, 3 buckets of sand and Rastegar could keep the pirates and the royalties if someone, anyone, would give Gantt any kind of job so he could get a life and leave BK alone.

 

The other parties took the view that Gantt was BK's problem, not theirs. Negotiations broke down. Court papers were filed and the rest is history.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where's the flaw in this logic:

 

Rastegar loses, he bankrupts LP and LPE and terminates their license to use the Laser name, then he opens up a new business that isn't a party to any contracts, buys the dirt cheap assets from the bankrupt companies, licenses the Laser name to the new companies and ILCA does whatever he wants because he still has the coveted Laser trademark.

 

Since he has the Laser trademark for boats and running regattas, he decides to threaten ILCA with legal action to stop them from running regattas unless they now terminate PSA as a builder and since he's already secured the next World and Olympic events in his territories, he's got them in check.

 

The checkmate move is terminating ILCA's right to use the Laser name, sweeping the table and owning the whole game.

 

If he wins in court, he just keeps LP and LPE as is and then begins to remove PSA and ILCA.

 

Hasn't that been his MO with all his past takeovers? Create infighting, fracture alliances, weaken the targets and then eliminate them one by one. Seems like win or lose, everything is going according to plan.

 

What am I missing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What am I missing?

PSA own the Laser trademark in their territories. So one is as powerful as the other in that respect. I think it will all be about whatever is left of the contracts has to say about who is allowed to authorise new builders. Agree a new company building boats called Lasers and looking like Lasers is a likely strategy, but whether that company would get authorisation to build International Lasers is another matter because it gets into a whole lot more contractual complications, and ILCA and ISAF will be smack in the middle of that mess. Too complicated to predict results I fear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What am I missing?

 

That LP didn't have to spend a fortune on lawyers to do that.

 

That if LP try to screw over the ILCA then ISAF can chose another dinghy for the Olympics, the ILCA can chose a different name (and maybe the identical boat, BK was ahead of them there) and LP are left with a worthless asset.

 

Which highlights the strategy behind the original contracts: play nice or the house of cards collapses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where's the flaw in this logic:

 

Rastegar loses, he bankrupts LP and LPE and terminates their license to use the Laser name, then he opens up a new business that isn't a party to any contracts, buys the dirt cheap assets from the bankrupt companies, licenses the Laser name to the new companies and ILCA does whatever he wants because he still has the coveted Laser trademark.

 

 

The flaw is that Rastegar has to bid against other interested parties to buy the Laser trademark from the receivers/bankruptcy trustee. In other words, PSA, Global Sailing or Kirby could jump in at that point and bid up the price, or outbid Rastegar.

 

More likely Rastegar sells the trademark, then puts the companies into bankruptcy. Kirby could object to a transaction that did not get a fair price for the trademark, but that would take time and money in bankruptcy court.

 

Edit: does Rastegar need to do this? Isn't the trademark already owned by another of his entities and licensed to LPE and LP?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Where's the flaw in this logic:

 

Rastegar loses, he bankrupts LP and LPE and terminates their license to use the Laser name, then he opens up a new business that isn't a party to any contracts, buys the dirt cheap assets from the bankrupt companies, licenses the Laser name to the new companies and ILCA does whatever he wants because he still has the coveted Laser trademark.

 

 

The flaw is that Rastegar has to bid against other interested parties to buy the Laser trademark from the receivers/bankruptcy trustee. In other words, PSA, Global Sailing or Kirby could jump in at that point and bid up the price, or outbid Rastegar.

 

More likely Rastegar sells the trademark, then puts the companies into bankruptcy. Kirby could object to a transaction that did not get a fair price for the trademark, but that would take time and money in bankruptcy court.

 

Edit: does Rastegar need to do this? Isn't the trademark already owned by another of his entities and licensed to LPE and LP?

You need to keep up with what's been going on...... ;)

 

Rastegar has already transferred the Laser trademark to another offshore company, so LPE can fold and he will still have control of the trademark.

 

However, the issue is very simple. All that matters is the contract with BK. If the courts deem it to be enforcable, then BK can stop LPE or any other Rastegar controlled company from building boats to the "Kirby Sailboat" design, because the contract specifically states that the builder won't build to that design outside of the contract. So while anybody can build a boat that looks exactly like the Laser, if LPE lose their court case, they couldn't because the contract has precedent over any lack of enforceable copyright.

 

If the court says the contract isn't enforceable, then Rastegar can do whatever he wants. My money says in that situation, he will stop paying anything to the ILCA because he will have them over a barrel. They will either have to accept his boats as class legal without payment or not have any supply in significant markets. The threat of loss of Olympic status doesn't work because Rastegar has stated on more than one occasion that the racing market is not his focus. At the moment LPE pay for boat plaques on all Lasers, even those that are not destined for the racing market. Why would they keep paying if they don't have to? This is why i believe the class has been so stupid. They have moved from a position of strength to one of being totally exposed to whatever LPE wants to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

... then BK can stop ... any other Rastegar controlled company from building boats to the "Kirby Sailboat" design

I think it may be more complex than that Simon. I don't think anything stops a brand new company building what they like: I can't see that they are contract limited. I don't see how the LPE contracts would affect other companies even if they "happen" to have "some" of the same ownership. But I could easily be wrong: I'm not a lawyer.

 

No, I think the question is what does it take for a company to become authorised to build *International* Lasers, and for that we need to understand all the contracts between ILCA, ISAF and Kirby. Certainly the fundamental rule used to prohibit any builder who wasn't authorised by Kirby, but that was thrown out in the misinformation vote. I *think* there may be other contracts involved though, but again I could be wrong: I haven't read everything. So I suspect that could be a whole new legal **** fight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to keep up with what's been going on...... ;)

 

Rastegar has already transferred the Laser trademark to another offshore company, so LPE can fold and he will still have control of the trademark.

 

However, the issue is very simple. All that matters is the contract with BK. If the courts deem it to be enforcable, then BK can stop LPE or any other Rastegar controlled company from building boats to the "Kirby Sailboat" design, because the contract specifically states that the builder won't build to that design outside of the contract. So while anybody can build a boat that looks exactly like the Laser, if LPE lose their court case, they couldn't because the contract has precedent over any lack of enforceable copyright.

The contracts bind the builders, not the owners of the builders. I think that Kirby will have difficulty enforcing them against other Rastegar entities. It's possible, but it won't be a slam dunk. That's the basic concept of a limited liability company -- limiting how the acts of a company affect the owner of the company.

 

I don't think that there will be a simple judgement in favour of either party. I think that the most likely scenario will create deadlock -- LPE and LP cannot build Kirby Sailboats, but without the trademark, no one else can sell Lasers in the USA and Europe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simon, I don't think the contract prohibiting LP from building Lasers (or similar, perhaps identical, boats) is practically enforceable anyway, regardless of its status in law.

 

I don't see how the "non–Laser" market is attractive, Rastegar can supply that market with non–plaque boats through LP or some other company, others are already doing it. He doesn't need the current shit fight to do it, he's already selling boats into recreational markets, he knows how to do that.

 

To me the value in the Laser derives from the strength of the class, Olympic status is one aspect of that. For strong sales, Rasetgar needs a strong class, which needs the ILCA and ISAF. If the big Laser events go away, so will the sailors. ISAF has shown they are very happy to change Olympic classes at the drop of a hat, they will have no compunction about replacing the Laser. The sailors will take longer to drift away, but drift they will if there's better racing in a similar class.

 

LP will be left with the "non–racing" market, which they can have right now without any of this. I suspect it's not particularly attractive on its own.

 

The root of all this is pride. Rastegar was pissed that Kirby sold to PSA. PSA tried to lord it over LP. The sale process seems to have been totally botched, Rastegar is exploiting that in retribution. So they are in court, which will decide certain legal matters but will not end the dispute nor fix what has been broken.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The trademark very well may have been genericized. I don't think the Olympics will switch because the Laser represents a unique talent pool- indeed that's another clue that the trademark is probably not defensible at this point. Someone should build boats and sell em as Lasers under an LLC and test that trademark once and for all. It won't be me, although I do have an interesting product idea for the recreational Laser market.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The trademark very well may have been genericized. I don't think the Olympics will switch because the Laser represents a unique talent pool- indeed that's another clue that the trademark is probably not defensible at this point. Someone should build boats and sell em as Lasers under an LLC and test that trademark once and for all. It won't be me, although I do have an interesting product idea for the recreational Laser market.

You're dreaming. What boats has the laser trademark been used on, except for those built with a valid license to the trademark? That's what you would have to find in order to show that it is now generic.

 

If were were not enough, just last year, Rastegar won a trademark infringement suit in Belgium against a dealer importing boats built by PSA.

 

 

The only shot against the trademark was Kirby's attempt to show that, somewhere down the line, there was a missing transfer, so no one owns it. I think that this attempt already failed, but perhaps someone else can be more precise on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Kirby's attempt to take down the trademark failed.

 

And no, nobody can stop anyone from building Laserious boats to an ISAF/ILCA construction manual. They are already. You might even be sailing one depending on the #. ;)

 

All just my opinion of course.

 

What happened to the holiday truce and good jokes? Don't you guys shop for gifts? Don't you guys sail?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked Santa for fricken laser mounted on a shark but he told me Greg Norman wasn't strong enough to carry a sail boat. Even for 1 MILLION DOLLARS!

 

Boom, Tish

 

Sorry procrastinating at work

I will build the Sharks for you and mount lasers if we can get some buyers

shark_cover.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Laser name and trademark have been used for a lot of boats which would not be accepted in Laser racing as we are discussing:

Laser SB3, Laser 5000, Laser 3000, Laser 2000, Laser Pico, Laser II, RC Laser, Revel Plastic kit Laser for starters. Found them all on Google Images but SA will not accept the images for posting.

 

So it appears that the trademark and registered name do not prevent anyone from building boats which do not comply with ILCA rules. Does this mean that a Laser look alike iscan be built and sold so long as its not built to the mysterious builder's manual? Whats the difference to the list above?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Kirby's attempt to take down the trademark failed.

 

Kirby filed two trademark cancellation proceedings. The one for the boat, sails, etc. was withdrawn because some agreement prevented him from ever contesting the trademark. However, the one for running regattas is still pending with Kirby claiming this one is outside of the agreement that prevents him from contesting it.

 

Does PSA have a Laser trademark that covers running regattas or do they just have one for hulls, sails, etc.? In the cancellation proceedings Rastegar's company, Velum, is claiming that ILCA is its licensee and therefore ILCA's use of the name is evidence of Velum's claim to the mark. What prevents them from extending coverage to AU (if PSA didn't secure that coverage)? Is there a loophole in the builder agreements that would allow Rastergar to grab the mark in AU for the purpose of running regattas?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Laser name and trademark have been used for a lot of boats which would not be accepted in Laser racing as we are discussing:

Laser SB3, Laser 5000, Laser 3000, Laser 2000, Laser Pico, Laser II, RC Laser, Revel Plastic kit Laser for starters. Found them all on Google Images but SA will not accept the images for posting.

All built with a license for the use of the trademark. The contracts between Kirby, IYRU, ICLA and Laser Performance explicitly allowed Laser Performance to use the trademark in such a way.

 

Try again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is that LPE can apparently continue prducing Laser type boats without any agreement with Kirby, ILCA or ISAF, It will not matter if they look like lasers, measure like lasers or are built like Lasers. Ifhe owns the name and logo, the racing sailors will have to change to something else. Kirby seems have predicted this outcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simon, I don't think the contract prohibiting LP from building Lasers (or similar, perhaps identical, boats) is practically enforceable anyway, regardless of its status in law.

 

I do believe that it is enforceable and that this is why Rastegar is screwed one way or another. The contract states that on termination of the contract, all molds, plugs etc shall be given up to BK and that the builder will cease making the Kirby Sailboat. If it is enforceable, then LPE cannot build a Laser like boat to the same specs as a real Laser, and if they change the specs so it isn't a Kirby Sailboat. Why would the class want them.

 

More importantly, the clause covers "termination" of the contract but doesn't state by whom. Therefore, as I see it, there is either a contract in place or it has been terminated. Either way, Rastegar cannot build boats. His argument surrounding the end of the contracts seem to me to all say, without using those words, that the contractw as terminated by LPE for one of a number of reasons. However, I don't believe that those reasons give him the right to terminate the contract AND still build Lasers. I believe that if he felt that the other party was in breach of the terms of the contract, his only option was to 1. enforce the contract and 2. claim recompense for that breach. I believe that simply terminating the contract means he is bound by the termination clause. The only hope he has would be to show that no contract ever existed, which he does try in a round about way. However, the contract was signed in 2005 and LPE paid "consideration" under the contract and certainly received something in exchange, namely the builders plaques. The contracts had no expiration date so I cannot see how it isn't either still valid or it has been terminated. I also cannot see how incorrect transfer of the contract can actually void it in such a way as to allow one party to continue receiving a benefit afforded under the contract while excusing that party from other terms of the contract. Again, it looks to me like it either should still be in force or it was terminated. Can a contract simply cease to exist. I don't think so and I hope not, because that would destroy all the certainty of contract law.

 

But enough for now. All sides on here are a deeply entrenched as are the parties involved with the actual case. We will need to wait and see what the courts have to say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're still conflating LPE and Mr Rastegar Simon. I don't think that works. There were attempts to extend the case to include entities outside LPE, but at least some were dismissed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Kirby's attempt to take down the trademark failed.

 

And no, nobody can stop anyone from building Laserious boats to an ISAF/ILCA construction manual. They are already. You might even be sailing one depending on the #. ;)

 

All just my opinion of course.

 

What happened to the holiday truce and good jokes? Don't you guys shop for gifts? Don't you guys sail?

It seems your old pal Gantt is honouring the holiday truce!

Also, concerning the BKI counter-offer which included 6 buckets of sand, I understand the document is flawed. There is no "sandy clause"...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The contracts had no expiration date so I cannot see how it isn't either still valid or it has been terminated.

The contracts that I read did have an expiration date. After expiration, they renew automatically every year for another 12 months if neither side terminates. I believe the 2005 document acknowledges this.

 

I don't understand why Kirby's termination notices did not use expiration as a reason to terminate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The contracts had no expiration date so I cannot see how it isn't either still valid or it has been terminated.

The contracts that I read did have an expiration date. After expiration, they renew automatically every year for another 12 months if neither side terminates. I believe the 2005 document acknowledges this.

 

I don't understand why Kirby's termination notices did not use expiration as a reason to terminate.

Kirby terminated the contracts due to breach of contract. I (non-lawyer) would think that terminating simply due to expiration would weaken his case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whit Meyer is a co-party animal.

You mean like a 3 way? Ain't there some fancy french word for dat? Rasty better run and cover his eyes!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently, Rastegar's lawyers did not know their client's corporate structure:

 

attachicon.gif173-1.pdfattachicon.gif173-2.pdfattachicon.gif173-main.pdf

The motion to amend will most likely be granted.

 

We start to see Allentuch's style emerging. He pulls no punches in the affirmative defense and the motion to amend is unapologetic . I sense that the legal testosterone is running at a high level between opposing counsel. They are playing hardball with even simple formalities and discovery procedures .

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Apparently, Rastegar's lawyers did not know their client's corporate structure:

 

attachicon.gif173-1.pdfattachicon.gif173-2.pdfattachicon.gif173-main.pdf

The motion to amend will most likely be granted.

 

We start to see Allentuch's style emerging. He pulls no punches in the affirmative defense and the motion to amend is unapologetic . I sense that the legal testosterone is running at a high level between opposing counsel. They are playing hardball with even simple formalities and discovery procedures .

 

Agreed.

 

It's almost as if there is quite a bit at stake.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Apparently, Rastegar's lawyers did not know their client's corporate structure:attachicon.gif173-1.pdfattachicon.gif173-2.pdfattachicon.gif173-main.pdf

 

The motion to amend will most likely be granted.

We start to see Allentuch's style emerging. He pulls no punches in the affirmative defense and the motion to amend is unapologetic . I sense that the legal testosterone is running at a high level between opposing counsel. They are playing hardball with even simple formalities and discovery procedures .

Agreed.

 

It's almost as if there is quite a bit at stake.

 

$2.6 million is at stake.

That is the amount that Global Sailing paid Bruce Kirby for BKI and his "rights".

 

That might seem a lot to you and me, but each side easily burns up $750,000 to $ 1,0000,000 in fees and expenses if this goes to trial. Add to this BK's age and the cost of publicity and uncertainty for LP and GS means that wise and impartial counsel should be looking for a settlement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

Apparently, Rastegar's lawyers did not know their client's corporate structure:attachicon.gif173-1.pdfattachicon.gif173-2.pdfattachicon.gif173-main.pdf

The motion to amend will most likely be granted.

We start to see Allentuch's style emerging. He pulls no punches in the affirmative defense and the motion to amend is unapologetic . I sense that the legal testosterone is running at a high level between opposing counsel. They are playing hardball with even simple formalities and discovery procedures .

Agreed.

 

It's almost as if there is quite a bit at stake.

 

$2.6 million is at stake.

That is the amount that Global Sailing paid Bruce Kirby for BKI and his "rights".

 

That might seem a lot to you and me, but each side easily burns up $750,000 to $ 1,0000,000 in fees and expenses if this goes to trial. Add to this BK's age and the cost of publicity and uncertainty for LP and GS means that wise and impartial counsel should be looking for a settlement.

 

I can't see that being at stake - or do you (IPLore) know that Kirby will try to sell again to Global Sailing? This is something that he now describes as an error. The future of the Kirby's design, who owns what, and who in the end the ISAF recognizes all hinge on the outcome of this trial. Laser Performance (Rastegar and Crane) are advantaged by the status quo, so delaying this trial is to their advantage.

 

The biggest thing that I see at stake is the right for Laser Performance to continue manufacturing Lasers to Bruce Kirby's design. That's what the ILCA saw as being at stake and why they changed the fundamental rule.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

Apparently, Rastegar's lawyers did not know their client's corporate structure:attachicon.gif173-1.pdfattachicon.gif173-2.pdfattachicon.gif173-main.pdf

The motion to amend will most likely be granted.

We start to see Allentuch's style emerging. He pulls no punches in the affirmative defense and the motion to amend is unapologetic . I sense that the legal testosterone is running at a high level between opposing counsel. They are playing hardball with even simple formalities and discovery procedures .

Agreed.

 

It's almost as if there is quite a bit at stake.

 

$2.6 million is at stake.

That is the amount that Global Sailing paid Bruce Kirby for BKI and his "rights".

 

That might seem a lot to you and me, but each side easily burns up $750,000 to $ 1,0000,000 in fees and expenses if this goes to trial. Add to this BK's age and the cost of publicity and uncertainty for LP and GS means that wise and impartial counsel should be looking for a settlement.

 

I can't see that being at stake - or do you (IPLore) know that Kirby will try to sell again to Global Sailing? This is something that he now describes as an error. The future of the Kirby's design, who owns what, and who in the end the ISAF recognizes all hinge on the outcome of this trial. Laser Performance (Rastegar and Crane) are advantaged by the status quo, so delaying this trial is to their advantage.

 

The biggest thing that I see at stake is the right for Laser Performance to continue manufacturing Lasers to Bruce Kirby's design. That's what the ILCA saw as being at stake and why they changed the fundamental rule.

I think that you misunderstand IPLore. What's at stake here is ultimately money (for Kirby and Rastegar). But how much? If Kirby accepted $2.6M for his rights, that gives an order of magnitude for the amount of money that is at stake between Kirby and Rastegar. For Laser sailors, what is at stake is their hobby, but they have very little control over the outcome. For the ICLA, what's at stake is its existence, but again, I think that the ICLA has little control over the outcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure its about money for the lawyers. A settlement is ideal for them since they do most of the work and get paid without the risk of losing.

 

I'm sure its about money for LPE and their ownership, but maybe not just money.

 

I'm not at all sure its about money for Mr Kirby.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Respect and money go together. I am not sure he likes the sail prices, as they are very different than the early marketing of the boat. It really did bring sailing to a lot of people.

 

It sure did and still does. I predict 30 boats for frostbiting in water w temps in the 30s, and breeze w gusts to 30 this weekend.

 

But don't forget which team is holding up the new sail. So if he does not like current sail prices he could always....

 

Or he could do what he said he would do and launch the Torch boat and class...

 

But looks another year of no Torch, no new sail, and fat cats fighting and lawyers getting richer.

 

Oh well. Guess I will just have to go sail my Laserious ISAF dinghy and have fun with friends racing.

 

This was always fun for some jokes over beers. But In think I have to revised my guess. I thought settlement. I would like to switch my SWAG to a fight to the death and a decision of 1.) BKI getting back royalties, but being largely out of the game going forward (due to), 2.) the class rules staying as they are, and 3.) LPE or designee retaining a valid LASER trademark and building boats for the Laser class with the current ISAF/ILCA construction manual. Oh, and another lawsuit being filed by our white knight and/or friends from southern waters. Its a cage match in my opinion! :P

 

OK, seriously, anybody taking odd on the likelihood this thing resolves in this calendat year (2015)?

 

What is the over/under year for it to end?

Link to post
Share on other sites