What's going on with S&W?

[HCM]

https://www.instagram.com/p/_miiI5F8ZN/

Can anyone verify this ? Apparently S&W's law firm is sending out cease and desist letters to makers / vendors of aftermarket M&P parts and custom work for trademark violations and " unlawful modification of Smith and Wesson products"

Anyone know what the deal is ?

[RJ]

Interested in what gives. No clue, nor am I lawyer, but:

What "law" prevents modification of a firearm by a legal owner?

What "trademark" is being misused and how?

Seems to me S&W is cheesed off that others have developed aftermarket parts, causing owners to dump the company innards resulting in a less gritty, smoother, lighter, more accurate pistol.

You know, kind of like S&W should have developed after they introduced the M&P in 2007, but decided not to. I don't see anything positive coming out of this for them.

[orionz06]

Wow. I mean the ported Shield was dumb but this takes the cake.


Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl

[okie john]

This is S&W destroying one of the best reasons for choosing their products: wide aftermarket support. Gaston is probably wetting his lederhosen with delight.


Okie John

[GardoneVT]

https://www.instagram.com/p/_miiI5F8ZN/

Can anyone verify this ? Apparently S&W's law firm is sending out cease and desist letters to makers / vendors of aftermarket M&P parts and custom work for trademark violations and " unlawful modification of Smith and Wesson products"

Anyone know what the deal is ?

Without seeing the rest of the document its hard to say. It looks like there's trademark and IP infringement being alleged by S&W, which is a separate issue compared to the "unlawful modifications" part.

Trademark disputes suck, but they're a common and thorny part of the business world .Apple and Samsung just got done dueling in court to the tune of billions over the subject. If Apex or any aftermarket firm used S&W trademarks without their permission, bad juju. *There's also business legal precedent stating that a trademark must be defended in order to be enforcible.

As to the "unlawful modifications" part, S&W has collectively assigned the plaintiffs one designation under the document. Apex is located in California, which has some particularly weird rules regarding firearm barrels and other accessories, especially vis a vis the safe handgun roster. IIRC, California just passed a new rule strengthening their roster to prevent single shot exemptions around it.

Again, without reading the whole document its hard to say who's "in the right". S&W could very well be the good guys here.

*not an attorney, not legal advice etc.

[Mr_White]

I just went outside and yelled fuck you to Smith and Wesson.

[RJ]

Wow. I mean the ported Shield was dumb but this takes the cake.




Agreed, but, uh, you might have missed this gem released in July in your comparison search:

5055

[HopetonBrown]

Apex is located in California, which has some particularly weird rules regarding firearm barrels and other accessories

What weird rules regarding firearm barrels and other accessories that would relate to Apex?

[RJ]

Moar here:

https://scontent-dfw1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/1934597_10204099808133979_4312216293917758907_n.jp g?oh=d6fb300a561bdee6dc4e2dfec65490de&oe=570D8406

[RJ]

Moar here:

https://scontent-dfw1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/1934597_10204099808133979_4312216293917758907_n.jp g?oh=d6fb300a561bdee6dc4e2dfec65490de&oe=570D8406

I gather they are not happy about this:

http://www.brownells.com/dreamguns/Brownells-Dream-Build/Dream-Gun-Catalog-Smith-Wesson-M-P-sid1079.aspx

[HCM]

The full letter. https://www.facebook.com/ballisticradio/photos/pcb.738309049633261/738308246300008/?type=3&theater

[LorenzoS]

I would dump all my S&W products and never purchase another if I didn't already do that 3 years ago when they told me to pound sand over my 9mm M&P's accuracy defect. Good to see they've confirmed I made the right choice.

[HopetonBrown]

Damn that thing is ugly.


I gather they are not happy about this:

http://www.brownells.com/dreamguns/Brownells-Dream-Build/Dream-Gun-Catalog-Smith-Wesson-M-P-sid1079.aspx

[spinmove_]

Very interesting. What strikes me as odd though is that this is definitely not the first time that anyone has done this to an M&P or other pistol (polymer or otherwise) and there have been no legal repercussions (at least from what I've gathered/observed). Makes me wonder why they'd get their panties in a twist over this.

[Savage Hands]

Without seeing the rest of the document its hard to say. It looks like there's trademark and IP infringement being alleged by S&W, which is a separate issue compared to the "unlawful modifications" part.

Trademark disputes suck, but they're a common and thorny part of the business world .Apple and Samsung just got done dueling in court to the tune of billions over the subject. If Apex or any aftermarket firm used S&W trademarks without their permission, bad juju. *There's also business legal precedent stating that a trademark must be defended in order to be enforcible.

As to the "unlawful modifications" part, S&W has collectively assigned the plaintiffs one designation under the document. Apex is located in California, which has some particularly weird rules regarding firearm barrels and other accessories, especially vis a vis the safe handgun roster. IIRC, California just passed a new rule strengthening their roster to prevent single shot exemptions around it.

Again, without reading the whole document its hard to say who's "in the right". S&W could very well be the good guys here.

*not an attorney, not legal advice etc.


Being in California, the California roster has zero to do with this. SMFH

[BobM]

There was some issue a few years ago between Glock and some airsoft manufacturers as I recall.

[Clusterfrack]

I just went outside and yelled fuck you to Smith and Wesson.

There should be a like button but with the middle finger up.

I don't own any S&W products other than a tactical pen and will probably keep not owning them.

[Mr_White]

There should be a like button but with the middle finger up.

I don't own any S&W products other than a tactical pen and will probably keep not owning them.

I agree, I would relish getting email notifications from PF saying "So-and-so clicked Fuck You for your post: What's going on with S&W?" Basically I think it's the dislike button Tom_Jones has talked about. It would just need a middle finger icon instead of thumbs down.

I get that S&W has trademarks and copyrights and feels like they need to protect them. But I think the practical effect is going to be robbing many end users of opportunities to shoot the M&Ps they want to shoot, and that S&W apparently refuses to build. Seems like it's going to piss lots of people off.

[GardoneVT]

After reading the documents in full, it looks like my 4006 is going down the road.

S&W isn't just saying Firm X used Trademark Y, which would be a rational legal defense: they're basically saying even adding so much as a Crimson Trace grip to an M&P constitutes trademark infringement unless the owner obliterates any S&W markings.

Since my S&W is now a legal liability given factory parts support is discontinued,its going bye bye asap. I'm voting with my wallet on this one.

[GardoneVT]

I agree, I would relish getting email notifications from PF saying "So-and-so clicked Fuck You for your post: What's going on with S&W?" Basically I think it's the dislike button Tom_Jones has talked about. It would just need a middle finger icon instead of thumbs down.

I get that S&W has trademarks and copyrights and feels like they need to protect them. But I think the practical effect is going to be robbing many end users of opportunities to shoot the M&Ps they want to shoot, and that S&W apparently refuses to build. Seems like it's going to piss lots of people off.

It's got to do with money.

Some bean counter in MA figured out that S&W is losing X amount of accessory revenue which is instead going into Apex and other firms' pockets. The fact that those companies are addressing core product problems isn't relevant to their profit margin.

Step one: threaten legal action to curtail aftermarket firms.

Step two : create "S&W approved Accessory Store", selling the same stuff at 2x the price .

What's actually gonna happen, folks will switch to Glock en masse.

[BehindBlueI's]

I just went outside and yelled fuck you to Smith and Wesson.

Reminds me of the first time I saw a keyhole on a revolver.

[Sal Picante]

Seems like it's going to piss lots of people off.

Seems?

Remember the zit-lock days? Yeah... This is worse.

[1slow]

S&W will find out about unintended consequences.
The harder it is to get accessories, the less people are interested in a gun, particularly if it has unresolved problems that the accessories fix.

In the 1970s I ordered hammers, triggers etc... from S&W and Ruger. If you sent them $ they sent you parts. No issues.

[SLG]

I don't think any of you seem to have any idea what's going on. Guilty before innocent, ay?

[JodyH]

I don't think any of you seem to have any idea what's going on. Guilty before innocent, ay?

5059

[LSP552]

I don't think any of you seem to have any idea what's going on. Guilty before innocent, ay?

They have been guilty ever since the lock.....:D

[HCM]

They have been guilty ever since the lock.....:D

This is true.

[Sigfan26]

They should really straitened our INTERNAL matters before even looking outside the company.
Examples:
Bought a model 69. Love the gun and it shot POA/POI with no issue... Then I noticed the barrel shroud serrations on top don't match up with the topstrap serrations. Look online and find this is a super common problem! I say, "Whatever, function is great, lockup is tight, accuracy is excellent. This isn't a super high end model. I can live with it"

Bought a 329PD
Barrel shroud is not perfectly lined up, but POA/POI is good, and the average person wouldn't even notice.

Bought a Performance Center 325 Thunder Ranch. Saw it in stock at the distributor, and a lightweight 45 acp revolver sounded bad a$$, so I ordered it as a Christmas present to myself... 30 rounds later, the f$&@ing barrel shroud has shot loose and the cylinder has odd scratch markings all over it! The distributor sent a new one with their deepest apologies (didn't sound like this was the first time they'd had to do it). This one is good... But, I won't be ordering another S&W revolver sight unseen.

[Hambo]

This called to mind something I saw on Dave Bowie's site:


DISCLAIMER: Glock is a federally registered trademark of Glock Inc. and is one of many trademarks owned by Glock,
Inc. or Glock Ges.mbH. Bowie Tactical Concepts is not affiliated in any manner with, or is endorsed by Glock Inc. or
Glock Ges.mbH. The use of Glock on this page is merely to advertise the sale of Glock pistols, parts, or components
and custome services On Glock pistols. For genuine Glock inc. and Glock Ges.mbH products and parts visits glocks
web site www.glock.com.

Glock OEM slides will no longer be engraved with Bowie Tactical Concepts.

[RJ]

Here's the Apex release. I guess since they are named (Apex), and they (Apex) just released their gunsmith/drop in barrels, maybe S&W has had enough with the aftermarket.

http://www.apextactical.com/blog/index.php/apex-news/apex-teams-with-top-custom-builders-on-brownells-dream-gun/

On the one hand, I can see the legal point here. But, really, how many of these 'dream' guns are they going to sell?

On the other hand, lawyering up against Apex, Brownells, and the other smallish suppliers is not going to win S&W many friends among the S&W fan boys. According to a poll I ran, almost half of all M&P owners modify their internals:

http://smith-wessonforum.com/smith-wesson-m-p-pistols/415994-survey-stock-modification-internals-your-m-p.html

I mean, hell, I put in an Apex trigger and D/CAEK less than two weeks after buying my M&P. So, given all those mods were on M&Ps, it seems a bit shortsighted to kick you major aftermarket suppliers in the teeth.

Oh yeah, and where were the lawyers when Chris Costa was selling his ported and reworked M&P?


http://youtu.be/xYrSFRkue3Y

Bottom line, it is a business decision that S&W made, but I'm not sure it was the wisest, long term.

[orionz06]

I don't think any of you seem to have any idea what's going on. Guilty before innocent, ay?

Probably but today is a good day to have something meaningless to be mad about as opposed to venting in real life.

I'm more upset that they're gonna do THIS rather than fix their fucking guns in the first place.

[ralph]

It's got to do with money.

Some bean counter in MA figured out that S&W is losing X amount of accessory revenue which is instead going into Apex and other firms' pockets. The fact that those companies are addressing core product problems isn't relevant to their profit margin.

Step one: threaten legal action to curtail aftermarket firms.

Step two : create "S&W approved Accessory Store", selling the same stuff at 2x the price .

What's actually gonna happen, folks will switch to Glock en masse.

Yup.. this will backfire.. and they'll be the losers. I dumped my M&P's years ago, I've NEVER missed them.. They're used to be a saying, "The customer is always right" Somewhere along the way, S&W seems to forgotten that... When they figure out that they made a huge mistake, it'll be to late.. Damn shame.. S&W used to make some of the best revolvers on the planet..

[Mr_White]

I don't think any of you seem to have any idea what's going on. Guilty before innocent, ay?

That's probably true, but that's why my punishment of S&W was limited to swearing outside, and on the internet. ;)

[LSP972]

Reminds me of the first time I saw a keyhole on a revolver.

Yes! After my initial "WTF is THIS???"

.

[Default.mp3]

Oh yeah, and where were the lawyers when Chris Costa was selling his ported and reworked M&P?


http://youtu.be/xYrSFRkue3YThey showed up and threatened ATEi about infringement, which is why the Costa Ludus M&P didn't last very long on the market (I mean, that thing was probably selling as fast as the Costa LaRues).

[RJ]

They showed up and threatened ATEi about infringement, which is why the Costa Ludus M&P didn't last very long on the market (I mean, that thing was probably selling as fast as the Costa LaRues).

Gotcha.

[Default.mp3]

Also, check out this little gem in the C&D letter:
http://i.imgbox.com/Zs0cpZQw.jpg (http://i.imgbox.com/Zs0cpZQw.jpg)
If S&W knows how to time travel, maybe they should go back and tell themselves to not fuck up the accuracy on the M&P, to skip the Sigma, etc.

[Drang]

Wondering if they're going to tell Julie Golob to stop using an Apex trigger in her M&P.

[MichaelD]

Huh. Well... so much for being an M&P fanboy. Anyone wanna sell me a pair of Gen 4 G19's?

[Dagga Boy]

And you guys talk about HK hating their customers....;)

[ssb]

While I think it's dickish, the "good" news is that they appear to be going after the completed firearms rather than the individual aftermarket stuff. I don't read that letter as S&W saying they have a problem with Apex making a barrel, but rather they have a problem with Apex and friends doing their thing to the guns and selling them with S&W's marks.

*obligatory disclaimer: I don't know much at all about trademark law
**legal advice is something you pay an attorney for, and not something you get from a random dude on the internet

[Chris Rhines]

is Apex (or Brownells, or whomever,) even selling this thing? Or is it a technology demonstrator being displayed at SHOT?

[okie john]

While I think it's dickish, the "good" news is that they appear to be going after the completed firearms rather than the individual aftermarket stuff. I don't read that letter as S&W saying they have a problem with Apex making a barrel, but rather they have a problem with Apex and friends doing their thing to the guns and selling them with S&W's marks.

*obligatory disclaimer: I don't know much at all about trademark law
**legal advice is something you pay an attorney for, and not something you get from a random dude on the internet

I think this is the real issue.

I work in a branch of advertising, and a lot of my clients would defend their products in this same way. I'd bet that a bit of rebranding would let the defendants in this case legally continue to sell the same parts and services that they sell now, just not complete "package" guns.

Frankly, I'm amazed that S&W doesn't offer Apex parts already, or sell guns with them installed like they did with Uncle Mike's grips on their revolvers and Novak sights on their autos. But the fact that they're going after the people who build products that S&W themselves are unwilling to figure out for themselves will just make them look heavy-handed.


Okie John

[ralph]

Well, it seems to me, that those involved should simply refuse to work on, repair, ANY S&W period.. Dump them right back on S&W. That should fan the flames, and once people figure out that S&W and ONLY S&W will work on them, they'll dump on the market ..fast... Gaston Glock is probably sitting in front of his fireplace right about now giggling like a school girl.. This news has to be a GREAT Christmas present..

[GardoneVT]

While I think it's dickish, the "good" news is that they appear to be going after the completed firearms rather than the individual aftermarket stuff. I don't read that letter as S&W saying they have a problem with Apex making a barrel, but rather they have a problem with Apex and friends doing their thing to the guns and selling them with S&W's marks.

*obligatory disclaimer: I don't know much at all about trademark law
**legal advice is something you pay an attorney for, and not something you get from a random dude on the internet

Reading this with my business eye, S&W is basically alleging the entire "M&P" handgun is a trademarked product, warts and all. Should an individual decide to fix what the factory didn't with a non-S&W component, they've now created a non-Smith product which has S&W trademarks on it.

Simply put , you can put an Apex trigger/Crimson Trace laser/aftermarket recoil spring in an M&P: but then you have to chisel out the "S&W" rollmarks. It's the firearms equivalent of Apple suing the Jailbreak folks .They'll probably argue next that we don't actually own an M&P, but that our handguns are merely 3 dimensional licenses like software code. So non-factory mods are basically "pirating".
Unfortunately for Smith, they make guns and not hipster status symbols.

This has harrowing business implications for those of us with older S&W products not supported by the factory anymore. If ,for example, someone decides to make a recoil spring rod or a side plate for my 4006 they could be dragged into litigation over it,because "Trademark".

While selling my old 4006 is partly a protest of this very poor business decision by S&W, its also pragmatic for this reason. If this is the company's stance not only is my gun orphaned by the factory ,but the aftermarket as well.I'm one KB or busted spring away from owning a paperweight.

[ralph]

Reading this with my business eye, S&W is basically alleging the entire "M&P" handgun is a trademarked product, warts and all. Should an individual decide to fix what the factory didn't with a non-S&W component, they've now created a non-Smith product which has S&W trademarks on it.

Simply put , you can put an Apex trigger/Crimson Trace laser/aftermarket recoil spring in an M&P: but then you have to chisel out the "S&W" rollmarks. It's the firearms equivalent of Apple suing the Jailbreak folks .They'll probably argue next that we don't actually own an M&P, but that our handguns are merely 3 dimensional licenses like software code. So non-factory mods are basically "pirating".
Unfortunately for Smith, they make guns and not hipster status symbols.

This has harrowing business implications for those of us with older S&W products not supported by the factory anymore. If ,for example, someone decides to make a recoil spring rod or a side plate for my 4006 they could be dragged into litigation over it,because "Trademark".

While selling my old 4006 is partly a protest of this very poor business decision by S&W, its also pragmatic for this reason. If this is the company's stance not only is my gun orphaned by the factory ,but the aftermarket as well.I'm one KB or busted spring away from owning a paperweight.

Well, if this is how this turns out, I'd sell it...If S&W basically wants to turn it's back on it's consumers, because they are unwilling or unable to make improvements to their products that others have done successfully, then we as consumers should return the favor.. At this point I'll NEVER buy a S&W anything.. I'm done with them. They made their bed, let them lay in it.

[HCM]

It's not as simple as just dremeling off the trademarks. You need ATF permission to remove the name and/or serial number and they've denied it in the past. Plus Smith & Wesson is losing free advertising by denying gunsmiths the option to customize their guns and keep the name. I wonder at what level this was discussed approved within S&W ?

[Drang]

When I realized this was aimed (so to speak) at full customized handguns, not aftermarket parts, I still thought it was excessive, but I can see where a trademark-specialist legal eagle who is otherwise ignorant of the gun industry might have a visit from the Good Idea Fairy and pursue this, not realizing what a PR nightmare it might turn into.
Then I look at this:
It's not as simple as just dremeling off the trademarks. You need ATF permission to remove the name and/or serial number and they've denied it in the past. Plus Smith & Wesson is losing free advertising by denying gunsmiths the option to customize their guns and keep the name. I wonder at what level this was discussed approved within S&W ?
and realize that the precedent could mean no customized guns ever again.




I mean, potentially. Doubt most manufacturers would be so dog-in-the-manger-ish about it, but once a legal precedent is set...

EDIT TO ADD: Not selling the "Heller Commemorative" 442. Not selling my father's "retirement" Model 10-5. And not divesting the S&W stock, either.
Traded in the 625JM on a P320 last week, though...

[Default.mp3]

I wonder at what level this was discussed approved within S&W ?Well, according to Pat Roger on Lightfighter:
The lawyers did this without authority

[ralph]

Huh. Well... so much for being an M&P fanboy. Anyone wanna sell me a pair of Gen 4 G19's?

I don't think that those would be too hard to find.. I would however, dump your M&P's before word of this reaches the Cleetus's of the world..

[41magfan]

I'll let some legal eagle correct me if I'm wrong, but I suspect this may be the heart of the matter:

If I send my M&P pistol to XXXXX and have work done to it, that's one thing. However, if XXXXX does work on an M&P pistol and markets/sells the whole gun as their product using any trademark protected designation or design (without license or permission from S&W) then that is something else altogether.

I don't think this is about individual parts or services, per se.

[SLG]

I'll let some legal eagle correct me if I'm wrong, but I suspect this may be the heart of the matter:

If I send my M&P pistol to XXXXX and have work done to it, that's one thing. However, if XXXXX does work on an M&P pistol and markets/sells the whole gun as their product using any trademark protected designation or design (without license or permission from S&W) then that is something else altogether.

I don't think this is about individual parts or services, per se.

This is my understanding.

Where's Tam when you need her?:-) I thought there were more people here who accurately follow the industry. Take a look at Salient's pages, for starters.

[JodyH]

S&W have always been the masters of moronic business decisions, only rivalled by Colt and Bill Ruger Sr..

[Kyle Reese]

I would dump all my S&W products and never purchase another if I didn't already do that 3 years ago when they told me to pound sand over my 9mm M&P's accuracy defect. Good to see they've confirmed I made the right choice.

I picked up a 9mm Walther PPS over a Shield, and feel pretty darn good about it after reading this. My M&P 9's were a dog's breakfast accuracy wise, with only my 2014 manufacture LE SKU example turning in acceptable (but not great) accuracy.

[LSP972]

All interesting speculation… but to an outsider such as myself (defined as one who has zero interest in the product/s under discussion, but likes a good soap opera as well as the next guy :D ), it is just another page in the "What's wrong with the M&P this week?" saga. Yeah, yeah, I know… most of those fleas have been eradicated. But back when I was interested in the Shield, and mildly interested in the M&P, it seemed like every time I turned around there was some flaw or issue with it.

I somehow doubt that the negative response to this will be as galvanic as that which resulted from the accursed lock, but it certainly won't do the firm any good. Moot point, really. With the possible exception of a couple of niche revolvers, S&W doesn't make anything that cannot be found elsewhere, of equal or better quality.

.

[ssb]

Reading this with my business eye, S&W is basically alleging the entire "M&P" handgun is a trademarked product, warts and all. Should an individual decide to fix what the factory didn't with a non-S&W component, they've now created a non-Smith product which has S&W trademarks on it.

Simply put , you can put an Apex trigger/Crimson Trace laser/aftermarket recoil spring in an M&P: but then you have to chisel out the "S&W" rollmarks. It's the firearms equivalent of Apple suing the Jailbreak folks .They'll probably argue next that we don't actually own an M&P, but that our handguns are merely 3 dimensional licenses like software code. So non-factory mods are basically "pirating".
Unfortunately for Smith, they make guns and not hipster status symbols.

This has harrowing business implications for those of us with older S&W products not supported by the factory anymore. If ,for example, someone decides to make a recoil spring rod or a side plate for my 4006 they could be dragged into litigation over it,because "Trademark".

While selling my old 4006 is partly a protest of this very poor business decision by S&W, its also pragmatic for this reason. If this is the company's stance not only is my gun orphaned by the factory ,but the aftermarket as well.I'm one KB or busted spring away from owning a paperweight.

Looking at the cases the letter cites, I think you're blowing the demand letter vastly out of proportion.


Rolex argues that this is a case where the alterations Mottale makes to Rolex's products are so basic that it is a misnomer to permit Mottale to retain Rolex's marks on the altered watches he sells. Mottale refurbishes the Rolex dial, sometimes adding diamonds to it, changes the watch bracelet, and/or replaces the Rolex watch bezel. Rolex asserts that the watch bezel as well as the workmanship involved in inserting diamonds into the face of the watch go to the basic performance and durability of the watch: The quality of the bezel and how it is attached affect the water-proofing of the watch; the insertion of diamonds on the face of the watch can affect the functioning of the watch hands. Rolex also contends that the durability of the watch bracelet and clasp affect the usefulness and longevity of the watch.

Rolex Watch U.S.A. v. Michel, Co., 179 F.3d 704, 709 (9th Cir. 1999).


[T]he recasing operation here employed results in a “new construction”. The case of a wrist watch is a necessary and integral part of the complete product. The substitution of a different crown and case by defendants results in a different product. The watch is no longer a Bulova watch. It is a new and different “watch” albeit one containing a “movement” manufactured by Bulova.

Bulova Watch Co. v. Allerton Co., 328 F.2d 20, 23 (7th Cir.1964).

---

The above two cases involve aftermarket watch guys taking fancy watches, putting aftermarket stuff in while retaining some of the OEM mfgr's marks, and selling them as "new" and "different" watches. The reasoning for disallowing such activity is below:


We agree with the District Court that the recasing operation here employed results in a ‘new construction’. The case of a wrist watch is a necessary and integral part of the complete product. The substitution of a different crown and case by defendants results in a different product. The watch is no longer a Bulova watch. It is a new and different ‘watch’ albeit one containing a ‘movement’ manufactured by Bulova. The case is not Bulova's and its fitting does not represent Bulova workmanship. As recognized in Champion Spark Plug Co. v. Sanders, 331 U.S. 125, 129, 67 S.Ct. 1136, 91 L.Ed. 1386, change in the original article may be such that the party making the change is without right to retain or use the manufacturer's trademark in connection with the resale of the changed product. In this connection the Supreme Court refers to Ingersoll v. Doyle, D.C., 247 F. 620. The rationale of Ingersoll is peculiarly apposite here. And, while the defendants are entitled to make a proper collateral reference to the source of the movement, without use of the trademark ‘BULOVA’ as such, any use of the trademark itself in connection with defendants' product must be in such a way that the public is not deceived. A complete and full disclosure is required. Prestonettes, Inc. v. Coty, 264 U.S. 359, 43 S.Ct. 350, 68 L.Ed. 731. The ‘unfair competition’ aspects of the instant case make it additionally essential that the public be informed not only of what the defendants actually do but also that it is done independently of Bulova, with which defendants have no connection.

Bulova, 328 F.2d at 23-24.

Again, while I think it's dickish, I don't think it's the end of the Smith and Wesson aftermarket as we know it. I think that, given the case law they've cited in their demand letter, their theory of infringement is quite clear. Neither Bulova nor Michel stands for the proposition that a third party may not manufacture aftermarket parts for a given OEM product. What they're going after is a third party taking the OEM product, installing their aftermarket parts in such a manner that "necessary and integral" parts of the complete OEM product are changed (to the point where the OEM product has now been made a "new product"), and selling that modified OEM product using the OEM manufacturer's marks.

I don't think there's support in either case for prohibiting the following:
- Customer sends OEM product to third party for customization (i.e. grip work, slide cuts, barrel fitting etc.)
- Third party manufacturer makes and sells aftermarket parts for OEM product (i.e. barrels, sights, grip panels, etc.)

I do think there is support in both cases for prohibiting the following:
- Third party manufacturers and retailers purchase S&W M&P pistols, gut them, work their grip and slide magic (ATEi), install their aftermarket products (APEX trigger and barrel), and sell them while the pistols still retain S&W's marks (Brownell's)

Once again, I'm not a lawyer, I have no specialized experience in trademark law, and my analysis is worth exactly what you've paid for it.

[RJ]

I gather they are not happy about this:

http://www.brownells.com/dreamguns/Brownells-Dream-Build/Dream-Gun-Catalog-Smith-Wesson-M-P-sid1079.aspx

When I posted this at 2:23, the site showed a picture of the 'dream' S&W M&P.

Somebody, check me on this, but right now, that same web page shows "nothing". What the?!

Second point: rereading the Apex announcement, it reads like Apex is just supplying parts for a not-for-sale demonstrator, or 'dream gun' that Brownells puts on their web page.

To, you know, sell aftermarket parts.

So, where is all this 'selling of rebranded guns' then? Or am I missing something here?

[Drang]

...Second point: rereading the Apex announcement, it reads like Apex is just supplying parts for a not-for-sale demonstrator, or 'dream gun' that Brownells puts on their web page.

To, you know, sell aftermarket parts....

This reminds me of a story...

Up until Dec. 31, 2014, Mrs. Drang worked for a seafood processor in Seattle. It was a somewhat small operation, but it did big business with Alaska commercial fishermen. (As in knowing the guys on a certain TV show narrated by Mike Rowe.)
At one point, the boss had a new logo designed, which bore a faint resemblance to the one used by a Big Name in the cranberry juice line.
He ran it by a lot of intellectual/trademark attorneys, who all opined, in writing, that it wasn't that close, especially since he wasn't competing with them. IIRC, he got their legal department to review and OK it.
And every time their legal department hired someone new, they would send him a cease and desist order, and he would have to respond.
So I find the "legal acted without authorization" plausible.

[UNK]

So if I understand this correctly I can buy a S&W and send it off for custom work. I can't buy a S&W with a "package" already performed. I could buy a S&W as made from the factory and then contract with the seller to perform a "package" before it is shipped to me.

[ranger]

I am looking forward to the fire sale on S&W products so that I may add to my collection at a vastly reduced cost!

[GardoneVT]

Looking at the cases the letter cites, I think you're blowing the demand letter vastly out of proportion.



Rolex Watch U.S.A. v. Michel, Co., 179 F.3d 704, 709 (9th Cir. 1999).



Bulova Watch Co. v. Allerton Co., 328 F.2d 20, 23 (7th Cir.1964).

---

The above two cases involve aftermarket watch guys taking fancy watches, putting aftermarket stuff in while retaining some of the OEM mfgr's marks, and selling them as "new" and "different" watches. The reasoning for disallowing such activity is below:



Bulova, 328 F.2d at 23-24.

Again, while I think it's dickish, I don't think it's the end of the Smith and Wesson aftermarket as we know it. I think that, given the case law they've cited in their demand letter, their theory of infringement is quite clear. Neither Bulova nor Michel stands for the proposition that a third party may not manufacture aftermarket parts for a given OEM product. What they're going after is a third party taking the OEM product, installing their aftermarket parts in such a manner that "necessary and integral" parts of the complete OEM product are changed (to the point where the OEM product has now been made a "new product"), and selling that modified OEM product using the OEM manufacturer's marks.

I don't think there's support in either case for prohibiting the following:
- Customer sends OEM product to third party for customization (i.e. grip work, slide cuts, barrel fitting etc.)
- Third party manufacturer makes and sells aftermarket parts for OEM product (i.e. barrels, sights, grip panels, etc.)

I do think there is support in both cases for prohibiting the following:
- Third party manufacturers and retailers purchase S&W M&P pistols, gut them, work their grip and slide magic (ATEi), install their aftermarket products (APEX trigger and barrel), and sell them while the pistols still retain S&W's marks (Brownell's)

Once again, I'm not a lawyer, I have no specialized experience in trademark law, and my analysis is worth exactly what you've paid for it.

Reading the document, here's the Salient quote;

"The numerous alterations made to the original design of S&Ws firearms constitute not only unauthorized modifications to Smith and Wesson's proprietary designs and misuse of S&Ws trademarks etc ......."

It's the "unauthorized modifications" line which breeds pause. Is that switching the trigger? Is that changing the mag release? Is that switching mag baseplates?

If I were a business owner staking millions of dollars of business capital on making a new accessory, would I bet the business that my products won't cross S&Ws undefined line of what constitutes 'unacceptable'?

Say there's a Gadget for the M&P. Would S&W consider that an unauthorized modification worthy of litigation? It's an expensive question, and one I see many answering by making products for other guns going forward.

On the consumer side , the risk of an individual being sued for modifying their gun is low. The issue is long term logistics. If S&W is giving the aftermarket industry the legal Stink Eye for making parts , it leaves the consumer in the lurch for parts. Ten years from now Glock guys will still have easily obtainable parts. Will M&P owners be able to say the same?

[ssb]

This was the Brownells "Dream Gun" page:

http://www.brownells.com/dreamguns/Brownells-Dream-Build/Dream-Gun-Catalog-Smith-Wesson-M-P-sid1079.aspx?aid=10078&source=ir&cm_mmc=affiliate-_-Itwine-_-IR-_-60594

Everything -- images, links to parts, and text -- has been removed. Take that for what you will. Was Brownells selling the pistol as configured, or was it simply a demonstrator for all the cool stuff that can be done? Was there a "Dream Gun" package available (i.e. I pay $1,000,000 for an accurate M&P9 with a red trigger and some weird scratches on the side)?

[UNK]

S&W almost put their selves out of business in 2000. You would think they wouldn't want to go down that path again.


I am looking forward to the fire sale on S&W products so that I may add to my collection at a vastly reduced cost!

[GardoneVT]

S&W almost put their selves out of business in 2000. You would think they wouldn't want to go down that path again.

They're just following Colt's fine example.

[ssb]

Reading the document, here's the Salient quote;

"The numerous alterations made to the original design of S&Ws firearms constitute not only unauthorized modifications to Smith and Wesson's proprietary designs and misuse of S&Ws trademarks etc ......."

It's the "unauthorized modifications" line which breeds pause. Is that switching the trigger? Is that changing the mag release? Is that switching mag baseplates?

Context, dude. This was a letter sent to a bunch of manufacturers and a retailer regarding what looks like a "package gun" that had a bunch of work performed on it and a bunch of parts dropped in.

I think that, if there was truly a legal basis for prohibiting third parties from performing custom work on customer-supplied firearms, the only "custom" M&Ps available would be coming out of the Performance Center.


If I were a business owner staking millions of dollars of business capital on making a new accessory, would I bet the business that my products won't cross S&Ws undefined line of what constitutes 'unacceptable'?

Say there's a Gadget for the M&P. Would S&W consider that an unauthorized modification worthy of litigation? It's an expensive question, and one I see many answering by making products for other guns going forward.

Aftermarket parts have been around for ages, and not just for guns. Ever use an aftermarket oil filter when doing an oil change? As above, if there truly was a legal basis for prohibiting the manufacture of aftermarket parts for a handgun (or any other product), the only sight upgrades for M&Ps would be coming from Smith and Wesson.


On the consumer side , the risk of an individual being sued for modifying their gun is low. The issue is long term logistics. If S&W is giving the aftermarket industry the legal Stink Eye for making parts , it leaves the consumer in the lurch for parts. Ten years from now Glock guys will still have easily obtainable parts. Will M&P owners be able to say the same?

Somehow I doubt that. Even Apple's shenanigans had more to do with the consumer being a licensed user of software (i.e. modifying/altering iOS), as I recall.

/10notalawyers.

[SLG]

The derp in this thread is deep. I thought a clue might have been had by now, but apparently not. The last thing I will say is that S&W has had Apex at their range, during their national competitions (BUG, most lately) selling parts and working on people guns. If you still think they have an issue with the aftermarket, I suggest you stop drinking and internetting.

[41magfan]

If the actors in the totality of this set of circumstances had obtained approval or license from S&W to market and sell this "M&P Dream Gun" pistol in the manner they elected to do so, there would have been no foul. They apparently did not, and that is an act of infringement.

Again, it ain't really about "parts", and "services".

[RJ]

Was Brownells selling the pistol as configured, or was it simply a demonstrator for all the cool stuff that can be done? Was there a "Dream Gun" package available (i.e. I pay $1,000,000 for an accurate M&P9 with a red trigger and some weird scratches on the side)?

I wish I'd have looked at it closer this afternoon when that web page was still populated.

Based on the other few dozen 'dream guns' still listed (Glocks, 1911s, etc.) these ARE NOT for sale. They appear to be notional gun builds, which happen to have a convenient way of dropping parts into your Brownells shopping cart.

They are not 'packages for sale', as near as I can tell.

Brownells apparently has been doing these 'Dream Guns' since 2011, apparently.

[Kirk]

Only S&W would design a gun that everyone would want if it worked, manufacture said gun that does not work, refuse to fix it, and then sue the individuals who are keeping said gun viable.

In my opinion as a director of sales with a large company, S&W should be kissing the feet of Apex right now. Without their aftermarket support, S&W has a product that is by far the worst in their market on virtually all levels except ergonomics and reliability.

I feel that S&W is consistently short sighted and poorly lead, but what do I know.

[GJM]

I don't have an issue with S&W acting to protect their intellectual property. Companies do this all the time, and they may have been advised that failing to act might undermine their ability to protect their rights in the future.

Here is what I am not so keen on -- the method they chose to protect their intellectual property. Nobody likes receiving that sort of letter. Given the nature of the web, and the past problems S&W has had with gun owners, they should have anticipated this being a big deal, generating much negative publicity for their brand. Given relationships, if I were involved in this, I would have called up Randy Lee and the Brownell's leadership, described the issue, and quietly resolved it. Only if that was unsuccessful, would I unleash the lawyer letters. Instead, they get massive coverage on the web, all bad, and gun owners reminding folks of S&W's perceived past sins.

Protecting intellectual property rights needs to be balanced against protecting the brand's reputation.

[Kirk]

I don't have an issue with S&W acting to protect their intellectual property. Companies do this all the time, and they may have been advised that failing to act might undermine their ability to protect their rights in the future.

Here is what I am not so keen on -- the method they chose to protect their intellectual property. Nobody likes receiving that sort of letter. Given the nature of the web, and the past problems S&W has had with gun owners, they should have anticipated this being a big deal, generating much negative publicity for their brand. Given relationships, if I were involved in this, I would have called up Randy Lee and the Brownell's leadership, described the issue, and quietly resolved it. Only if that was unsuccessful, would I unleash the lawyer letters. Instead, they get massive coverage on the web, all bad, and gun owners reminding folks of S&W's perceived past sins.

Protecting intellectual property rights needs to be balanced against protecting the brand's reputation.

This.

The medium they chose is ridiculous. This could most likely have been resolved more smoothly in a different manner

[UNK]

x 1000... there will be fallout from this.


I don't have an issue with S&W acting to protect their intellectual property. Companies do this all the time, and they may have been advised that failing to act might undermine their ability to protect their rights in the future.

Here is what I am not so keen on -- the method they chose to protect their intellectual property. Nobody likes receiving that sort of letter. Given the nature of the web, and the past problems S&W has had with gun owners, they should have anticipated this being a big deal, generating much negative publicity for their brand. Given relationships, if I were involved in this, I would have called up Randy Lee and the Brownell's leadership, described the issue, and quietly resolved it. Only if that was unsuccessful, would I unleash the lawyer letters. Instead, they get massive coverage on the web, all bad, and gun owners reminding folks of S&W's perceived past sins.

Protecting intellectual property rights needs to be balanced against protecting the brand's reputation.

[Willard]

EDIT TO ADD: Not selling the "Heller Commemorative" 442. Not selling my father's "retirement" Model 10-5. And not divesting the S&W stock, either.
Traded in the 625JM on a P320 last week, though...

I will be selling / trading them all (including until now EDC's). I will not be fooled thrice. Lump me with the "Cleti" if you will.

[Jim Watson]

No bra burning for MY Plastic M&P which was tuned by Dan Burwell before the Apex folks learned to count higher than six. Of course he refined the factory parts instead of shifting from gunsmithing to parts sales.

I'll be keeping my eyes open for Smiths at fire sale prices as the protestors unload theirs.

[Savage Hands]

No bra burning for MY Plastic M&P which was tuned by Dan Burwell before the Apex folks learned to count higher than six. Of course he refined the factory parts instead of shifting from gunsmithing to parts sales.

I'll be keeping my eyes open for Smiths at fire sale prices as the protestors unload theirs.


That's an odd comment, Apex and Randy Lee has been around much longer than the M&P existed working mainly on revolvers.

[HCM]

That's an odd comment, Apex and Randy Lee has been around much longer than the M&P existed working mainly on revolvers.

correct thought - I thought what this comment was referring to:
before the Apex folks learned to count higher than six as in six shooters ?

[mmc45414]

We have reliable information that this whole dust up was caused by some lone actor operating without authorization. I am picturing some young kid who is new with an established law firm, that probably grew up in the Boston suburbs, that has never fired a S&W or any other pistol and knows nothing about the industry, trying to make a name for themselves by showing their bosses how smart they are.

IMO the final outcome will just be a clarification issued, somebody will buy Randy Lee a nice meal at the SHOT show, and maybe another tasty three magazine rebate offer...

[RJ]

Another Press release on the one-of-a-kind "dream gun"

http://www.ammoland.com/2015/12/apex-teams-top-custom-builders-brownells-dream-gun/#axzz3v9Ftplgc

"The Brownells Dream Guns Project was started in 2011 to help feature the wide range of parts and accessories available from Brownells that customers can use to upgrade and customize their own pistols, rifles and shotguns. To date over 100 Dream Guns have been built and are available for review at Brownells.com."

In other words, this is a single gun, assembled with parts from industry suppliers, customized by gunsmiths, highlighting the opportunities in the marketspace, intended as a vehicle to advertise said parts and services.

And the Legal team at S&W seized on this as a good idea to issue a Cease and Desist letter. What a bunch of schmucks.

[RJ]

We have reliable information that this whole dust up was caused by some lone actor operating without authorization..

Can you clarify this? Who is "we"?

[Aray]

I will collect all of the defiled, debased, contaminated and dishonored S&W products and dispose of them appropriately. I'll pay any shipping and transfer fees out of the goodness of my heart.

[Savage Hands]

correct thought - I thought what this comment was referring to: as in six shooters ?


Wow, that was over my head. I shouldn't post that late anymore lol

[Sal Picante]

I think that claim #3, the request to return any and all product, is pretty whacko...

[LittleLebowski]

Textbook on "how to alienate your aftermarket and customer base." Textbook.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoy4_h7Pb3M

[GJM]

I think that claim #3, the request to return any and all product, is pretty whacko...

Les, I disagree. That request is the only one that makes sense. How else would S&W have a chance to get an M&P that looks good, and shoots accurately....

[Sal Picante]

Interesting - while S&W is doing this, maybe doing this, or rogue lawyers(?) are doing this, Beretta and Wilson team up to refresh the 92 brand...

[Sal Picante]

I don't think any of you seem to have any idea what's going on. Guilty before innocent, ay?

I totally agree with you, but I'm just going to point out that Ferguson burned because of (mis?)perceptions...

[SLG]

I totally agree with you, but I'm just going to point out that Ferguson burned because of (mis?)perceptions...

I didn't realize how many of the members here are as dumb as the instigators in Ferguson. With few exceptions, we live in the best gun times ever. Only the casual, usually uninformed shooter, would dream of ditching a company's products over something they don't actually know anything about. Think Nyeti is going to sell his Smith's?

I love almost all gun companies, even the ones I don't really use, because they make my weapons. I don't care at this point if it comes off harsh or a little strong, but this thread has now shown me who on this board I don't need to pay any attention to anymore.

[SLG]

I don't have an issue with S&W acting to protect their intellectual property. Companies do this all the time, and they may have been advised that failing to act might undermine their ability to protect their rights in the future.

Here is what I am not so keen on -- the method they chose to protect their intellectual property. Nobody likes receiving that sort of letter. Given the nature of the web, and the past problems S&W has had with gun owners, they should have anticipated this being a big deal, generating much negative publicity for their brand. Given relationships, if I were involved in this, I would have called up Randy Lee and the Brownell's leadership, described the issue, and quietly resolved it. Only if that was unsuccessful, would I unleash the lawyer letters. Instead, they get massive coverage on the web, all bad, and gun owners reminding folks of S&W's perceived past sins.

Protecting intellectual property rights needs to be balanced against protecting the brand's reputation.

What makes you think they didn't try that route?

[LittleLebowski]

I didn't realize how many of the members here are as dumb as the instigators in Ferguson. With few exceptions, we live in the best gun times ever. Only the casual, usually uninformed shooter, would dream of ditching a company's products over something they don't actually know anything about. Think Nyeti is going to sell his Smith's?

I love almost all gun companies, even the ones I don't really use, because they make my weapons. I don't care at this point if it comes off harsh or a little strong, but this thread has now shown me who on this board I don't need to pay any attention to anymore.

Inbound email.

[SLG]

Smith just made an official statement, explaining what they intended. The short is that it was strictly a Trademark issue, and that they are fine with aftermarket stuff, and look forward to seeing the "dream gun" at SHOT.

[GJM]

What makes you think they didn't try that route?

No idea whether they tried that route or not. If they did try that, then they should have written that letter to reflect that, with those efforts to resolve the issue referenced. That way, when the letter became public, as it surely would, those that are not privy to what did and did not happen, can clearly see those attempts referenced in the letter.

Not me, but there are a bunch of people that hold a grudge against S&W and Ruger for perceived past sins, and who are just waiting for some current slight to rehash the actions of years past. This plays right into that.

[GJM]

Smith just made an official statement, explaining what they intended. The short is that it was strictly a Trademark issue, and that they are fine with aftermarket stuff, and look forward to seeing the "dream gun" at SHOT.

Do you have a link to that statement?

[Sal Picante]

I didn't realize how many of the members here are as dumb as the instigators in Ferguson. With few exceptions, we live in the best gun times ever. Only the casual, usually uninformed shooter, would dream of ditching a company's products over something they don't actually know anything about.

Dude... I'm just pointing out that people, you know the "customer base", chooses "product A" over the almost identical "product B" because they want to buy into the idea of something (the brand).

When the "casual reader" of RECOIL or whatever sees this on the front page of a google search, that can't be good marketing.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/731798/PF/sw.png


Saying "Oops - JK!" doesn't erase all the perception that somewhere, someone in the company was all like "Get me a bulldog lawyer!!"


Personally? I don't mind the S&W products I have... I've still got a 1950's M&P .38 and a set of 'cuffs that I keep in the bedroom.

;)

[orionz06]

Fix the fucking gun so it can hold a down zero and an a-zone and we'll all forget this ever happened.


Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl

[UNK]

Maybe you have had too much internet for the week.



I didn't realize how many of the members here are as dumb as the instigators in Ferguson. With few exceptions, we live in the best gun times ever. Only the casual, usually uninformed shooter, would dream of ditching a company's products over something they don't actually know anything about. Think Nyeti is going to sell his Smith's?

I love almost all gun companies, even the ones I don't really use, because they make my weapons. I don't care at this point if it comes off harsh or a little strong, but this thread has now shown me who on this board I don't need to pay any attention to anymore.


The derp in this thread is deep. I thought a clue might have been had by now, but apparently not. The last thing I will say is that S&W has had Apex at their range, during their national competitions (BUG, most lately) selling parts and working on people guns. If you still think they have an issue with the aftermarket, I suggest you stop drinking and internetting.

[nalesq]

Do you have a link to that statement?

http://bearingarms.com/smith-wesson-fully-understand-dream-gun-project-apologizes/

TL;DR, blame outside counsel, haha.

[orionz06]

Maybe you have had too much internet for the week.

He's not wrong.
Everyone was ready to loot and burn the place down before really seeing what they were asking for ad saying.



Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl

[Willard]

Maybe you have had too much internet for the week.

Wold be my guess, but I am a "casual, usually uninformed shooter."

[UNK]

incorrect and wrong are two different things.



He's not wrong.
Everyone was ready to loot and burn the place down before really seeing what they were asking for ad saying.



Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl

[SLG]

Dude... I'm just pointing out that people, you know the "customer base", chooses "product A" over the almost identical "product B" because they want to buy into the idea of something (the brand).
Personally? I don't mind the S&W products I have... I've still got a 1950's M&P .38 and a set of 'cuffs that I keep in the bedroom.

;)

Sorry, I was agreeing with you, didn't mean to come across otherwise.

[SLG]

No idea whether they tried that route or not. If they did try that, then they should have written that letter to reflect that, with those efforts to resolve the issue referenced. That way, when the letter became public, as it surely would, those that are not privy to what did and did not happen, can clearly see those attempts referenced in the letter.

Not me, but there are a bunch of people that hold a grudge against S&W and Ruger for perceived past sins, and who are just waiting for some current slight to rehash the actions of years past. This plays right into that.

I don't think they actually did do that, my question was rhetorical.

Not directed at GJM,

My only point this whole time has been STFU and see what it actually means or doesn't mean, before passing judgement. I don't care if you like S&W or not. All gun companies do stuff that many of us think is stupid or wrong. Stuff many of you will never see or know about, since you're not in the industry. I'm not going to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and I'm not going to judge an industry I love until I actually know what has happened.

Also, there is more backstory to this (as usual) then will likely come out. Some of us understand this. Many here don't. If you think my comments were directed at you, they probably were. Feel free to go fly a kite somewhere. I hope none of you qualify for jury service.

Do I think S&W did the smart thing originally? No. Did I judge them before knowing the facts? No.

[TR675]

I have no comment on S&W's legal strategy, plan, and etc. They should probably have given more thought to how this would look when legally unsophisticated internet denizens got wind of it. Hindsight is 20/20.

I will say that trademark and IP law is complicated and sometimes requires IP holders to take action or waive their rights. Sometimes they need to do it to preserve their brand or for real or perceived liability reasons.

All of this is to say that I'm seeing a lot of knee jerk reactions based on a set of very incomplete facts, and at this point in time those reactions are premature. They are also not representative of the usual level of discourse on the forum.

[Sal Picante]

Sorry, I was agreeing with you, didn't mean to come across otherwise.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pdWAcK6Eh8

[RJ]

http://bearingarms.com/smith-wesson-fully-understand-dream-gun-project-apologizes/

TL;DR, blame outside counsel, haha.

Thanks for the link, that was helpful.

I find it believable. I totally get that a legal firm could have had free reign to pursue IP concerns, which is absolutely within S&W's best interest.

But it doesn't say much for how inept this makes S&W management looks. I would like to think the good folks who work at S&W are all doing double facepalms this morning.

[BehindBlueI's]

Sooo....Can we rethink those Hillary holes, now?

[Aray]

I used to think that emotional overreaction without all of the facts was limited to a certain group with certain political leanings. I was wrong.

[Sal Picante]

Sooo....Can we rethink those Hillary holes, now?

Shudder... "Phrasing!"

[Savage Hands]

I didn't realize how many of the members here are as dumb as the instigators in Ferguson. With few exceptions, we live in the best gun times ever. Only the casual, usually uninformed shooter, would dream of ditching a company's products over something they don't actually know anything about. Think Nyeti is going to sell his Smith's?

I love almost all gun companies, even the ones I don't really use, because they make my weapons. I don't care at this point if it comes off harsh or a little strong, but this thread has now shown me who on this board I don't need to pay any attention to anymore.


Maybe many of us jumped the gun on the torching of Smith, timing is extremely important IMO. We have Christmas this week and impending Gun legislation on a Federal level after the holidays so IMO this should have been handled discreetly.
You obviously know more than the rest of us on this matter but the perception of Smith looks extremely negative over this.

[LSP552]

Sooo....Can we rethink those Hillary holes, now?

Dude......I never want to hear, think, or imagine Hillary and holes in the same sentence!

[TCinVA]

I personally find it distasteful when companies, ostensibly staffed by adults, use social media as a weapon (in this case by posting incomplete information that is lacking context) to intentionally RILE THE FUCK UP their fans who then, in a TL;DR world, proceed to burn shit down. I find the Ferguson analogy quite apt.

Indeed.

When you see somebody posting something that's so absurd it boggles the mind, odds are that it isn't actually what is being alleged. Not that truth matters much to people out for clickbait.

Reason doesn't work well shouted through a megaphone.

[LorenzoS]

Did I judge them before knowing the facts? No.
Nobody here has the power to judge them in a jury, but we do have the right to decide we don't like to purchase a company's products if they have a history of douchebag actions. Given the bad will they worked so hard to earn by collaborating with Clinton and shafting 9mm M&P owners, nobody should be surprised at the schadenfreude of the last 24 hours.

[41magfan]

This incident was just another glaring example of the modern culture’s propensity to propagate any instance of empty-headed “drama” or “reality”. It seems we’ve become a nation of wishy-washy featherbrained critics that look for an offense at every turn while we vigorously ignore every issue of real substance.

[mmc45414]

Can you clarify this? Who is "we"?
Post #51 indicated that Pat Rodgers, a long time M&P user and somebody I accept as connected in the industry, had mentioned on another forum that the letter didn't reflect true intent. This was enough for me to wait and see before I fired up a torch and started melting down half my handguns.

Perhaps I should have said "I" instead of "we", because as somebody that has been married for a few decades, I am willing to accept that things can be miscommunicated... :)

[HCM]

http://bearingarms.com/smith-wesson-fully-understand-dream-gun-project-apologizes/

TL;DR, blame outside counsel, haha.

So if I understand this correctly, someone at S&W or S&W's law firm saw the press release for the Brownells dream gun, did not read or comprehend it completely, causing them to believe Brownells, Apex etc were going to begin selling complete "M&P Dream Guns" when in fact, the Dream gun is a "one off" demonstrator designed to showcase aftermarket parts and custom work and even the single example is not for sale. The Dream Gun is basically like the chicken and rice recipe printed on the side of a can of cream of Mushroom soup, designed to show you what you can do with the product and a little imagination.

If this was the first Brownells Dream Gun, the confusion would be more understandable. However, given Brownells has been building Dream Gun demonstrators on a variety of platforms since 2011, S&W's law firm appears to have failed to perform basic due diligence before sending out the C&D letters.

There is a whole page of Dream Guns here which included recognizable products such as Ruger .22 pistols and Remington 870 shotguns: http://www.brownells.com/dreamguns/Brownells-Dream-Build-mid122.aspx.

[RJ]

So if I understand this correctly, someone at S&W or S&W's law firm saw the press release for the Brownells dream gun, did not read or comprehend it completely, causing them to believe Brownells, Apex etc were going to begin selling complete "M&P Dream Guns" when in fact, the Dream gun is a "one off" demonstrator designed to showcase aftermarket parts and custom work and even the single example is not for sale. The Dream Gun is basically like the chicken and rice recipe printed on the side of a can of cream of Mushroom soup, designed to show you what you can do with the product and a little imagination.

If this was the first Brownells Dream Gun, the confusion would be more understandable. However, given Brownells has been building Dream Gun demonstrators on a variety of platforms since 2011, S&W's law firm appears to have failed to perform basic due diligence before sending out the C&D letters.

There is a whole page of Dream Guns here which included recognizable products such as Ruger .22 pistols and Remington 870 shotguns: http://www.brownells.com/dreamguns/Brownells-Dream-Build-mid122.aspx.

Yep.

Except, you know, when you do a Chicken and Rice recipe, you know it's going to taste good; it's not like you have to add $85 in aftermarket spices to it when you buy the soup.

But, yeah, basically.

[mmc45414]

The Dream Gun is basically like the chicken and rice recipe printed on the side of a can of cream of Mushroom soup, designed to show you what you can do with the product and a little imagination.
Well, that and a buttload of money...

[GJM]

I just read the (groveling) apology -- headline should be "S&W schlonged, by shooting themselves in their own leg."

[Savage Hands]

So if I understand this correctly, someone at S&W or S&W's law firm saw the press release for the Brownells dream gun, did not read or comprehend it completely, causing them to believe Brownells, Apex etc were going to begin selling complete "M&P Dream Guns" when in fact, the Dream gun is a "one off" demonstrator designed to showcase aftermarket parts and custom work and even the single example is not for sale. The Dream Gun is basically like the chicken and rice recipe printed on the side of a can of cream of Mushroom soup, designed to show you what you can do with the product and a little imagination.

If this was the first Brownells Dream Gun, the confusion would be more understandable. However, given Brownells has been building Dream Gun demonstrators on a variety of platforms since 2011, S&W's law firm appears to have failed to perform basic due diligence before sending out the C&D letters.

There is a whole page of Dream Guns here which included recognizable products such as Ruger .22 pistols and Remington 870 shotguns: http://www.brownells.com/dreamguns/Brownells-Dream-Build-mid122.aspx.


Agreed, IMO Smiths firm overreacted which in turn caused some overreaction on the internet. It doesn’t change my view for Smith as I haven't had interest in their products after I sold off my M&P's.

[Jim Watson]

I, too, just came across the apology from S&W to Brownell's. No mention of anything said to Apex.
http://bearingarms.com/smith-wesson-fully-understand-dream-gun-project-apologizes/

[TCinVA]

As most of you know Apex Tactical Specialties was among the five companies contacted by lawyers on behalf of Smith & Wesson regarding the ‘Dream Gun®’ we prepared for exhibit in the Brownells booth at SHOT Show. The letter was in fact a cease and desist order and we spent most of yesterday dealing with the fallout of that letter.

After our initial shock, we came to realize that there was a gross misunderstanding on the part of the lawyers as to the purpose of the pistol we collaborated on. We say on the part of the lawyers, and not Smith & Wesson, for a reason which we’ll make clear shortly. The ‘Dream Gun®’ was intended to be and is indeed a one-off custom build. It is not for sale nor is it intended to be the first in a line of ‘Dream Gun’ models. It is simply an example of what current, and hopefully future, M&P owners can do with their pistol with the parts they can purchase from Brownells.
This unique, one-of-a-kind aspect was missed by the lawyers whose understanding of the firearms industry might not be as broad and in-depth as that of those actually running companies.

How do we know this? Well, this morning James Debney, President and CEO of Smith & Wesson, personally called us to apologize. He explained to us that the cease and desist letter should never have gone out and that Smith & Wesson fully supports Brownells’ effort to spotlight what avid gun owners can do to personalize their firearms. In other words, James Debney gets it. He understands the firearms industry, and there is no better proof of that than the fact he called himself.

The firearms industry is a small, close knit industry where most issues like this are handled with informal, personal phone calls before the need for lawyers arises. This even applies to the industry’s biggest companies, like Smith & Wesson. It is a great tradition and an important part of our industrial culture, and it is one that James Debney understands and respects.
On behalf of Apex Tactical Specialties we want to thank James Debney for stepping in to this firestorm, facing it head-on and resolving it quickly and with class. James Debney is a class act and his actions this morning, personally calling all the companies involved to apologize, reflects brilliantly on the Smith & Wesson brand.
To you, our customers, we cannot begin to thank you enough. Much of what was said online was said in defense of Apex. That means a great deal to us and to all those working at Apex. We will always work to ensure you get our best effort and that our company and its products live up to your expectations.

Finally, all this would not have been resolved without the efforts of Brownells President Matt Buckingham. Late yesterday we found out this was all soon to go away because Matt was talking directly to James Debney. Apex has a great relationship with Brownells and they are one of our largest customers. They are also good friends. As gunsmiths ourselves, we have a deep appreciation for Brownells and the Brownell family who have been champions of gunsmiths everywhere. As a small business you can be sure of one thing when dealing with Brownells – they will never make you feel small. Matt Buckingham stepped in yesterday to make sure Apex, DP Custom Works, Blowndeadline Custom and SSVI had a strong voice in the discussion and for that we very grateful. Thankfully, the man on the other end of the phone line, James Debney, saw things the exact same way.

Randy Lee & Scott Folk


That's from the guys at Apex.

They handled things like men. No rumors. No innuendo. No social media attention-whoring.

The fact that Randy and the good people at Apex were quiet for a while spoke volumes about the likely truth of the situation.

[Wondering Beard]

I just read the (groveling) apology -- headline should be "S&W schlonged, by shooting themselves in their own leg."

Nope, we definitely aren't doing phrasing anymore.

I'm just not sure it trumps BehindBlueI's "Hillary Holes".

[Mitchell, Esq.]

I'm grumbling because this went away without my getting a piece of anyone's flesh...

Here is me. Slinking back to my lair. Desire for litigation unfulfilled...

Sadness.

On a side note - S&W may be looking for new attorneys, so...there's that.

[Dagga Boy]

I'm grumbling because this went away without my getting a piece of anyone's flesh...

Here is me. Slinking back to my lair. Desire for litigation unfulfilled...

Sadness.

On a side note - S&W may be looking for new attorneys, so...there's that.

I am buying the story about a rogue lawyer as much as I bought the rogue person in one office of the IRS targeting tea party groups. I missed the we fired the law firm for doing this without permission announcement.

[SecondsCount]

I am buying the story about a rogue lawyer as much as I bought the rogue person in one office of the IRS targeting tea party groups. I missed the we fired the law firm for doing this without permission announcement.

I agree. The backlash was big and they had to come up with an excuse to save face.

[Dagga Boy]

I posted this elsewhere as to what the real issue is:

Here is the real truth....most of the gun companies and major players in the industry are filled with business people, accountants and attorney's and very few gun folks who nobody listens to. This is what happens, and it is industry wide.....it's just that not everyone shows their ass this bad.

[Mitchell, Esq.]

I am buying the story about a rogue lawyer as much as I bought the rogue person in one office of the IRS targeting tea party groups. I missed the we fired the law firm for doing this without permission announcement.

I do not know how it is in other law firms, but before I send out what is the equivalent of a nuclear first strike that letter gets approved by my superiors.

Even after that, it would still be approved by the client because it's going to reflect on them more than it would reflect on the law firm. Quite frankly, a law firm with a reputation for aggression in defense of its client's interests is not a poor reputation to have all together.

[LSP972]

I am buying the story about a rogue lawyer as much as I bought the rogue person in one office of the IRS targeting tea party groups. I missed the we fired the law firm for doing this without permission announcement.

Aha! A conspiracy! The drama lives on!*



*But you're probably right…:D

.

[Kimura]

I am buying the story about a rogue lawyer as much as I bought the rogue person in one office of the IRS targeting tea party groups. I missed the we fired the law firm for doing this without permission announcement.


I agree. The backlash was big and they had to come up with an excuse to save face.

I don't know. I worked for a large manufacturer in another industry and it would be odd to me if S&W had involved their attorney without reaching out to the companies in question first. A quick conference call between representatives from the different companies would have answered any questions or issues S&W would have had. That's just professional/industry courtesy and it's hard to believe that any S&W executive with any experience at all would have skipped this step all the way to call the attorney. That's a huge step in a short amount of time, especially considering time frame and the time of year. Generally the only time it would have gone to the attorney would be if there was no response from the parties involved over a reasonable period of time. I also don't see that happening. I think Brownells and Apex etc would have responded to S&W for a conference call. Even if the Executives were on holiday break, this is definitely something they would want to take care of themselves.

[SLG]

Bearingarms.com has a letter posted from Liz Sharp, one of the Vice President's at S&W. It may give you a little more of a glimpse into what happened.

[Willard]

I find it the pinnacle of hilarity when posters in this thread condemn those who "overreacted" to S&W's overreaction. Ostensibly, those with the least information in these cases (the consumer) should rightly discern the motives and intentions of the corporations involved & judge accordingly. Never mind if said company historically exhibited several episodes of acting against the best interests & desires of gun owners. Merely disregard all that. Never mind that they present seemingly 'crae-crae' demands and assume the information they present (including return firearms) isn't because they reacted with no idea of what they were reacting to. Forget the fact that NO one with an iota of common or business sense would ever present demands as inane as those outlined by the C&D. You, as a consumer, are better than that. You owe an allegiance to any company operating in the industry & should support their shenanigans without fail. They are not expected to contemplate how these things will be received / perceived and conduct/monitor their communications accordingly. This applies no matter how stupidly they operate or present themselves. Responsibility falls with the consumer. There might be a "back story" that you are not privy to after all that causes a corporate giant in the industry to show their collective asses. Just shut up and buy product.

If you think I am talking to you I am. Glad I know who to ignore now as well & have adjusted my preferences accordingly. Nothing more to add to this thread.

[JM Campbell]

Still own them, still shoot them, still carry them everyday. Sun rises in the east and sets in the west.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[SLG]

Nobody here has the power to judge them in a jury, but we do have the right to decide we don't like to purchase a company's products if they have a history of douchebag actions. Given the bad will they worked so hard to earn by collaborating with Clinton and shafting 9mm M&P owners, nobody should be surprised at the schadenfreude of the last 24 hours.

There is no question that everyone should buy products they like, want and believe in. If this incident makes you not want to buy S&W again, so be it. That is pretty different from selling stuff you already have, imo.

The bigger issue though, is that you are acting like it is the same people there today, who acted the way they did back in the day. None of them are still around. That's like blaming Obama for stuff FDR did because they both held the same office.

[HCM]

I'm grumbling because this went away without my getting a piece of anyone's flesh...

Here is me. Slinking back to my lair. Desire for litigation unfulfilled...

Sadness.

On a side note - S&W may be looking for new attorneys, so...there's that.

S&W would be wise to hire an attorny who is also a gun person. There are more out there than one might think but .....Mitchell, Esq did call "Shotgun".

[TGS]

Still own them, still shoot them, still carry them everyday. Sun rises in the east and sets in the west.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

No truer words have ever been spoken on the gunternet.

[TR675]

If we're going to blacklist companies because of their officers' past bad behavior, let's get a running list started, shall we?

Ford (antisemitism)
GM (corporate capitalists, industrial pollution)
Mitsubishi (Japanese militarism)
Remington & Colt (indigenous genocide)
IBM (sold business machines to the Nazis)
Volkswagen (Nazis)
Porsche (Nazis)
Hugo Boss (Nazis)
ThyssenKrupp (Nazis)
H&K (Nazi by association, generally corrupt)
Bayer (Nazis)
Mercedes (Nazis)
German corporations in general (Nazis)

Feel free to join in.

[orionz06]

No shortage of hate in business.


Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl

[Dave J]

Feel free to join in.

Good thing Glock's corporate behavior has always been above reproach. :)

[Mr_White]

You know what I think the problem is, S&W must have hired the same attorneys who wrote IDPA their 'pains and penalties of perjury' loyalty oath pledge thing.

[TR675]

Good thing Glock's corporate behavior has always been above reproach. :)

Glock (Nazis)

[HCM]

Glock (Nazis)

Hitler was Austrian .....

[UNK]

What's that smell? Smells like spin irrelevant distraction and maybe even looks a little like the crawdad shuffle. People don't like a bunch of crap no matter who it comes from. ...

[LHS]

Do people really think that the BOD or senior executives at S&W got together and said, "How can we best f-over and alienate our aftermarket suppliers and customers?"

Honestly? I've seen some C-level folks who really were that retarded. I've also seen a tendency for executives to cover their asses by throwing lower level folks under the bus. Absent any other evidence, I'd call it 50/50 between dumb low level people getting the firm in trouble and dumb execs stepping on their dicks.

The press release from Apex sways me, though.

[HCM]

Seems applicable:


http://youtu.be/m7mIy97_rlo

[orionz06]

You know what I think the problem is, S&W must have hired the same attorneys who wrote IDPA their 'pains and penalties of perjury' loyalty oath pledge thing.

I wonder if they need a guy to defend them on forums? If so I hope they have a finders fee, I know of a blind loyalist who might be perfect.

[Jared]

If we're going to blacklist companies because of their officers' past bad behavior, let's get a running list started, shall we?

Ford (antisemitism)
GM (corporate capitalists, industrial pollution)
Mitsubishi (Japanese militarism)
Remington & Colt (indigenous genocide)
IBM (sold business machines to the Nazis)
Volkswagen (Nazis)
Porsche (Nazis)
Hugo Boss (Nazis)
ThyssenKrupp (Nazis)
H&K (Nazi by association, generally corrupt)
Bayer (Nazis)
Mercedes (Nazis)
German corporations in general (Nazis)

Feel free to join in.

Honestly, I'd bet that if we had an all access peek behind the curtain pass to almost any large company, we'd see some stuff we wouldn't like.

That's kind of how I view this little S&W incident. We got a look at something we normally don't, and it's unflattering. This isn't the first time we've seen individuals or companies in the shooting sports behaving badly though. I know that some of the gun trainer drama that's appeared on social media and in forums over the last 2-3 years looked just as bad as this S&W business to me.

[fixer]

I am inclined to believe the 'lawyers screwed the pooch' story based on my own personal experience with corporate legal dept at my workplace. There is an astonishing short sightedness ruling the roost. Combined with some corporate initiatives about 'brand protection' and you get this result--lawyers going on the attack.

[Clobbersaurus]

No shortage of hate in business.




Quoted for truth.

To me, this seems like it was just a little firearms festivus that got aired very publicly. The parties were made to shake hands by the public outing, like a principle making two kids shake hands after a school yard dust up. They didn't want to, but they had to.....

Edit to add: This doesn't sway my opinion of S&W. Protecting your brand is important, as is protecting your business partnerships. It's a tightrope walk complicated huge by social media.

[MGW]

I just picked up a 5" M&P Pro and love the shit out of it so far. So if anyone wants to do a Festivus dump of some late model M&P's let me know. I would be happy to give you 1/2 price on any S&W hate you want to get rid of. [emoji4]

[SLG]

How many of you contribute to 2A foundations, of whatever persuasion? Many gun companies, and yes, S&W, spend a huge amount of their profits on defending our 2A rights. Of course it's self serving, they want to continue to make and sell guns. It also serves us, and gives back to the consumers in ways none of us can hope to. Are all of you even NRA Life members? I don't really care what the political excuse is, you are not much of a gun enthusiast if it's not worth a small amount of money to try and protect our rights. We shouldn't have to defend them, but we do. If this doesn't affect you on a gut level, then you can't hope to understand how much it affects me. My life and freedom is made possible by the gun industry. If yours isn't, or you think it isn't, maybe golf is the answer for you.

The above is just one reason why I will not rush to judgement on the actions of a company in MY industry. I don't actually work in the gun industry, and truthfully, I don't really want to. I've turned down lucrative job offers from a few gun companies. It's still MY industry. I have invested most of my life in it, and its well being is essential to me on many levels. Glock, Sig and HK to name a few, have all done some pretty rough things over the years. I won't throw them under the bus, even knowing the full details. All of them have fixed themselves, and all of them will likely err again. Just like the rest of us. I don't carry a S&W, HK or Sig, though I have carried all of them. I still like them all, and hope they all do well. I'm certainly not going to sell guns I already own (or pretend to on the internet) because of real or perceived stupidity from the current crop of gun execs. If the crime is so egregious, and I feel I can't give them anymore of my money, ok, everyone is entitled to their own political stance and can choose how to spend their time and money.

If any of this makes me a blind loyalist, then I'd rather be blind then dumb. One of the major principles of our way of life is innocent until proven guilty. Not only do I believe in that, I get to see it in action, every single day. I put it into action every single day. Some of you have proven that you do not subscribe to this idea. I hope none of you work in the justice system in any capacity.

Only a few people really know the whole story behind what happened with the C&D letters. I'm not one of them. I do know James Debney though. He is a sincere guy who has a board to answer to. He tries everyday to make S&W better, and he is mostly succeeding. I believe him, and appreciate what he did to rectify the situation. If you want to believe that's spin, or a cover up or whatever else, have at it. I don't care if anyone here never buys a Smith product again. With only one or two exceptions, all of mine were made a long time ago, and I don't plan on getting any newer ones anytime soon, but not because of any of this. I am truly a gun guy. Some of you are not. That's fine too, it's still a free country.

[Erik]

I do not know how it is in other law firms, but before I send out what is the equivalent of a nuclear first strike that letter gets approved by my superiors.

Even after that, it would still be approved by the client because it's going to reflect on them more than it would reflect on the law firm. Quite frankly, a law firm with a reputation for aggression in defense of its client's interests is not a poor reputation to have all together.

This. That letter shows a lack of good business sense on both sides. If I was a betting man, I'd say somebody on the law firm side fucked up by not escalating the letter up the chain at S&W and somebody at S&W fucked up by not making sure his/her boss was in the loop. If I was the relationship partner at Ballard Spahr, I'd be fucking pissed.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/12/23/sw-apologizes-to-all-those-served-with-cease-desist-order/

[GJM]

I would bet my Gadget that the cease and decease letter was not unilaterally sent by the law firm without approval of S&W.

[GardoneVT]

And I'd bet your gadget that "without approval of S&W" would be better stated as "without the approval of someone at (a lower level within) S&W". :)

Sounds like the guy/gal who would have stopped this business in-house was on Christmas vacation.

[Savage Hands]

.

This is an eye opening perspective, thank you for the post.

[Dagga Boy]

This is an eye opening perspective, thank you for the post.

I wholly agree; however, this does not address the real issue. There wasn't one single person in the chain who was enough of a gun person to stop this. That is the industry cancer. It is the same issue in politics, and our government.....people running stuff that have experience running stuff with zip experience in the stuff they run. I am aware of some major issues at Smith totally away from this issue, but the same symptoms....people running stuff concerned wholly with bottom line today, and no thinking towards the traditions, history, and future of how the company looks and is regarded in a very non traditional industry. Let's get away from guns. This is no different than Ford sending a C&D letter to Roush or Shelby, because the non-car guy at Fords legal place and nobody in the chain at Ford knows who Carrol Shelby was and what Shelby does. Again, somebody at Smith sent a C&D to Brownell's. The oops isn't that the letter was sent, the massive issue is not knowing that there may be an issue with pissing off Brownell's.
Now to SLG's other question (all of which are excellent). I am an endowment life member of the NRA (I just went to endowment because of the positive moves I am seeing from the NRA right now). So, how many people in the chain from that letter are life members of the NRA? Compare that to the employees at Brownell's and Apex.

I am not really lambasting S&W, I am lambasting the industry as a whole where these things happen regularly and it is getting worse.

[GJM]

And I'd bet your gadget that "without approval of S&W" would be better stated as "without the approval of someone at (a lower level within) S&W". :)


If this was politics, we would want to know who approved the letter, who else knew, what the discussions were in-house prior to it being sent, and who said what after the letter went viral.

If one person individually went rogue, I would expect to hear of their termination soon.

[UNK]

Yes that's the nature of legal/accounting/admin types. Rogue..dangerous..risk takers :p :rolleyes::)


If this was politics, we would want to know who approved the letter, who else knew, what the discussions were in-house prior to it being sent, and who said what after the letter went viral.

If one person individually went rogue, I would expect to hear of their termination soon.

[Clobbersaurus]

I would bet my Gadget that the cease and decease letter was not unilaterally sent by the law firm without approval of S&W.

http://bearingarms.com/smith-wesson-fully-understand-dream-gun-project-apologizes/

Liz Sharp, their VP of Investor relations, said the letter originated at "a lower level within our organization". Which means that someone at S&W approved it, but probably didn't think of the implications of it becoming as public as it did.

I'm sure they now have some new rules regarding the distribution of legal letters....but otherwise business will carry on.

[GJM]

http://bearingarms.com/smith-wesson-fully-understand-dream-gun-project-apologizes/

Liz Sharp, their VP of Investor relations, said the letter originated at "a lower level within our organization". Which means that someone at S&W approved it, but probably didn't think of the implications of it becoming as public as it did.

I'm sure they now have some new rules regarding the distribution of legal letters....but otherwise business will carry on.

There is always a first, but I don't know of many organizations that permit "lower level" employees to retain outside counsel and send this sort of letter. I suspect "lower level" is a euphanism for the person that actually did the deed.

[rsa-otc]

I wholly agree; however, this does not address the real issue. There wasn't one single person in the chain who was enough of a gun person to stop this. That is the industry cancer. It is the same issue in politics, and our government.....people running stuff that have experience running stuff with zip experience in the stuff they run. I am aware of some major issues at Smith totally away from this issue, but the same symptoms....people running stuff concerned wholly with bottom line today, and no thinking towards the traditions, history, and future of how the company looks and is regarded in a very non traditional industry. Let's get away from guns. This is no different than Ford sending a C&D letter to Roush or Shelby, because the non-car guy at Fords legal place and nobody in the chain at Ford knows who Carrol Shelby was and what Shelby does. Again, somebody at Smith sent a C&D to Brownell's. The oops isn't that the letter was sent, the massive issue is not knowing that there may be an issue with pissing off Brownell's.
Now to SLG's other question (all of which are excellent). I am an endowment life member of the NRA (I just went to endowment because of the positive moves I am seeing from the NRA right now). So, how many people in the chain from that letter are life members of the NRA? Compare that to the employees at Brownell's and Apex.

I am not really lambasting S&W, I am lambasting the industry as a whole where these things happen regularly and it is getting worse.

As always well said. It's the little guys who breath enthusiasm into gun business not the majority of the players / management types at the big boys. They are driven by stock prices, dividends and yearly bonuses based on increased stock prices, profit margins etc.

[Trooper224]

When something like this happens, and let's be honest it happens frequently, I'm always amazed at the rabid jingoistic flag waving that ensues. Whenever our sense of 'murica! gets bruised we're far too quick to throw the baby out with the bath water.

[BehindBlueI's]

When something like this happens, and let's be honest it happens frequently, I'm always amazed at the rabid jingoistic flag waving that ensues. Whenever our sense of 'murica! gets bruised we're far too quick to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Lines get drawn pretty quick. You suck and should feel terrible. No, they are above reproach and you suck if you dare question. Then entrench. And the silent majority don't bother to say:

http://i.imgur.com/aUbk9ha.gif

Now, about that keyhole...

[SLG]

Lines get drawn pretty quick. You suck and should feel terrible. No, they are above reproach and you suck if you dare question. Then entrench. And the silent majority don't bother to say:

http://i.imgur.com/aUbk9ha.gif

Now, about that keyhole...

Just for the record, I am certainly not saying, "don't question." The OP asked for an explanation of what was going on. He didn't come out and pre judge the situation, like so many others did. He wanted to gather information. That is what a forum like this is for, education. Once you have all the facts, have at it. Question or judge all you like. Depending on the situation I may disagree with your take, but I have no issue with that. I just really dislike people who pretend to be gun people, who will immediately throw a gun company to the wolves, without knowing anything about the situation. And then they fall back on, "Remember the Clinton era stuff!"

[GJM]

I think it is important to distinguish between disliking the behavior and disliking the company.

I dislike this behavior, meaning the letter, and feel it is a big whopper. I have no problem pointing out how they screwed up big time here. That said, I don't dislike S&W. If I disliked companies and people every time they did something I felt objectionable, I would have a very short list of companies and people I associated with.

[Clobbersaurus]

There is always a first, but I don't know of many organizations that permit "lower level" employees to retain outside counsel and send this sort of letter. I suspect "lower level" is a euphanism for the person that actually did the deed.

To be fair, after a screw up like that, that person may be considered "lower level" now.

Like working in the mail room for the next ten years type of "lower level". ;)

[Joe in PNG]

Considering all the gaffes, communications breakdowns, and other things against official policy that happen with my very small organization, it does not surprise me in the least that S&W can have an underling derp up like this.

Gun owners tend to be a bit too quick to pull out the tinfoil at times.

[mmc45414]

Gun owners tend to be a bit too quick to pull out the tinfoil at times.

I also wonder how many of those that are calling for S&W to be forsaken forever and banished from existence (again...) would like the company they derive their livelihood from to be held to the same standard... :)