View Full Version : S&W C&D letters to Brownells and Apex
Did S&W just bite themselves or are they setting a new trend by going after parts makers, suppliers and gunsmiths? Makes me reconsider purchasing one of their handguns.
http://www.recoilweb.com/sw-sends-cease-and-desist-letter-to-custom-gunsmiths-80507.html
Late last week the special Smith & Wesson M&P build for the Brownells Dream Guns Project was announced. Today the parties involved, to include Apex Tactical, Brownells, DP Custom Works, Blowndeadline Custom, and SSvi all received a Cease & Desist letter from a law firm representing Smith and Wesson. In part that letter included this:
Read more: http://www.recoilweb.com/sw-sends-cease-and-desist-letter-to-custom-gunsmiths-80507.html#ixzz3v6AJsX9I
Those are some hefty demands....
Nightstalker865
12-22-15, 17:19
This will be interesting to see how things shake out for sure.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Doc Safari
12-22-15, 17:24
Check out demand #3:
. Turn over to Smith & Wesson your inventory of the Infringing Product, or any Smith & Wesson product modified by you in the first instance that bears any mark owned by Smith & Wesson.
I think my response to that one would be "Go pound sand."
Sorry S&W, we were just helping you sell guns that you normally wouldn't sell because of the crap parts you choose to put in, and not doing anything about it.
I guess S&W just dug their grave on this one.
This is surprising. It is like saying Ned Christiansen cant customize a 1911 and advertise his work.
I dont recall Glock ever doing this. One of the many reasons I like Glocks is the availability of factory and aftermarket parts. This makes me want to avoid S&W products. S&W needs to find some new attorneys. This will cost them customers.
Leaveammoforme
12-22-15, 17:27
Says the company that brought to market a Glock clone minus the reliability.
S&W wants us to forget about the Sigma like the Feds want us to forget about Fast & Furious.
Oh S&W no....
Bad move. Poor decision. A lot of people are gun shy to M&P as is.
If anything they should be making Apex stuff factory installed.
There is a reason people stick with Glock. They make good revolvers but yeesh on Automatics. I say this as someone who lugged a 4586 back in the day. S&W, poor form here.
You'd think they would be ok with it. You have several companies showing how awesome/ bad a$$ a M&P can be with some custom work, potentially leading to more sales of the M&P line by people who want to emulate the work done. Instead they sh!t the bed and start to threaten Apex, who fixed a lot of M&P issues, and Brownell's who sells who knows how many parts of S&W. Yeah, those are 2 companies I'd like to piss off.
Who at Apex pissed in Smith's Cheerios? I mean, seriously, one would think the amount of shit Apex has put out that has likely sold M&Ps Smith would be SENDING them more guns to pimp so that they could displace them in THEIR own booth. I know that would be my thoughts, you selling shit for us, lets help each other here so make more money! Unless the mods that are being done are serious safety hazards that make the gun go FA, explode or beat the neighbors kids. And the last one could be a boon depending on the neighborhood, I don't see the point of this other than to cause bad blood and piss people off.
S&W has been pushing their own Performance Center guns pretty hard. I suspect that has something to do with it, not wanting to lose business to 3rd party groups.
You sure don't see Glock, HK (because they hate us) or Sig doing the same.
The Facebook page is exploding in hate right now. It's actually pretty funny.
That was moronic. My only guess is that they felt their was a major liability issue or some other financial motive.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
From what I have been reading, they thought these companies were buying M&Ps, customizing them, and re-selling them, using S&W in their marketing, but what was really happening is they were collaborating on a one off for display purposes at SHOT.
Defaultmp3
12-22-15, 18:14
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 **** up the accuracy on the M&P, to skip the Sigma, etc.
Brownells has obviously built their entire business on the customization of firearms. My guess is that their attorneys are rather knowledgeable with trademarks and related issues. I hope SW gets their head handed to them in court.
I will not buy another Smith & Wesson product if they continue to push this issue. SW should be assisting Apex, Brownells with this promotion, not screwing them.
Sad. They just lost me as a customer. And from the company that ripped off the Glock it's really sad.
So if I buy a car and put different wheels on it, the car company can try and sue the wheel company?
FYI, SSVI pulled their original post on this, they say, out of respect for APEX, who they say, along with Brownells are attempting to sort this out.
How did S&W rip Glock off? Because they made a polymer striker fired gun after seeing Glock's?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Wow, SW can get bent over this.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
How did S&W rip Glock off? Because they made a polymer striker fired gun after seeing Glock's?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yea, pretty much. The Sigma. It's discussed in the book, Glock: The Rise of America's Gun. They [S&W] got sued by Glock and lost, so they had to pay Glock royalties on every Sigma they made... or something to that effect. It's been a while since I read the book.
crosseyedshooter
12-22-15, 18:41
I dunno. The way I read the letter is just Smith & Wesson doesn't want their trademarked name and logos on an item that isn't their design. All Apex/Brownell's has to do is remove Smith & Wesson and M&P logos from the advertising and the pistol itself.
Yea, pretty much. The Sigma. It's discussed in the book, Glock: The Rise of America's Gun. They [S&W] got sued by Glock and lost, so they had to pay Glock royalties on every Sigma they made... or something to that effect. It's been a while since I read the book.
I believe they had to pay royalties and make alterations to the pistol. May have ended up added parts that did dick all. At least that is what I am remembering since a friend had one before upgrading to Sig and Glock. I think there were added springs in the trigger assembly that didn't do much more than add pull weight and that removing them didn't do anything other than allow for a lighter trigger pull? I am not certain since he removed the springs, ran a couple hundred rounds through it, then bought a MK25 and sold the Sigma and that has been literally years ago now. But, yes, calling the Sigma a copy of a Glock isn't out of line considering what happened. I know some who bought Sigma's when they came out because they thought they would be collector's pieces since they fully expected Glock to sure Smith into the ground over it.
Fun tidbits of gun history.
I dunno. The way I read the letter is just Smith & Wesson doesn't want their trademarked name and logos on an item that they isn't their design. All Apex/Brownell's has to do is not use Smith & Wesson or M&P logos in the advertising.
So now if your Colt 1911 goes to Novak's or another smith for mods, they must remove the Colt logos? The whole thing is ridiculous in my opinion and could set a bad precedent.
cutter_spc
12-22-15, 18:50
If we do not hear from you by January 5, 2015, Smith & Wesson will pursue its rights and remedies to the fullest extent permitted by law without further notice to you.
Read more: http://www.recoilweb.com/sw-sends-cease-and-desist-letter-to-custom-gunsmiths-80507.html#ixzz3v6GLABuD
I know another poster posted this, but I just want to make sure every one sees this, hard to believe they would send something out like this with such a huge error.
Not defending smith, but if you were going to use their product to promote your business then you might want to ask permission.
anachronism
12-22-15, 18:52
How did S&W rip Glock off? Because they made a polymer striker fired gun after seeing Glock's?
No. S&W actually copied patented key features of the Glocks, and Glock sued them for it, and S&W had to change their design, and had to pay a fee to Glock for every Stigma they manufactured. Funny thing: S&W did such a poor job of their design. that the guns were plagued with serious issues. The guns were subsequently "improved" a number of times, and the guns gained such a bad reputation that their values dropped sharply. I had an early "high-line" Sigma in the then-new 40 S&W caliber. My gun originally cost around $400.00 IIRC. I traded it in less than a year towards a Beretta, and about a week after I traded, the bottom dropped out on the Sigmas. New guns sat on the shelf unsold forever. The dealer I traded mine to finally sold it in their "going out of business" sale three years later. It was in the display marked "make offer" starting out at $150.00 or so.
Let's see. Sigma, Sigma VE (Value Edition), then SVE, then the GVE, then the "SD" series that were no longer marked as Stigma, er Sigma. It seems like there were others, but I can't remember all of S&Ws shenanigans. This last episode tears it. No more S&W for me.
S&W should look at how big manufacturers and boutique shops can both benefit. Bruce Gray and Sig are examples of how it's done right.
I was on the fence with S&W after they sent the troopers here a lot of quality control nightmares. Now S&W can go pound sand. I wont be buying any of their products and I will whole heartily support Brownells.
S&W has been pushing their own Performance Center guns pretty hard. I suspect that has something to do with it, not wanting to lose business to 3rd party groups.
You sure don't see Glock, HK (because they hate us) or Sig doing the same.
The Facebook page is exploding in hate right now. It's actually pretty funny.
It wouldn't surprise me if this was really part of it. Think of the business model: Release a marginally reliable product where only a small percentage of consumers will notice the deficiencies in design, then charge them to correct factory errors. Given the C&D, it looks like they don't want others stomping all over their turf.
"In some cases it might even be necessary to remove [a trademark], for example when the product has been adapted or modified by a third party."
http://www.iusmentis.com/trademarks/crashcourse/limitations/
If they removed the logos as the letter mentioned, they would be fine. Also if it isn't for sale, they should be fine.
el_chingoton13
12-22-15, 19:37
The arf thread on this is entertaining.
At least I now know better than to buy that PRO I've been wanting... Sounds like it's CZ time.
crosseyedshooter
12-22-15, 19:49
So now if your Colt 1911 goes to Novak's or another smith for mods, they must remove the Colt logos? The whole thing is ridiculous in my opinion and could set a bad precedent.
My example would be a smith couldn't modify the Colt 1911 and then advertise it as a "Colt Super Duper 1911" if "Colt" and "1911" happen to be trademarks of Colt. They could advertise a "Super Duper" modification package for "Colt 1911" which wouldn't be advertising a new product using existing trademarks. It's all just jumping through legal hoops, but laws are laws and there are very specific usage of trademarks that aren't allowed. It seems Apex/Brownell's didn't advertise in a way to avoid the trademark laws, such as advertising a "Smith & Wesson M&P" pistol with XYZ upgrades. They advertised an "M&P Dream Gun" which uses the M&P trademark but the product does not exist as a Smith & Wesson product.
Anyway, I really hope this doesn't hurt the firearms industry and innovation by companies such as Apex. They single-handedly made M&P a viable competitor in the market with their sear/trigger upgrades.
el_chingoton13
12-22-15, 19:57
First 1911 maker on the top of my head (heirloom precision) markets a "Signature Grade Custom Colt Commercial Government Model" on the front page. Same?
My example would be a smith couldn't modify the Colt 1911 and then advertise it as a "Colt Super Duper 1911" if "Colt" and "1911" happen to be trademarks of Colt. They could advertise a "Super Duper" modification package for "Colt 1911" which wouldn't be advertising a new product using existing trademarks. It's all just jumping through legal hoops, but laws are laws and there are very specific usage of trademarks that aren't allowed. It seems Apex/Brownell's didn't advertise in a way to avoid the trademark laws, such as advertising a "Smith & Wesson M&P" pistol with XYZ upgrades. They advertised an "M&P Dream Gun" which uses the M&P trademark but the product does not exist as a Smith & Wesson product.
Anyway, I really hope this doesn't hurt the firearms industry and innovation by companies such as Apex. They single-handedly made M&P a viable competitor in the market with their sear/trigger upgrades.
This is exactly what I was thinking just spelled out much better.
PatrioticDisorder
12-22-15, 20:06
This has to be the worst move a gun company ever made. Without a doubt they just pissed off a bunch of loyal S&W customers and potential customers.
I wonder if people are going to start panic buying Apex parts...:rolleyes:
FlyingHunter
12-22-15, 20:12
They lost me years ago when my new 686 had a cylinder timing issue. I sent it in for service and they refused the warranty repair it because I had "modified" my gun. The modification you ask...after market sights. Upon return, I sold it to local gunsmith and I've never owned a Smith since. Never will.
My example would be a smith couldn't modify the Colt 1911 and then advertise it as a "Colt Super Duper 1911" if "Colt" and "1911" happen to be trademarks of Colt. They could advertise a "Super Duper" modification package for "Colt 1911" which wouldn't be advertising a new product using existing trademarks. It's all just jumping through legal hoops, but laws are laws and there are very specific usage of trademarks that aren't allowed. It seems Apex/Brownell's didn't advertise in a way to avoid the trademark laws, such as advertising a "Smith & Wesson M&P" pistol with XYZ upgrades. They advertised an "M&P Dream Gun" which uses the M&P trademark but the product does not exist as a Smith & Wesson product.
Anyway, I really hope this doesn't hurt the firearms industry and innovation by companies such as Apex. They single-handedly made M&P a viable competitor in the market with their sear/trigger upgrades.
I think this has already been mentioned, but isn't the issue only valid if the gun is to be sold, which from my understanding the gun that caused the hoopla isn't going to be, it is in effect a demo gun, a gun to show what can be done? Otherwise couldn't someone taking basically any gun and modifying it to be something "super great" and then posting pics and details fall into the same trap? "Oh, you have our trademark on your gun that you modified and you showed others now we sue you?" It just doesn't make sense since you are shooting yourself in the foot more than anything since it can be pretty well shown that guns with rich aftermarket sources thrive more than guns without them.
For Smith's sake I hope they come out and say it was some mid level accountant's idea following the corporate Christmas party where everyone was hammered and no one was thinking straight and use that to explain the fvck up in the date and wash their hands of it and offer to buy Apex a keg.
I suspect (no evidence, just I think) they make most of their coin in the M&P line off LE agency contracts and not the civilian market. It's a guess. But I'm certainly in the minority here in saying that this in no way turns me off their product. I'm not in the market but I'm also not hanging a rope from a thick branch for S&W.
"It has recently come to Smith & Wesson’s attention that you have developed and are promoting for sale an “M&P Dream Gun,” (the “Infringing Product”)."
I'm pretty sure S&W overlooked the part that it wasn't for sale. I know I did.
Tactfully, S&W should have contacted the parties in a non-legal manner first to figure out what was going on before slapping them with a C&D.
Someday I'd love to see someone just write back "No" or "Go **** yourself"
Over on Lightfighters Pat Rogers said the law firm S&W uses, did all on their own.. Without consulting the company, in advance...OOOOPS... Tomorrow should be interesting..
Over on Lightfighters Pat Rogers said the law firm S&W uses, did all on their own.. Without consulting the company, in advance...OOOOPS... Tomorrow should be interesting..
If this is the case, damage has already been done. There is a lot of activity at our local gun shops due to both Christmas shoppers and people who are concerned about a repeat of the San Bernandino attack. Damage control will be the order of the day for Smith & Wesson at a time when a lot of people are making firearm purchases.
Over on Lightfighters Pat Rogers said the law firm S&W uses, did all on their own.. Without consulting the company, in advance...OOOOPS... Tomorrow should be interesting..
Wow. Can the client sue their own representation for damages because that is what they just did to Smith, they hurt them, and if this is the case it ain't truly Smith's fault but that won't matter since the **** up is on page 1, the it was just an idiot lawyer jumping the gun is on page 14 under an add for hemorrhoid cream. Also, this reiterates my assumption of a drunken action after a Christmas party. It really does.
MountainRaven
12-22-15, 21:26
Wow. Can the client sue their own representation for damages because that is what they just did to Smith, they hurt them, and if this is the case it ain't truly Smith's fault but that won't matter since the **** up is on page 1, the it was just an idiot lawyer jumping the gun is on page 14 under an add for hemorrhoid cream. Also, this reiterates my assumption of a drunken action after a Christmas party. It really does.
There is a thing called, "legal malpractice," and it's my understanding that many attorneys carry insurance for it.
kantstudien
12-22-15, 22:06
Meh, "plausible deniability." S&W can "save face" and blame the scumbag attorneys.
jackblack73
12-22-15, 22:24
I can't imagine a firm sending out letters like this without speaking to their client.
Companies pay the law firms to enforce trademark dilution, etc. I'm sure that's what the firm thought they were protecting.
But this is just ignorant of basic marketing... High end customizations and associated publicity help sales, not hurt. Imagine a car mfg telling a well known customizer like Foose to cease and desist... Would never happen.
I've been off S&W for some time based on my experiences a while back and more recently how they treated my brother on a cracked frame on a lightly used 9mm.
I know some folks like them, but this will hurt civvy sales and put them back to competing for LEO sales as main market. The revolvers are so expensive now that market is shrinking.
Disappointed, but not surprised. I hate to see a once respected US mfg let lawyers override good sense
In 7 pages (so far) on ar15dotcom, no one picked up on the "deadline" in the C&D letter as January 5, 2015. And half of them still think the modified gun is for sale.
I'll be sure to make my first stop at Brownells booth :)
brushy bill
12-22-15, 22:52
I have purchased my last S&W. I hated them for the 1994 2nd Amendment assassination attempt & similar shenanigans, but it was a British Company then (Tompkins if memory serves) & I eventually softened up & gave them support again. Will not fool me thrice. Will look for trades on the S&Ws I have and accessories/parts...some of which were EDC. Can't see how this benefits S&W, but it is their business model so we'll see (trademark dilution not withstanding). Hopefully astute purchasers will boycott & they will not need to request return of their firearms (one of the demands), because they will be able to retain all they produce.
Companies pay the law firms to enforce trademark dilution, etc. I'm sure that's what the firm thought they were protecting.
^This
No law firm worth a nickel wants to become the ones that lets their client become the Xerox trademark of the 21st-century.
That said, poor form a Smith & Wesson, poor form.
Sent from 80ms in the future
Jimmy
It is possible the law firm over stepped their bounds on this one and it is possible S&W didn't know about it.
When Mad Magazine released its spoof on Star Wars, the law firm representing Lucas Arts sent Mad a strongly worded cease & desist order and threatened legal action. Mad Magazine responded by sending the law firm a copy of a letter written by George Lucas himself, telling Mad Magazine how much he enjoyed the spoof. The law firm dropped the whole matter.
At this point, it's best to wait & see how it shakes out. It's possible the law firm slipped its leash on this one and that S&W will call them off
This is exactly what will happen.
Damage Control is getting to work the Christmas holiday pro bono...:)
It is possible the law firm over stepped their bounds on this one and it is possible S&W didn't know about it.
When Mad Magazine released its spoof on Star Wars, the law firm representing Lucas Arts sent Mad a strongly worded cease & desist order and threatened legal action. Mad Magazine responded by sending the law firm a copy of a letter written by George Lucas himself, telling Mad Magazine how much he enjoyed the spoof. The law firm dropped the whole matter.
At this point, it's best to wait & see how it shakes out. It's possible the law firm slipped its leash on this one and that S&W will call them off
Sorry S&W, we were just helping you sell guns that you normally wouldn't sell because of the crap parts you choose to put in, and not doing anything about it.
I guess S&W just dug their grave on this one.
I've been considering a new polymer .45acp and recently had a chance to try am M&P .45 with APEX parts including the flat faced trigger. I liked it enough that I started shopping for a pistol. Guess I'll shop for something else...
^This
No law firm worth a nickel wants to become the ones that lets their client become the Xerox trademark of the 21st-century.
Yep. Law firms do what they're hired to do, they aren't PR. I see no reason to get pissed at S&W for the mistake.
Sounds like someone is trying to make a name for themselves either at S&W or at said law firm and they did not anticipate the general public backlash. Even IF S&W "did not know" they will still be the ones dealing with this.
Wonder if HK hired the law firm to send this letter? Help take the heat off them over the recent VP9 video LOL
The general public will likely never even notice, but those who are more dialed in are all over it. This is the age of social media, and some of those who got the letters have a huge social media presence, and this thing went viral very quickly last night.
Seems a company already facing potential legal issues (http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/second-amendment-2/obama-targets-gun-maker-smith-and-wesson-with-bogus-sec-charge) would be quick to put this to rest by issuing a response, S&W are sure taking their sweet time with an official response. My concern is not so much with S&W (as I gave up on them a few years ago) but with a trend in the industry like transpired in the auto industry where manufacturers went after repair shops (http://www.autoblog.com/2015/04/20/automakers-gearheads-car-repairs/). As of 8AM (est) S&W has not responded to the outrage on their social media page on FB which included people like Pat Rogers.
I take it this is real? I was reading more about this. It says the companies are supposed to stop by January 5, 2015, it is kind of late, or the law firm are a bunch if idiots, because they did not have someone proof it and put down 2016. I do not think this is a good law firm and S&W need to find a new firm.
I tend to think the 2015 was a error but after reading the responses from some of these companies and then to see someone like Pat chime it I tend to believe these letters were in fact real. Silence sometimes is deafening and you would think that such a rumor would be squashed quickly. Guess we will wait and see.
el_chingoton13
12-23-15, 08:54
From S&W's president on Instagram...
“I would like to clarify that we fully support the Brownells Dream Guns® Project and we appreciate that it showcases the many ways in which our customers – loyal fans of our M&P brand – can choose to customize their M&P firearms. Our decision to contact the companies that worked on the project was intended to protect the trademarks that support the M&P brand. When a product bears the Smith & Wesson and M&P trademarks and is purchased new with our lifetime service policy, we want to be sure that the consumer knows it has passed our demanding quality standards. In our efforts to protect that promise and to preserve the brand that we and our customers cherish, we did not fully understand the intent of the Dream Guns® Project and we overlooked the opportunity to convey our enthusiasm for the creativity and innovation that Brownells and all of the companies involved have demonstrated. We look forward to seeing the firearm on display at the upcoming SHOT Show in January and at the NRA in May.”
There you have it, all is well. Y'all can take your M&P off the for sale block.
What? That sure took all the drama away.
Some of you need to understand how much scrutiny goes into nearly everything the president of a company states publicly and adjust your expectations accordingly.
That was a purty darn fast response.
I did not see any evidence of any exacting standards in my brief flirtation with a 9mm M&P. If there were Apex would not be what it is.
Even after the S&W backpedal, the idiots on arfcom are blaming the whole thing on BDL and SSVi, calling them liars, etc.
Even after the S&W backpedal, the idiots on arfcom are blaming the whole thing on BDL and SSVi, calling them liars, etc.
Like you said, "the idiots on arfcom", they can't read nor comprehend. That's why they're idiots.
Damage is done. It speaks loudly of a company that would rather get lawyers involved vs. picking up the telephone and finding out about said project and to then allow the flames to be fanned for nearly 24hrs before backtracking. Guess it was not the lawyers fault but a decision made by S&W.
Like you said, "the idiots on arfcom", they can't read nor comprehend. That's why they're idiots.
Truly amazing....even the mods. S&W deserves props, they posted their statement in the thread over there.
Demanding quality standards??? They were able to say that with a straight face??? I agree, the damage has been done and if it has gotten this much traction so quickly. S&W is good for stepping on their tongue then sticking their foot in their mouth to try and fix it. I'll stick with owning good old S&W products.
Demanding quality standards??? They were able to say that with a straight face??? I agree, the damage has been done and if it has gotten this much traction so quickly. S&W is good for stepping on their tongue then sticking their foot in their mouth to try and fix it. I'll stick with owning good old S&W products.
Yup, pretty much the same here...The Mod 69 I bought has been a decent little handgun, But when you put side by side with either my older Pre-lock 629, or my 586, It's pretty clear which ones have higher build quality, All you have to do is pull the DA trigger to feel the difference.. There was a time when S&W took a little pride in their work, And, it showed, The fit, finish, trigger pulls, all excellent. now, it seems, it's a "just stamp'em out and ship" mentality.....
That's the mentality of all manufacturing today. Make it cheap and stack it deep. Sell them another one when it breaks. Everything is meant to last a short period of time and then it is to be replaced.
Yup, pretty much the same here...The Mod 69 I bought has been a decent little handgun, But when you put side by side with either my older Pre-lock 629, or my 586, It's pretty clear which ones have higher build quality, All you have to do is pull the DA trigger to feel the difference.. There was a time when S&W took a little pride in their work, And, it showed, The fit, finish, trigger pulls, all excellent. now, it seems, it's a "just stamp'em out and ship" mentality.....
Thirty years ago if you bad mouthed S&W or Remington to an employee of those companies you would have probably received a punch in the face for your troubles. Today not so much. Back then Smith and Wesson and Remington existed to make firearms, today they exist to provide an income streams for their shareholders. If the S&W management team thought they could reconfigure the factory to make refrigerators at a greater profit, they would in a heart beat.
The sad truth is, it is no longer about pride in a product, it's about stock dividends and making a whole bunch of money for upper management. The CEO's and Presidents are just like professional ballplayers, they talk about commitment to excellence and the team...until another team offers them more money, then they are selling that same spiel down the street.
We asked for it, we got it.
Here is what Randy Lee of Apex posted on their Facebook page, class acts all around from Apex to Smith and Wesson's CEO/President:
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 — with Matt Theiss, Scott Folk, Randy Lee, Mark Graham and Frank N Miramontes.
Here is what Randy Lee of Apex posted on their Facebook page,
.....
Randy is always a stand up guy and well regarded for all the excellent products he's produced that's - without a doubt- a large part of M&P line of pistols success. Credit where it's due to S&W however for owning up to what appears a mistake/miscommunication and it appears some good people who are also gun guys got it figured out without additional drama and BS.
Here is what Randy Lee of Apex posted on their Facebook page, class acts all around .....
Well there you go, fck S&W and their strong arm tactics. Sounds like they at the least need new representation as it appears like a micro amount of investigative work would have revealed it was a "one off".
As an aside, Blowndeadline's work is stunning.
Well there you go, fck S&W and their strong arm tactics. Sounds like they at the least need new representation as it appears like a micro amount of investigative work would have revealed it was a "one off".
As an aside, Blowndeadline's work is stunning.
I dont understand how you get "strong arm tactics" from what you quoted. Sounds like you have a personal vendetta against S&W.
Gents, there is no need to quote the entire letter.
Thanks.
I dont understand how you get "strong arm tactics" from what you quoted. Sounds like you have a personal vendetta against S&W.
These intellectual property and safety and quality concerns are extremely serious and demand your immediate attention. Accordingly, we demand that you:
1. Confirm in writing that neither you nor any third party will display the Infringing Product, or any similar product, at the 2016 SHOT Show or make any other commercial display or promotion of such Infringing Product;
2. Cease the sale of any firearm modified by you or any other third party that bears any Smith & Wesson trademark, including, but not limited to the S&W® Marks or the M&P® Marks;
and
3. Turn over to Smith & Wesson your inventory of the Infringing Product, or any Smith & Wesson product modified by you in the first instance that bears any mark owned by Smith & Wesson.
If we do not hear from you by January 5, 2015, Smith & Wesson will pursue its rights and remedies to the fullest extent permitted by law without further notice to you.
Read more: http://www.recoilweb.com/sw-sends-cease-and-desist-letter-to-custom-gunsmiths-80507.html#ixzz3vCUf6eQX
Give us our guns back sounds like strong arming to me.
Sounds like you and I differ in opinion.
MERRY CHRISTMAS
SeriousStudent
12-23-15, 20:39
I'm not surprised to read Randy Lee's statement. He's always been a class act, and a great guy. I have Apex parts in a half-dozen guns, and am about to order one of their barrels. And Brownell's has had my business for as long as I can remember, and will continue to get my money.
I am glad to read that the president of S&W reached out personally to those folks, and hope that Apex and Brownell's are satisfied with the results.
Time to order some more parts from both of those companies. :cool:
PatrioticDisorder
12-23-15, 21:20
I'm not surprised to read Randy Lee's statement. He's always been a class act, and a great guy. I have Apex parts in a half-dozen guns, and am about to order one of their barrels. And Brownell's has had my business for as long as I can remember, and will continue to get my money.
I am glad to read that the president of S&W reached out personally to those folks, and hope that Apex and Brownell's are satisfied with the results.
Time to order some more parts from both of those companies. :cool:
Randy is awesome, the worst part about this is Smith screwed up and at the end of the day not many people will feel sympathy if their bottom line is harmed. However, if M&P sales tank so will Apex sales as their triggers are virtually a requirement for the M&P. It would be a damn ironic shame to see Apex get hurt because of S&W stupidity attacking them.
These intellectual property and safety and quality concerns are extremely serious and demand your immediate attention. Accordingly, we demand that you:
1. Confirm in writing that neither you nor any third party will display the Infringing Product, or any similar product, at the 2016 SHOT Show or make any other commercial display or promotion of such Infringing Product;
2. Cease the sale of any firearm modified by you or any other third party that bears any Smith & Wesson trademark, including, but not limited to the S&W® Marks or the M&P® Marks;
and
3. Turn over to Smith & Wesson your inventory of the Infringing Product, or any Smith & Wesson product modified by you in the first instance that bears any mark owned by Smith & Wesson.
If we do not hear from you by January 5, 2015, Smith & Wesson will pursue its rights and remedies to the fullest extent permitted by law without further notice to you.
Read more: http://www.recoilweb.com/sw-sends-cease-and-desist-letter-to-custom-gunsmiths-80507.html#ixzz3vCUf6eQX
Give us our guns back sounds like strong arming to me.
Sounds like you and I differ in opinion.
MERRY CHRISTMAS
Did you not read the entire thread, or just not understand what has happened since the op?
Back to real-time, all parties involved handled it well, cause it could have went south real quick.
Ha! It's one thing to shoot one's self in the foot. It's altogether something else to aim.
Dumbasses...
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
Did you not read the entire thread, or just not understand what has happened since the op?
.
He read the pertinent posts, including the comments by Randy Lee. He is entitled to his own interpretation of the event.
Slvr Surfr
12-23-15, 22:03
I for one can understand the F-Up on S&W's part. The company is run and managed by humans. It is also legally represented by humans that obviously failed to communicate before sending that letter. I will continue to purchase S&W guns as needed, especially after they admitted to making a mistake with that letter. S&W has never let me down with any of their products that I have owned, especially when needing repairs. There CS is top notch and has always left me happy.
I will also continue to support Brownells and APEX Tactical because they are flat out awesome.
I suspect (no evidence, just I think) they make most of their coin in the M&P line off LE agency contracts and not the civilian market. It's a guess. But I'm certainly in the minority here in saying that this in no way turns me off their product. I'm not in the market but I'm also not hanging a rope from a thick branch for S&W.
Unlikely. Saw something on this recently and combined LE/MIL contracts were something like 35-40% of all US firearms sales. One of the Glock annuals in the mid to late 90's(when police were switching over to Glocks by the load) mentioned government sales were 20% of their business.
Well, I probably won't be buying anything from these idiots anytime soon.
Too bad, I've been itching for a 340PD
I don't get what the big deal is. They made a mistake, owned up to it, and everything seems fine. It's like some of you guys are just searching for reasons to hate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So true.You nailed it
Thirty years ago if you bad mouthed S&W or Remington to an employee of those companies you would have probably received a punch in the face for your troubles. Today not so much. Back then Smith and Wesson and Remington existed to make firearms, today they exist to provide an income streams for their shareholders. If the S&W management team thought they could reconfigure the factory to make refrigerators at a greater profit, they would in a heart beat.
The sad truth is, it is no longer about pride in a product, it's about stock dividends and making a whole bunch of money for upper management. The CEO's and Presidents are just like professional ballplayers, they talk about commitment to excellence and the team...until another team offers them more money, then they are selling that same spiel down the street.
We asked for it, we got it.
Eurodriver
12-24-15, 00:12
revised opinion after doing more research
brushy bill
12-24-15, 00:32
It's like some of you guys are just searching for reasons to hate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Don't have to search for reasons, they serve them up in spades. Here are a few: 2000 contrivance with Slick Willy = forced integral lock (which may render your weapon useless when most needed) on consumers even if they hate it, put out a pistol with enough fleas to make a circus, infringe on Glock's patents & then have the audacity to demand aftermarket providers who 'fix' your product (that you presumably could & certainly should fix on you own, but could not be assed to fix ) turn over all said modified firearms, realize you went full retard, issue a non-apology, then expect no one to notice you are acting like an ass hat. Folks try to forgive S&W over and over and yet they give you reasons to question your willingness to do so. I didn't see where they owned up to anything...just more subterfuge & PC comments. Particularly indicators that leadership didn't know. Leadership is responsible for everything, full stop. Own it. I saw a weak answer from another forum of 'but these aren't the same guys as in 2000'. I nearly choked when I read that and an "SME" posting, "That's like blaming Obama for stuff FDR did because they both held the same office."...Nope, not same office...same party and same party line. Of course this is just my humble opinion. YMMV.
I don't get what the big deal is. They made a mistake, owned up to it, and everything seems fine. It's like some of you guys are just searching for reasons to hate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's all like, we should forgive people who apologize for their mistakes, especially if the people they "hurt" didn't actually get hurt. But if a company makes a mistake? Nope, never buying another product from them ever again. I hope none of you use Apple, Samsung, or Microsoft's products, they're at least a hundred times more aggressive in protecting their intellectual property than S&W.
And you'd think with the relationship between Apex, Brownells, and others with S&W, they'd actually call them up to talk instead of just posting letters like that online... it's almost as if S&W and Brownells planned this for the huge publicity they'd get. I mean they couldn't have paid for better advertisement for the Dream Gun project.
Did you not read the entire thread, or just not understand what has happened since the op?
Publicly traded company goes after one man shop in business for less than a year.
To Smith and Wesson it was just "business". To those small business owners on the receiving end of the legal arm of a 1.2 billion company it was personal.
So they said "oops we're sorry we made a mistake", but that doesn't absolve their inherent dumbassery in the handling of a situation which was easily preventable.
I don't get what the big deal is. They made a mistake, owned up to it, and everything seems fine. It's like some of you guys are just searching for reasons to hate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You know that's how it is in the gun world. If certain companies screw up, there's a slew of people out there ready to pounce. It's most often the fans (more accurately, 'trolls') of an opposing brand that are the most vocal about it. Why they feel they have to push their loudmouth rhetoric on others when nobody cares and it only makes themselves look stupid, I'll never know. I'm sure you can think of some other examples. ;)
Eurodriver
12-24-15, 09:03
It's most often fans of an opposing brand that are the most vocal about it. I'm sure you can think of some other examples. ;)
That'd be me. S&W M&Ps are a joke. It's pathetic that if APEX had to C&D, M&P sales would tank. I can think of no other mainstream product that absolutely requires modifications (to a critical component no less) in order to be mediocre. Of course, no one expects everything to be to their liking out of the box. There is always a trade off between price and performance, but a factory "Glock killer" pistol should at least be serviceable. That Grant offers like 652 upgrades to a NIB M&P (yet offering only "sights" for Glocks) is telling...
Apex Tactical DCAEK:
Polish Internals:
AEK Trigger:
Sights:
Apex Tactical FSS:
Storm Lake Fitted Barrel (non-threaded):
Storm Lake Fitted Barrel (Threaded):
So that M&P which is "less expense than a Glock and more reliable" now costs $1,185? I'd hope to God it would be for that much! Even guys buying 70 year old Nagant revolvers don't have to swap that many parts out to outshoot a damn Glock.
The problem isn't with folks "ready to pounce" on S&W. It's exactly the opposite. The problem are idiots who keep buying subpar products only to spend hundreds getting them to "work" and let the company get away with manufacturing bullshit.
S&W realized they ****ed up because the execs did homework and knew if APEX went down their entire M&P line was toast. It's easier to call off the attorney witch hunt than actually make a better pistol...
Publicly traded company goes after one man shop in business for less than a year.
To Smith and Wesson it was just "business". To those small business owners on the receiving end of the legal arm of a 1.2 billion company it was personal.
So they said "oops we're sorry we made a mistake", but that doesn't absolve their inherent dumbassery in the handling of a situation which was easily preventable.
Fair enough. I get where your coming from.
... it's almost as if S&W and Brownells planned this for the huge publicity they'd get. I mean they couldn't have paid for better advertisement for the Dream Gun project.
This is kinda what I am thinking, but Brownells probably isn't the one that needs the extra exposure. I also believe that more than a few people are so disappointed with S&W's execution of the M&P pistol line, that they fully exploit every opportunity to express that disappointment with S&W management.
Publicly traded company goes after one man shop in business for less than a year.
To Smith and Wesson it was just "business". To those small business owners on the receiving end of the legal arm of a 1.2 billion company it was personal.
So they said "oops we're sorry we made a mistake", but that doesn't absolve their inherent dumbassery in the handling of a situation which was easily preventable.
This is the key... They pay lawyers to do this, and err on the side of "strike first".
This is the same mindset that leads to stupid YouTube and website takedowns that break little guys even if ultimately proven to be noninfringing.
Sorry, if the best anyone can say is "Apple does it too", then S&W is not the kind of company I want to support.
If a few lawyers got fired, then I'd be more sympathetic. They apologized for the incident, not the overzealous policy.
Imagine if Chip Foose was C&D'd every time he chose a camaro/mustang/challenger to customize.
It's funny how threads will get locked after a few posts to uphold m4c standards but people don't learn. Then childish and presumptive comments like here continue ad nauseum. It's embarrassing.
That Grant offers like 652 upgrades to a NIB M&P (yet offering only "sights" for Glocks) is telling...
He also offers like 1000 upgrades for an AR-15 but only 2 upgrades for an AK (Magpul Zhukov stock and ALG trigger)...
Did we miss the part where Apex was satisfied with how S&W handled the situation and has since moved on?
echo5whiskey
12-24-15, 20:39
Did we miss the part where Apex was satisfied with how S&W handled the situation and has since moved on?
Apparently. If all parties involved are happy with the outcome, I don't see why it's still a big deal.
This is more reasonable... they are admitting the process was a problem and are working to correct it.
Update: I reached out to Smith & Wesson’s Liz Sharp, Vice President of Investor Relations, in order to get a better idea of precisely who was responsible for the letters going out. Here is her reply.
Thank you for your inquiry, Bob. First and foremost, we at Smith & Wesson take full responsibility for the letters that were sent and we apologize. We value our customers, our peers within the industry, and our reputation. The letters originated at a lower level within our organization in an attempt to protect our brand. However, the letters were clearly a mistake and we are taking the necessary steps to insure that this type of mistake does not occur again and that we have better oversight in the future. I’d like to share that when our President and CEO, James Debney, was made aware of the situation, he immediately got on the phone with Pete Brownell and also with Matt Buckingham, both of Brownells, to explain what had occurred and to apologize. They were both very understanding and we are pleased that our relationship with them remains strong. James is now in the process of reaching out to each of the recipients of the letter to extend a personal apology.
From an update added to: http://bearingarms.com/smith-wesson-fully-understand-dream-gun-project-apologizes/
anachronism
12-24-15, 22:27
If this were the first time S&W engaged is jackassery, or even the second time, it would be easy enough to shake this off. Their followups do not reverse the original statements, which appeared to me to demand any S&W product that has been even slightly modified is to be returned to S&W. I'm glad that S&W seems to be trying to amend the letter situation, but I also see S&W as considering any firearm marked with their logo to be their property.
Anyway, I may reconsider my newfound removal of S&W from my purchase list. I'm guessing that a lot of S&Ws change of heart came from consumer outrage. Remember, S&W went through layoffs during the Clinton Presidency (2000) when consumers became outraged over S&Ws agreements with the U.S. Government to restrict the availability of their products to the public through a rather strongarm "Code of Conduct", and other concessions. Distributors, Dealers, and the general public launched a boycott that forced S&Ws owners (Tomkins PLC) to sell the company at a huge loss. There have been other issues as well, but this one nearly ended S&W.
Their followups do not reverse the original statements, which appeared to me to demand any S&W product that has been even slightly modified is to be returned to S&W.
That's not what it says. Modified, using their trademark and name, and most importantly, for commercial sale.
That's a completely legitimate and reasonable stance, because selling a modified product using their name can adversely impact their perceived quality if it catastrophically fails or even just jams on a regular basis, regardless if said modifications voided the warranty.
Btw, you should read the license agreements of software you buy sometime. You'll realize how little you actually own.
Eurodriver
12-25-15, 09:28
He also offers like 1000 upgrades for an AR-15 but only 2 upgrades for an AK (Magpul Zhukov stock and ALG trigger)...
You stop interfering in my M&P bashing with logic right this instant.
Did we miss the part where Apex was satisfied with how S&W handled the situation and has since moved on?
From the comments on this 11 page thread, it appears not. Talk about making the proverbial mountain from the molehill. It's a non issue at this point. Those who want to remove S&W from their list of manufacturers to purchase from over this very minor dust up - in which as you point out the offended parties fully satisfied - need to get a life. If S&W had doubled down on their position, would be a totally different matter, but they handled their mistake very well, and it's a non issue. Chit happens. All those who are perfect raise your hand.
el_chingoton13
12-25-15, 13:58
Didn't ATEi and 10-8 put out customized M&Ps for sale a while ago?
So there are companies who desperately want to do away with the first sale doctrine and with massive application of lawyers and court cases its been eroded some.
But first sale doctrine holds that mfgs can only control and enforce conditions of the first sale of a product. But after that they cannot, as long as the second sale is not misrepresented as new.
The mfg can decline to warranty or similar, but they cannot use trademark or similar intellectual property (IP) rules to prohibit resale.
It's clear to anyone that a customized product has:
1- been sold to the customizer
2- has been modified and as such is not "as new"
3- the mfg may chose not to warranty it
This was how the world worked before software and similar IP battles started.
Otherwise you could not ever sell a car, or even an unopened product. Or a modified product, like a pistol with new sights. Or a polished feedramps, whatever. Or even the dealer which adds a wheel, tire package, custom paint, and sells it as the "Baja Special"
Trademark, domain, and patent trolls and lawyers really want to change this. It's not a good thing unless you buy into the idea that a mfg can control subsequent sales, private or reseller.
This is how Microsoft shut down resale of windows cd's. Big media did the same for music cd's. Apple used trademark & patent law to shut down people adding memory to early macs, case moda, etc. Textbook publishers tried (and failed) to kill resell of textbooks.
What SW should have done is contact their dealer/reseller and told the the level of modifications will force them not to warranty. And they will disavow all liability. And make it clear to potential purchasers of the above.
So for a mfg to go after a custom shop/gunsmith like this is particularly slimy, and tells you where their head is at.
If its a concept piece not for resale to demonstrate custom capabilities? Fair use of a purchased item as long as its not misrepresented as an unmodified Smith.
Sold as a customized gun? Fair use, 2nd sale, warranty caveats applied.
The action would have been reasonable if the customizer was misrepresenting as the "new S&W MP Baja Special" and implying it was a SW package.
There is much grey area between these scenarios, and the courts have been making bad precedent which is undermining consumer rights.
You stop interfering in my M&P bashing with logic right this instant.
If you think your foot was bothering your before per your M&P bashing, it's probably a fair wager that doubling-down will bring you even more new levels of 'fun' to contend with... ;)
Joking aside, all the best with getting through that - hopefully it'll all come together once they remove the hardware...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.