Abby's Guide to Vacuum Cleaners
Username Password
Home Discussions Reviews More Guides
Abby’s Guide > Vacuum Cleaners > Discussions > Electrolux -- First Quarter 2008 . . .

Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Search For:
Venson


Joined: Jul 23, 2007
Points: 1900

Electrolux -- First Quarter 2008 . . .
Original Message   Apr 29, 2008 10:31 am
Hi all,

Following is a link to a news article regarding the up and down sides for Electrolux during this year's first quarter.

http://www.centredaily.com/business/technology/story/553091.html

Best,

Venson

Replies: 34 - 43 of 140Next page of topicsPreviousNextNext page of topicsAllView as Outline
CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894

Re: Electrolux -- First Quarter 2008 . . .
Reply #34   May 18, 2008 7:37 pm
Hello DIB:

Thanks for the links and commentary.  Here's my take on the results of the suit based on the information provided and I'm familiar with.

No jury trial, as demanded. 

Settled out of court before arguments given and heard. 

Terms of settlement not disclosed [confidential]. 

In my view, the above is another way of saying both sides got absolutely nothing!  Zip.  And the case for patent infringement by dyson against HOOVER was thrown out. 

If dyson had a case against HOOVER, especially on patent infringement, it would have gone to trial for a jury hearing and a very public award of damages.  IMHO. Why?  That was dyson's previous courses of action in 2 cases involving patent/copyright infringements.  Dyson was awarded pretty hefty sums in those cases and used the money to start and expand its operations.  The cases and awards are very public and widely known in those cases.  Why?  As a deterent for others. 

Not so in the case in question.  It resulted in a no win for dyson.

Carmine D.

This message was modified May 18, 2008 by CarmineD
CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894

Re: Electrolux -- First Quarter 2008 . . .
Reply #35   May 18, 2008 8:01 pm
CarmineD wrote:
DIB:

The case was dismissed and no jury heard it.  Why?  A change in the copy right laws making it more difficult for the aggrieved parties to prevail and win on copy right and patent infringements in the USA courts.  Nothing happened.  Zip.  Thrown out.

Carmine D.



DIB:

Thank you for pointing out the distinction for patent and copy right.  I edited my post to include both.

Carmine D.

HARDSELL


Joined: Aug 22, 2007
Points: 1293

Re: Electrolux -- First Quarter 2008 . . .
Reply #36   May 18, 2008 8:05 pm
CarmineD wrote:
Hello Hardsell:

Trade magazine?  Gag order on settlement?  No, I don't think so.  You must be confused.  Very public and widely known and talked about on other Forums.  It amounted to a big zip for dyson and HOOVER all around.  BTW, the FUSION is a sourced vacuum.  Made for HOOVER, not by HOOVER. 

Carmine D.

Now you are admitting that the above is incorrect.     As I said :   Terms of the settlement were confidential

Hello DIB:

Thanks for the links and commentary.  Here's my take on the results of the suit based on the information provided and I'm familiar with.

No jury trial, as recommended. 

Settled out of court before closing arguments given and heard. 

Terms of settlement not disclosed [confidential]. 

In my view, the above is another way of saying both sides got absolutely nothing!  Zip.  And the case for patent infringement by dyson against HOOVER was thrown out. 

If dyson had a case against HOOVER, especially on patent infringement, it would have gone to trial for a jury hearing and a very public award of damages.  IMHO. Why?  That was dyson's previous courses of action in 2 cases involving patent/copyright infringements.  Dyson was awarded pretty hefty sums in those cases and used the money to start and expand its operations.  The cases and awards are very public and widely known in those cases.  Why?  As a deterent for others. 

Not so in the case in question.  It resulted in a no win for dyson.

Carmine D.



Your earlier view was that I was confused and that everyone knew the answer.  Your view as to both sides getting nothing is worthless..

CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894

Re: Electrolux -- First Quarter 2008 . . .
Reply #37   May 18, 2008 8:08 pm
HS:

Even a blind groundhog finds a acorn now and then.  Congrats on your acorn.

Still a big zip for dyson.  Didn't get a penny.

Carmine D.

HARDSELL


Joined: Aug 22, 2007
Points: 1293

Re: Electrolux -- First Quarter 2008 . . .
Reply #38   May 18, 2008 8:09 pm
CarmineD wrote:
HS:

Even a blind groundhog finds a acorn now and then.  Congrats on your acorn.

Still a big zip for dyson.  Didn't get a penny.

Carmine D.



They still broke the hoover thieves.
CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894

Re: Electrolux -- First Quarter 2008 . . .
Reply #39   May 18, 2008 8:16 pm
HARDSELL wrote:
They still broke the hoover thieves.

Sorry, I disagree with you and others  Nothing lost, nothing gained.  HOOVER called dyson's bluff on the lawsuit and dyson caved.  No jury trial.   Dyson could have demanded the jury trial and asked for monetary damages instead of settling.  Dyson had the best legal team money could buy.  Dyson settled because it knew [its lawyers knew] the suit was a frivolous and dyson would lose.

Carmine

This message was modified May 18, 2008 by CarmineD
HARDSELL


Joined: Aug 22, 2007
Points: 1293

Re: Electrolux -- First Quarter 2008 . . .
Reply #40   May 18, 2008 9:02 pm
CarmineD wrote:
Sorry, I disagree with you and others  Nothing lost, nothing gained.  HOOVER called dyson's bluff on the lawsuit and dyson caved.  No jury trial.   Dyson could have demanded the jury trial and asked for monetary damages instead of settling.  Dyson had the best legal team money could buy.  Dyson settled because it knew [its lawyers knew] the suit was a frivolous and dyson would lose.

Carmine



Terms of the settlement were confidential

Read  above.  You have no idea what the settlement was.  Prior to today you did not know that the settlement was confidential.  Another example of why no one takes your advice.

This message was modified May 18, 2008 by HARDSELL
CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894

Re: Electrolux -- First Quarter 2008 . . .
Reply #41   May 19, 2008 7:28 am
HARDSELL wrote:
Terms of the settlement were confidential

Read  above.  You have no idea what the settlement was.  Prior to today you did not know that the settlement was confidential.  Another example of why no one takes your advice.

Hello HS:

Tom Gasko alias and/or infamous dualcyclone and motohead brags about the HOOVER/dyson Fusion litigation and now the supposed Electrolux lawsuit.  At the time dualcyclone drew an anology with the the Lionel lawsuit.  Lionel was ordered to pay $40 Million for patent infringement.  Tom Gasko said the same would happen for HOOVER.  Obviously, the HOOVER/dyson lawsuit never happened.   

The Lionel jury award of $40 Million was overturned in the courts.  A new trial was ordered.  I already told you the reason.  The patent and copy right laws were changed making it more difficult for alleged aggrieved parties to prevail.  Why?  That's for another discussion.  The Lionel retrial never happened.  The plaintiff settled with Lionel.  Terms undisclosed.  Sound familiar? 

Shortly after the settlement was announced, Lionel emerged from bankruptcy, stronger than ever.  No $40 million liability on its records for the suit.  The same as Whirlpool when it bought Maytag/HOOVER.  There was no liability on the financials for the settlement of the dyson lawsuit.  You have to disclose the long term liability on the financials every year until paid regardless of the terms of the legal agreement. 

Carmine D.

This message was modified May 19, 2008 by CarmineD
Motorhead


Joined: Nov 2, 2007
Points: 409

Re: Electrolux -- First Quarter 2008 . . .
Reply #42   May 19, 2008 9:17 pm
Carmine, are you saying history didn't happen?  Dyson did take Hoover to court.  Even if there was no monetary settlement, the lawsuit still happened.  The reason for the lack of settlement is that it *is* China after all, who does not honor international patent.  The main point here is that Dyson did bring a lawsuit. 

No one stated *anything* in regards to a possible settlement, in fact it was quite the contrary.  I am not speculating on any type of settlement, I just know that Dyson will take this to the advertising authority and sue Electrolux over their claim of their machine being the "world's first".  This claim will undoubtedly be removed after the lawsuit occurs.

That's what this upcoming lawsuit will be about.  No more, no less.

-MH
CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894

Re: Electrolux -- First Quarter 2008 . . .
Reply #43   May 20, 2008 7:39 am
Motorhead wrote:
Carmine, are you saying history didn't happen?  Dyson did take Hoover to court.  Even if there was no monetary settlement, the lawsuit still happened.  The reason for the lack of settlement is that it *is* China after all, who does not honor international patent.  The main point here is that Dyson did bring a lawsuit. 

No one stated *anything* in regards to a possible settlement, in fact it was quite the contrary.  I am not speculating on any type of settlement, I just know that Dyson will take this to the advertising authority and sue Electrolux over their claim of their machine being the "world's first".  This claim will undoubtedly be removed after the lawsuit occurs.

That's what this upcoming lawsuit will be about.  No more, no less.

-MH


Hello Tom:

Now the truth according to Tom Gasko.  Seems the settlement terms are more well known than people said and thought.

I followed the developments on Lionel for several years [because you used the $40 million jury award to brag about what HOOVER would have to pay to dyson].  And I followed the dyson/Maytag litigation for obvious reasons.  I knew if there were a monetary settlement against HOOVER by dyson you would be the first to post on all the vacuum Forums and here.  And if there weren't you would not.  BTW, both Lionel and MTH are USA companies not Chinese. 

I also knew that any monetary settlement for a lawsuit, MUST be disclosed in the financial statements of the companies.   I make a habit of reading financial statements.  

I had to wait for the best time to post here.  And bring all the different pieces together after more than 4 years.  Obviously, I needed your willing but unknowing cooperation.  On the night of a full moon no less.  Thank you.

How's that for a biting sense of humor.

Carmine D.

This message was modified May 20, 2008 by CarmineD
Replies: 34 - 43 of 140Next page of topicsPreviousNextNext page of topicsAllView as Outline
Vacuum Cleaners Guide   •   Discussions  Reviews  
AbbysGuide.com   About Us   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Contact Us
Copyright 1998-2024 AbbysGuide.com. All rights reserved.