Brass Eagle announces settlement of Odyssey lawsuit

[1stdeadeye]

$$$

I'll bet that sum they paid is quite small. $1 and BE gets to claim victory. They were paid and get to save face. OPP gets to hand over a buck and claim they won because the settlement was foavorable to them. Both sides save face!

[shartley]

Re: $$$

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
I'll bet that sum they paid is quite small. $1 and BE gets to claim victory. They were paid and get to save face. OPP gets to hand over a buck and claim they won because the settlement was foavorable to them. Both sides save face!

[1stdeadeye]

Re: Re: $$$

Originally posted by shartley

It is probably very small. That is why the terms are always confidential. OPP probably stating their case because they are so happy about this type of result. A humbled loser would sulk away and hide. OPP is doing the opposite!

[shartley]

Re: Re: Re: $$$

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
It is probably very small. That is why the terms are always confidential. OPP probably stating their case because they are so happy about this type of result. A humbled loser would sulk away and hide. OPP is doing the opposite!

[1stdeadeye]

Re: Re: Re: Re: $$$

Originally posted by shartley

Too true. I guess that is why these settlements are kept confidential...to keep people like you and I guessing!

[shartley]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: $$$

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye


Too true. I guess that is why these settlements are kept confidential...to keep people like you and I guessing!

VERY true.... and that is why usually both parties stick to press releases ONLY, and don't go and post their case on a public forum.

[thetex]

Good stuff!!

Shartly,
I've got to hand it to ya. This has to be one of the most intellegent forums I have personally seen, outside of MENSA, where they most often are talking about nothing more than trivial BS. You bring a very clever argument to the table. However, your assesment is for your own pasification to find a difinitive winner or loser. If you want an assessment from our perspective, and I would like to hear BE's on this one, we were both losers. This is my opinion and doesn't even nessisarily include the ones of my colleagues.
The lawyers were the difinitive winners so by your reasoning (monitary transfer or value of exchanges), both companies were the losers. Yea, we lost. OH well.
We don't blame BE for their actions. And, in a court of law, both companies could claim loses. That doesn't mean they were right or that one company won or lost. There was no decision made in the court.
You as the consumer can claim loses. So what? Does that mean you lost? Does that mean they won? I assure you, if you go to court the lawyers will win all of the time. If neither side can see value and they decide to quit fighting and it's acceptable to both parties when they sign, is there a winner? Loser?
OK, we lost.
Want a HALO?
Good argument. I don't know if I could hold water if I were sitting down for a beer with you. Then what would be the point of holding water when your having beer anyway.
OPP will be providing the paintball industry the HALO as well as other fine products for years to come. We will continue to improve on our products and meet the demands of our customers as best we can. Look for alot from OPP in the near future.
Peace,
TEX

[Webmaster]

"But it would be a cold day in hell before I give anyone, or any other company one dime when I am right. "

While noble - not always practical. I am sure you recognize that in business, certain things must be done to survive... And the "good guy" doesnt always win. I am sure if you look around you will see many examples of one company not playing fair with another - or with thier own employees.

As you noted many firms fight lawsuits for YEARS. And you are right. But I would like to point out ODD isnt AOL, Philip Morris, or even a company 1/100th that size!

Granted I dont know all the facts - but if I owned a small company and had a lawsuit against me with the aggresor being large enough to easily survive a long lawsuit - I would probably jump at the chance to settle out court and still be able to make my product in peace and make a living at it.

[Marchborne]

Couple (well, four) points on the legal procedures...

(1) In almost every settlement, the contents of that settlement are stipulated by the parties to be confidential, with some exceptions (e.g., the parties agreed in this case to issue a joint press release). Those confidentiality clauses usually have BIG penalty clauses for violations, which is likely why BE and Ody are just saying "check out the press release."

(2) Also, in almost every settlement, both sides stipulate that the settlement is NOT an admission of wrongdoing. In other words, there may indeed have been a violation, or a wrongful act, or whatever is at issue in any given litigation, but neither side is going to admit to it. THAT'S ONE OF THE PURPOSES OF SETTLEMENT.

(3) There are lots of reasons to settle. Some of them have been discussed. Most often, money is at issue. Shartley, I have to respect your "never-say-die" attitude, but there are times when it's just not worth the fight. Plus, if you (hypothetically, of course) litigated 'till bankruptcy, closed shop, re-opened, and started selling an (allegedly) infringing product again, rest assured, the dogs would be huntin' again.

(4) Sounds like what they did was one of two things: (a) dismiss without prejudice, which means the exact same issue can be brought to court again, if necessary; or (b) the dismissal was with prejudice, which means the exact issue and facts cannot be re-litigated, and what the press release is referring to is BE's ability to take further alleged infringements into court.

P.S.: These are just general observations, DO NOT construe any of my posts as legal advice.

[shartley]

Re: Good stuff!!

Originally posted by thetex
Shartly,
I've got to hand it to ya. This has to be one of the most intellegent forums I have personally seen, outside of MENSA, where they most often are talking about nothing more than trivial BS. You bring a very clever argument to the table. However, your assesment is for your own pasification to find a difinitive winner or loser. If you want an assessment from our perspective, and I would like to hear BE's on this one, we were both losers. This is my opinion and doesn't even nessisarily include the ones of my colleagues.
The lawyers were the difinitive winners so by your reasoning (monitary transfer or value of exchanges), both companies were the losers. Yea, we lost. OH well.
We don't blame BE for their actions. And, in a court of law, both companies could claim loses. That doesn't mean they were right or that one company won or lost. There was no decision made in the court.
You as the consumer can claim loses. So what? Does that mean you lost? Does that mean they won? I assure you, if you go to court the lawyers will win all of the time. If neither side can see value and they decide to quit fighting and it's acceptable to both parties when they sign, is there a winner? Loser?
OK, we lost.
Want a HALO?
Good argument. I don't know if I could hold water if I were sitting down for a beer with you. Then what would be the point of holding water when your having beer anyway.
OPP will be providing the paintball industry the HALO as well as other fine products for years to come. We will continue to improve on our products and meet the demands of our customers as best we can. Look for alot from OPP in the near future.
Peace,
TEX

[1stdeadeye]

Re: Good stuff!!

Originally posted by thetex
Shartly,
I've got to hand it to ya. This has to be one of the most intellegent forums I have personally seen, outside of MENSA, where they most often are talking about nothing more than trivial BS. You bring a very clever argument to the table. However, your assesment is for your own pasification to find a difinitive winner or loser. If you want an assessment from our perspective, and I would like to hear BE's on this one, we were both losers. This is my opinion and doesn't even nessisarily include the ones of my colleagues.
The lawyers were the difinitive winners so by your reasoning (monitary transfer or value of exchanges), both companies were the losers. Yea, we lost. OH well.
We don't blame BE for their actions. And, in a court of law, both companies could claim loses. That doesn't mean they were right or that one company won or lost. There was no decision made in the court.
You as the consumer can claim loses. So what? Does that mean you lost? Does that mean they won? I assure you, if you go to court the lawyers will win all of the time. If neither side can see value and they decide to quit fighting and it's acceptable to both parties when they sign, is there a winner? Loser?
OK, we lost.
Want a HALO?
Good argument. I don't know if I could hold water if I were sitting down for a beer with you. Then what would be the point of holding water when your having beer anyway.
OPP will be providing the paintball industry the HALO as well as other fine products for years to come. We will continue to improve on our products and meet the demands of our customers as best we can. Look for alot from OPP in the near future.
Peace,
TEX

Okay Sam,
Now I really think that I am onto something with that $1 guess. A big corporation with tons of lawyers like BE will have a more professional approach. A small firm like OPP might act like more of a renegade.

[shartley]

Webby and Marchborne


Good points, but nothing I don't know (or even agree with). My arguments and statements were not meant to be "legal" alone. There was more to it. And I am sure you both realize that.

[shartley]

Re: Re: Good stuff!!

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye


Okay Sam,
Now I really think that I am onto something with that $1 guess. A big corporation with tons of lawyers like BE will have a more professional approach. A small firm like OPP might act like more of a renegade.

[thetex]

Right On!

Your right. Sometimes you have to think outside the box to do what we do. Being part of the status quo is not always desirable either. You have to challenge the system to make yourself established as being the tip of technology. And you have to observe, defend, make your point and establish your presence every chance you get when your small. Some call it being a renegade. That's OK. Cool! We call it, "IT'S ALL WE'VE GOT." That's why small companies act different than larger ones.
Hey, now maybe I can act more like them and take out a magazine add???? We'll see.
Shartly,
I have one very important question for you and you better not skate around it.
Who's buying?
Later,
TEX

[FutureMagOwner]

as i was going to state at the begining of the thread(but i descided to read the whole thing which showed me it was already stated) all around its smarter money wise to just settle after litigation fees lawyer fees and so forth, you end up paying more than the settlement in most cases and it saves you the headache of having to deal with lawyers(lol if you cant tell i dont like corporate lawyers in most cases )