Titleist Wins Retried Golf Ball Patent Lawsuit Against Callaway
by Ryan Ballengee on Mar 29, 2010 4:37 PM EDT
in Playing Golf
Email
PrintRemember the lawsuit between Callaway and Titleist parent Acushnet over patents that Callway acquired when they bought Top Flite and then used them to sue Acushnet saying that they had patents on some technology behind the Pro V1 ball before Titleist did?
In late 2008, a federal judge in Delaware declared that the four patents of Spalding-now-Callaway were infringed upon by Acushnet. The judge declared that the then-used method of manufacturing Pro V1s would have to stop, and Callaway would receive a settlement payment near $150 million.
After Acushnet appealed the ruling, a federal judge determined in August that the case was to be retried because Acushnet had evidence suggesting that Callaway's acquired patents were filed after Achusnet got theirs.
The retrial is now over, and Titleist has won. Effectively, four of the patents that Callaway acquired were rendered invalid by the the US Patent and Trademark Office because Acushnet already had patents tantamount to the same thing.
The end result is that Acushnet doesn't have to shell out the $150 million, but it would not seem likely that the Pro V1s will be made in the old method as the company has claimed that they are now better.
14 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Sure makes ya wonder
how many gazillion dollars those little round rocks are worth doesn’t it…Don’t know if it’s in first place with the dollar rush, but it’s probably way out in front of whatever is in second place…No wonder their 50.00 some dollars a dz. and won’t help the average hacker on little bit….STUB
Old pro v1x - vs New pro v1x
Would any company ever claim otherwise?
I know a few folks that have stock piles of the Older Pro V1x – swearing that there is a marked difference between the old and new (downward). For me i switched to Callaway when Titleist made the change.
I do wonder if there will be any changes from Titleist now that they have been vindicated in court (barring appeal)?
Add to that $150 million in savings all the old Pro V’s sitting around in warehouses and shops around the world that don’t have to be destroyed and can now be sold and distributed. That’s a lot of good will to charities and ranges and schools that will make the Titleist name even more popular.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
You know, I don’t know if they held onto any stock of old Pro V1s or not. That’s a good question.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroom, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Mar 29, 2010 8:09 PM EDT up reply actions
They weren’t going to bury them – couldn’t burn them – couldn’t sell them – but they DID know they were going to appeal – no sense in destroying the old balls before a final decision. It’d be fun to ask the Titleist people.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
I’ll run it by ’em and see what I get back.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroom, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Mar 29, 2010 9:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Court you really think it will be charities, ranges and schools? and not Foundations, Clubs and Colleges? Achusnet is not particularily well known for their charitable giving – they do offer a high school discount program (through retailers not direct) on balls, clothes and shoes but that is about all – Taylor Made on the other hand have a very good HS/College program!
But you know if you are say 10th in the world amateur rankings they would be happy to sponsor you.
doesn’t matter – those were just the first few things that popped into my mind. what they will be giving out or selling as range balls are the old balls.
you bring up TaylorMade – huge difference between Titleist and Taylormade. Titleist makes their bones with golf balls. Clubs are more like a hobby with them. Taylormade is the opposite – they are a club company first. Taylormade makes clubs that high school kids can use – game improvement clubs. Titleist makes player clubs. You wouldn’t put a set of Titleist butter knives in the hands of a beginner – you’d give them something forgiving like Taylormade. Acushnet’s game improvement brand used to be Cobra – now part of Puma.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
That used to be the case but the AP1 is a easy to hit forgivness iron – (they wouldn’t call it a game improvement club but I have seen a couple games improved with these in the bag) – such as you might characterize the TM Burner.
Titlesit has always been a boutique club company – the Scotty Cameron / Vokey relationships etc. I was trying to get at the fact that their methodology for supporting amateurs is lacking (in my opinion) – while the balls might end up at ranges that just seems a waste – why not give them to the first tee or Junior Golf programs (like cigarettes, get that brand loyalty in place early and you got a customer for life).
By the time a player has reached college age it is likely they have made a number of decisions that they will carry with them as they age. Golf is likely one of them – brand and proclivity to certain balls most likely as well.
Ummm – give everybody butter knives – I was given a club membership and set of Mizuno MS-1 blades when I turned 12 – no driver only a 5 wood, irons, sand wedge and putter. And a copy of Penicks little red book. it was torture for about a month.
by Drew McCallum on Mar 30, 2010 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions
I didn’t say that they WOULDN’T give them to first tee programs and the like. I just said that the things I listed were the first things that popped into my mind.
AP1’s are very nice clubs and a lot more forgiving than their blades – but not nearly as forgiving as the TM Burners.
Cameron USED to be a boutique putter company – being under the Titleist flag takes them out of that catagory even though they still make custom putters.
When you say that “by the time a player has reached college age”, are you talking about competitive golfers who are looking to turn pro ?
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
No just an avid amateur is what i had in mind – someone that started the game as a teenager (or before) and continues to play into their twenties.
I hope that Titleist would be so good as to spread their giving/sponsorship to new and emerging players – I just don’t think that it is going to happen.
True on the Cameron/Vokey paradigm shifting – I still view Titleist as a boutique brand – especially as they bought the Cameron/Vokey names so as to solidify that ideal – the fact that the retail clubs are not hand ground and milled by either of the Mr’s is not exactly advertised – Sure it is obvious and logical that for 139$ one is not going to get a hand ground Vokey wedge – Titleist is still hoping that the public makes the inference that they are.
by Drew McCallum on Mar 30, 2010 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions
But Drew,
whether you wanted to be a surgeon or not, you had some of the best equipment available in your hands…Mizuno has made some of the finest equipment for years, I played them way back when, had the Exar gold shafts…great feel…they were called the Mizuno Pros….still have the set….STUB
They really are fabulous irons – I would still play them but I would have to reshaft them and that just seems wrong – great irons for baked out fairways – zero bounce (i swear they are a little concave)
by Drew McCallum on Mar 30, 2010 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Have a golf story tip? Contact editor Charles Boyer and he will follow the story! Thanks!
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
