Jump to content

Cybergun To Intensify Campaign Against "Counterfeit" Airsoft Guns


BioRage

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I don't have any interest in buying from them... They treat me the customer like *suitcase* and make it unreasonably hard to get what I want so *fruitcage* em.

 

I can't buy the licensed gun I want from them as they won't import it into the uk and I can't get it from a European seller as cyberscum will pull their access if they do.

 

I can't get spare mags for ine gun because they won't sell them in the uk.

 

Add to that the *suitcasey* scummy trademark practices which have to be illegal! Trademarking someone else's company name just has to be illegal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Every year or two they try to bully asain manufactures, and every time they ignore cybergun.

 

Cybergun will go down sooner or later due to their reputation.

Yeah, other than people who have zero choice or don't know who they are, airsofters by and large despise them. That's not a good business plan, being despised by your customers. The fact that their stock is falling so badly speaks volumes, they're desperate because they don't actually make anything, they just bully other companies that do.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to deny it, whoever came up with the original idea for their business model is damn smart as far as I'm concerned.

 

Buy license - People pay you for it - Done

 

I'm guessing there's a little bit of admin work but realistically very little time needed; pretty much sit there and the cash flows in.  The BIG caveat of course is that if I were doing it personally I'd allow (indeed encourage) the people paying me to make the markings on their guns as realistic as physically possible.  Maybe my company logo on the box and manual or something at the most, certainly no plastering that *suitcase* all over the RIFs themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh does that mean Magpul could sue them and drive them to the ground?

 

Since being bought, Magpul has undergone some significant internal changes. That said, now that they've gone their separate ways from PTS, Magpul is struggling to get a handle on how to manage infringement regarding Airsoft counterfeits. I think Cybergun making false claims as to owning the Magpul Airsoft licensing rights is the least of their problems. Magpul moves very slowly on such matters even when it's on their radar.

 

 

Am I right in thinking that the owner of Magpul also has a ownership share in PTS?

 

I'm not at liberty to discuss such matters.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. I've come to think that maybe what's keeping them afloat are sales from non English speaking regions. And since they don't give a hoot about what's happening here they don't really wise up to Cyergun's shenanigans. We need something that will go beyond forums or Facebook and actually spread the word out there like I dunno, a cleverly thought of patch or something.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cybergun probably dont have much of a choice - they're losing money like crazy.   Its probably a case of someone at cybergun in the past signing up contracts to pay company X  a large sum of cash every year to use their licence for x number of years.   Which sounds like a good idea, until you see everyone using the trades that you paid for without paying you your fee.   The only person who can then stop that is you, using lawyers.   It sucks, but its the only way to protect your investment.

 

Yes its rubbish, but they have to do it to protect their business.   Me, I could care less what trades are on the gun, but I know its important to many.   Obviously it would be better it cybergun could be made to go away and full trades could go on all our guns, but unless they run out of money soon, then thats unlikely.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't mind so much if they actually used proper trades.  I appreciate the want for RS companies wanting to protect their IP and using a company like CG to do so.  But rather than ending up with 100% accurate RIFS, what CG are essentially doing is squatting over each and every one of their products, doing a massive *suitcase* on them and then crudely using their finger to smear an approximated interpretation of the trademark by someone that could very easily still be wearing nappies. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Since being bought, Magpul has undergone some significant internal changes. That said, now that they've gone their separate ways from PTS, Magpul is struggling to get a handle on how to manage infringement regarding Airsoft counterfeits. I think Cybergun making false claims as to owning the Magpul Airsoft licensing rights is the least of their problems. Magpul moves very slowly on such matters even when it's on their radar.

 

I'm not at liberty to discuss such matters.

See this is what's interesting regarding the Magpul/PTS split. From what I'm aware it wasn't PTS products which were the issue (they even mention being for training use only/being PTS on the few I've seen) but they can't have expected to crush all the illegitimate clones from pulling the PTS license. Ah well it was a shame.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They didn't expect that.  From what I recall, the idea was/is that when they stopped PTS producing (for example) MOE stocks they could then say that anything resembling an MOE stock that did not come straight from one of their authorised dealers or distributors was most definitely an illegal knock-off and not suited for use on a firearm.  Obviously it wouldn't have mattered for things like AEG MIAD grips and AEG PMAGs etc but when you're protecting a company worth *fruitcage* $$$$$$$$$$$ then a little bit of airsoft revenue doesn't factor in much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people have argued that an AEG MIAD and AEG mags should be exempt. I made the same argument. The problem is that US Customs simply don't have the manpower and education to carefully discriminate what should and shouldn't work for real steel.

 

See this is what's interesting regarding the Magpul/PTS split. From what I'm aware it wasn't PTS products which were the issue (they even mention being for training use only/being PTS on the few I've seen) but they can't have expected to crush all the illegitimate clones from pulling the PTS license. Ah well it was a shame.

They were always happy with PTS as it was a long established relationship even prior to the formation of PTS. They actually had a stake in PTS. PTS made them a lot of money as the majority of profits went back to Colorado. However the unlicensed counterfeits were affecting the Magpul brand and domestic bottom line. The decision to stop all Magpul airsoft licensing was a difficult one to come to terms with on both sides due to the past history and investment in PTS as a partner. Magpul felt it was in their best interests to cease all production of the airsoft counterparts so as to make an unequivocal message to US customs that anything entering the US territory even remotely resembling Magpul products should be considered counterfeit. Did it work? Not really. The unlicensed copies continue to proliferate the second hand market and gun shows in the US. Sales of counterfeit Magpul products outside the US has been difficult to control due to differing legal systems and working within them is difficult for Magpul's US attorneys insufficiently familiar with international laws. It was far easier to a degree (and less financial legal burden) for Magpul when PTS was doing all the heavy lifting regarding Copy/IP rights. How this will pan out for them is anyone's guess. But to their credit, they do have a broad stroke legal brush with US Customs to say block anything from coming into the US (when it is discovered and intercepted in transit) that may resemble their products on any level and could be legally contested.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the use of session cookies.