Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by spartywrx, Oct 16, 2009.
I am still miffed why civilian shooters purchase HK products.
/\ They are quality?
I don't understand why people are annoyed a weapon passed a 20,000 or whatever it was torture test all that tells me is it would perform excellent.
I was referring to the person whining about HK picking an inferior company to produce the new replicas
Ahh, I see. Thanks for clarifying.
Well it looks like Vulcan is no longer manufacturing the V94, probably smart of them since their MP-5 clone was much closer to the real thing than GSG's was.
I'm surprised Bobcat (now Red Rock Arms) is still producing a clone. Maybe HK hasn't gotten to them yet
Red Rock Arms,
I know the site say No but..........
gsg isn't the only company h&k is going after.
they are even going after paintball manufactures & manufactures of accesories that fit h&k rifles & pistols
hk is also suing or has already sued these companies.
Iron Ridge Arms Company
CENTRAL OHIO PAINTBALL, INC
SHORTY USA, INC
GB INVESTMENTS, INC
AIRSOFT ATLANTA, INC
DONG YING INTERNATIONAL, INC
TEAM S.D., INC
BT PAINTBALL DESIGNS, INC
TIPPMAN SPORTS LLC, TIGERSTRIPE PAINTBALL LLC
PRECISION AIRSOFT, LLC
Professional Arms, LLC
COHARIE ARMS, INC., SPECIAL WEAPONS, INC
GAMO USA, INC
VECTOR ARMS, INC
DICK'S SORTING GOODS, INC.
They have every right to go after all of the companies you listed. If Hyundai started putting four bangers in vette chassis and chevy sued them no one would bat an eye. Since the majority of people on this board are anti-hk due to envy, they think it's wrong for hk to protect their design and brand image.
I was never impressed with the GSG-5, unfortunately.
No. Selling guns soley because of the similarity to another companies design, hard work & advertising is theft. This is the right outcome. If they want to trade and profit on HK's design & popularity, they can pay them for it. They didn't. HK did what they had to do to protect their physical & intellectual property. I am MORE likely to buy HK now--They are proud of their design & they should protect it. Better yet, they should produce a .22lr version & make a killing on the clear heavy demand displayed here.
Is the look of MP-5 somehow trademarked?
i remember back when i had a usp, h&k even said in the manual that they copied the grip angle from the 1911 so i think h&k should be sued & production of the usp should cease at once because it is obvious to everyone that they stole the grip angle of the 1911.
no one is ever going to mistake a gsg or a paintball gun as an h&k.
h&k saw the popularity of gsg's & got pissed because they didn't think of it first.
as far as the pantball & airsoft guns are concerned i see that as h&k taking toys away from children.
the accessories are even a bigger joke, i guess h&k thinks if it will fit on a h&k it must be manufactured by h&k.
Screw HK and their nut-clingers.
I paid thru the nose for a P2000 that had a rattling slide release. Took it back to dealer and he showed me 3 more that did the exact same thing. POS.
If HK owners want to waste money to increase pecker size, let them. But, I am a guy that prides himself on sound financial decisions.
I pulled this off of a website selling the GSG-5. HK not only was right to sue, they really had no choice. A company simply cannot survive if they allow another company to profit off of their design, popularity and advertising without taking steps to protect their identity. GSG wanted to profit from someone elses work, and they got smacked for it. Plain & simple. Countries do not survive without borders. Companies don't either.
So "a webiste" says that is an exact replica?
Sorry but that is absolutely false. If it were an exact replica then HK parts and GSG parts would be full compatible which they are not. The GSG-5 looks like an MP-5 on the outside but that's were the similarities end. Even cosmetically the GSG-5 is different to a degree, for example the eject port on the MP-5 is in very different place than it is on the GSG-5. Anyone who is even a little familiar with the MP-5 could easily tell the difference between the two guns.
Also the MP-5 is a scaled down clone of the Spanish Cetme which HK copied when they designed the G3 which they then used as a design to build many other rifles. The Cetme design is not owned by HK and so they can't claim that the design is really theirs to begin with.
Yeah, where you guys been? There's going to be a LOT of HK-branded .22 clones next year. I'm half interested in the MP7.
Awful lot of HK haters in a thread about an HK clone don't ya think? It's pretty normal for the appearance of something to be trademarked. It makes sense that now that HK is entering the .22 MP5 market it would shut down the competition if they could do so legally. GSG can hopefully just crank out a new gun that looks slightly different.
And no one lacking any familiarity with the MP5 would be remotely interested in owning the GSG. That is the entire point. They copied a look, knowingly allowed it to be marketed as a copycat, trading on another companies investment. They lost on the flat merits of the case. If HK had failed to take them out, then any company EXACTLY copying the MP5, right down to caliber, would be able to claim HK's forfeiture of the design as a defense. Not to mention HK's own .22 versions now hitting the market facing a competitor that would not exist were it not for THEIR original design.
They should have licensed this manufacture just like Walther did with Colt on the .22 AR. They didn't, and they lost.
I thought they settled out of court? That's rather different than losing. H&K certainly had the right, necessity actually, to pursue what it believes is an infringement on it's IP. If they let it go they risk losing rights to that IP. However, I'm at a loss with some of the rest of these.
Agreed. I will modify my earlier comment to state that they lost the opportunity to import in the settlement. This is clearly the outcome HK needed; +1 to the necessity for HK to stand their ground. They are forced to, or the face losing it all.
Idk, I have a shooting buddy who loves his GSG. It's fun but not my cup of tea. In the particular case against GSG and ATI I feel they're justified. I seem to remember seeing something about "MP-5" on the box my friend's GSG came in. However, HK going after everybody who might even be associated with making something that relates to one of their designs is overboard. I hate to use the cliche but at the end of the day I get the feeling from HK that "you suck and we hate you" really is the way that they feel about the rest of the world. If that is how they feel I'm happy to comply and purchase firearms from other manufacturers. I'm simply not likely to buy something from a company that's just "not that into me."
It's not quite the same thing. How many companies make AR-15 rifles? AK platform? Mauser?
I'm honestly not sure how the laws work. If they would release a legitimate civilian version of their firearms they wouldn't have to worry about this....
Lol. I say meh to roller delay.
It is the same thing, or close to it. Just because others might be getting away with something does not make it right. In the case of the AR15, the IP aspect of the look does not belong to current or historical makers. The patents have expired.
I saw them this week at a gunshow, for under 400 bucks...
Crap. Now I almost feel an obligation to get one before they skyrocket in price. One at the local sporting store...hmm.
Dumping a ton of money into a stateside factory in a country that has A. an economic downturn, And B. Obama as President.
Not to mention civilian sales are like 8% of what they do and they are in litigation with Australia over them banning one of their rifles.
As mentioned, if they would release a legitimate halfway affordable civilian version of their firearms that didn't look like garbage with the thumbhole stocks and whatnot, people would buy the real thing instead of clones.
HK can go pound sand.
Just my .02,
Separate names with a comma.