5 ms·

A nicer solution could have been: Fluke: "We'll swap your 2000 chinese multimeters with 2000 Fluke multimeters. We will send the non-fluke multimeters to under

A nicer solution could have been: Fluke: "We'll swap your 2000 chinese multimeters with 2000 Fluke multimeters. We will send the non-fluke multimeters to under-funded universities in africa/asia/wherever."

ryoshu 13y ago
That would still dilute the mark. Fluke had a lot of options and it looks like they took the best one.
- johansch 13y ago
  Do they really have a trademark for yellow multimeters in e.g. Tanzania?
EpicEng 13y ago
Why in the world would/should Fluke give away ~$800,000 worth of product (that sparkfun would make a ton of money off of) because someone decided to violate their trademark and paid the price for it? We're talking about 2,000 vastly inferior multimeters here. You may or may not agree with the trademark being issued in the first place, but it was, and I don't blame fluke for wanting to protect their brand. They make a really good product. These things are pieces of garbage in comparison.
- schoen 13y ago
  I think you mean trademark.
  - EpicEng 13y ago
    That I did.
- userbinator 13y ago
  > Why in the world would/should Fluke give away ~$800,000 worth of product I've seen a lot more than that spent on marketing stunts, except in this case the consumers actually benefit by getting better equipment.
  - vacri 13y ago
    Marketing stunts don't usually give away the core product.
    - freehunter 13y ago
      Do things that don't scale!
- jaeysin 13y ago
  But they didn't violate their trademark, there is no use of the name Fluke or their trademark. "A trademark is a brand name. A trademark or service mark includes any word, name, symbol, device, or any combination, used or intended to be used to identify and distinguish the goods/services of one seller or provider from those of others, and to indicate the source of the goods/services. " http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/ http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/ You could make an argument that the products themselves are look-alikes, or pursue them if they created a similar trademark to cause confusion, but it doesnt seem to me that they obviously acted to violate a trademark.
  - rhizome 13y ago
    which is called "trade dress" and is much more difficult for fluke to prevail on.
    - gonzo 13y ago
      though they did.
      - rasz_pl 13y ago
        No they didnt. Nobody questioned their bogus trademark yet. Sparkfun isnt exactly in ideal position to fight Fluke, after all they very well might make a ton of money selling Fluke gear in the future. No point getting hostile over ~$20K. Fluke received a trademark for a item design that WAS ALREADY IN USE for at least 20 years. Trademark in the center of all this is ~"dark case, yellow face". They didnt even come up with the design first. Look at the second one from the top: http://www.stevenjohnson.com/apparatusdesignco/index.html http://www.stevenjohnson.com/apparatusdesignco/index.html Fluke multimeters started white/gray/beige, then went black, then yellow. Yellow on black is new to fluke. Basically they STOLE generic, already used design and trademarked it same way one click and round corners received US Patents.
        darklajid 13y ago
        Nitpicking: I think you have the colors wrong - it's "yellow case, dark face" as far as I understand. Not that it makes a huge difference..
- jakethehuman 13y ago
  You are comparing products aimed at two entirely different markets; may as well be saying that 'Lexus has every right to copyright a yellow car because KIA makes such an inferior car.' . Just because a product is distributed with different intent and audience does not mean it does not deserve to exist. Excuse me while I enjoy this hot pocket, I find them quite alright, thank you.
  - teacup50 13y ago
    Not just yellow. A distinctive yellow outer case with a black face. The product looks like a Fluke -- until you look more closely and notice how awful the build quality is. That a cheap Chinese multimeter looks like a Fluke was not a fluke.
  - gonzo 13y ago
    actually, if the sales channels are different, there is an argument that use of a similar mark (or trade dress) is not confusing.
- jakethehuman 13y ago
  You are comparing products aimed at two entirely different markets; may as well be saying that 'Lexus has every right to copyright a yellow car because KIA makes such an inferior car.' . Just because a product is distributed with different intent and audience does not mean it does not deserve to exist. Excuse me while I enjoy this hot pocket, I find them quite alright, thank you.
- jakethehuman 13y ago
  You are comparing products aimed at two entirely different markets; may as well be saying that 'Lexus has every right to copyright a yellow car because KIA makes such an inferior car.' . Just because a product is distributed with different intent and audience does not mean it does not deserve to exist. Excuse me while I enjoy this hot pocket, I find them quite alright, thank you.
revelation 13y ago
Are you trying to get people in africa/asia/wherever killed? If touching it can kill you, I wouldn't go anywhere near it with a 15 bucks meter. And for everything else, the sheer terribleness of these will soon annoy you into buying something usable.
- jzwinck 13y ago
  Poor people may not be able to buy expensive equipment. It may be that having worse equipment is better than none. We shouldn't always apply the same level of "if one person gets hurt it is unacceptable" protectionism to other societies.
  - userbinator 13y ago
    If your choice is e.g. between using a not-safe-as-a-Fluke meter to help fix your vehicle that broke down in a remote area, or starve to death, would anyone really choose the latter? Some very good examples of this principle: http://mackys.livejournal.com/838591.html?nojs=1 http://mackys.livejournal.com/838591.html?nojs=1 http://www.afrigadget.com/2010/02/28/jua-kali-dressed-in-mitumba/ http://www.afrigadget.com/2010/02/28/jua-kali-dressed-in-mit...
  - noonespecial 13y ago
    I wish people would consider this more often. We seem to have an epidemic of "if we can't do it perfectly, we shouldn't do it at all" infecting many areas of American life at the moment. Unfortunately, this usually results very little perfect and a great deal of not doing anything.
    - drdaeman 13y ago
      Depends on particular niche. For hardware supplies, yes, having a bad device is better than having none. For crypto software - no, it must be state-of-art or we're screwed.
amartya916 13y ago
They are donating the multimeters, that's what the Sparkfun blog says at least: https://www.sparkfun.com/news/1428 https://www.sparkfun.com/news/1428
- johansch 13y ago
  Awesome!

ryoshu 13y ago

That would still dilute the mark. Fluke had a lot of options and it looks like they took the best one.

johansch 13y ago
Do they really have a trademark for yellow multimeters in e.g. Tanzania?

EpicEng 13y ago

Why in the world would/should Fluke give away ~$800,000 worth of product (that sparkfun would make a ton of money off of) because someone decided to violate their trademark and paid the price for it? We're talking about 2,000 vastly inferior multimeters here. You may or may not agree with the trademark being issued in the first place, but it was, and I don't blame fluke for wanting to protect their brand. They make a really good product. These things are pieces of garbage in comparison.

schoen 13y ago
I think you mean trademark.
- EpicEng 13y ago
  That I did.
userbinator 13y ago
> Why in the world would/should Fluke give away ~$800,000 worth of product I've seen a lot more than that spent on marketing stunts, except in this case the consumers actually benefit by getting better equipment.
- vacri 13y ago
  Marketing stunts don't usually give away the core product.
  - freehunter 13y ago
    Do things that don't scale!
jaeysin 13y ago
But they didn't violate their trademark, there is no use of the name Fluke or their trademark. "A trademark is a brand name. A trademark or service mark includes any word, name, symbol, device, or any combination, used or intended to be used to identify and distinguish the goods/services of one seller or provider from those of others, and to indicate the source of the goods/services. " http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/ http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/ You could make an argument that the products themselves are look-alikes, or pursue them if they created a similar trademark to cause confusion, but it doesnt seem to me that they obviously acted to violate a trademark.
- rhizome 13y ago
  which is called "trade dress" and is much more difficult for fluke to prevail on.
  - gonzo 13y ago
    though they did.
    - rasz_pl 13y ago
      No they didnt. Nobody questioned their bogus trademark yet. Sparkfun isnt exactly in ideal position to fight Fluke, after all they very well might make a ton of money selling Fluke gear in the future. No point getting hostile over ~$20K. Fluke received a trademark for a item design that WAS ALREADY IN USE for at least 20 years. Trademark in the center of all this is ~"dark case, yellow face". They didnt even come up with the design first. Look at the second one from the top: http://www.stevenjohnson.com/apparatusdesignco/index.html http://www.stevenjohnson.com/apparatusdesignco/index.html Fluke multimeters started white/gray/beige, then went black, then yellow. Yellow on black is new to fluke. Basically they STOLE generic, already used design and trademarked it same way one click and round corners received US Patents.
      - darklajid 13y ago
        Nitpicking: I think you have the colors wrong - it's "yellow case, dark face" as far as I understand. Not that it makes a huge difference..
jakethehuman 13y ago
You are comparing products aimed at two entirely different markets; may as well be saying that 'Lexus has every right to copyright a yellow car because KIA makes such an inferior car.' . Just because a product is distributed with different intent and audience does not mean it does not deserve to exist. Excuse me while I enjoy this hot pocket, I find them quite alright, thank you.
- teacup50 13y ago
  Not just yellow. A distinctive yellow outer case with a black face. The product looks like a Fluke -- until you look more closely and notice how awful the build quality is. That a cheap Chinese multimeter looks like a Fluke was not a fluke.
- gonzo 13y ago
  actually, if the sales channels are different, there is an argument that use of a similar mark (or trade dress) is not confusing.
jakethehuman 13y ago
You are comparing products aimed at two entirely different markets; may as well be saying that 'Lexus has every right to copyright a yellow car because KIA makes such an inferior car.' . Just because a product is distributed with different intent and audience does not mean it does not deserve to exist. Excuse me while I enjoy this hot pocket, I find them quite alright, thank you.
jakethehuman 13y ago
You are comparing products aimed at two entirely different markets; may as well be saying that 'Lexus has every right to copyright a yellow car because KIA makes such an inferior car.' . Just because a product is distributed with different intent and audience does not mean it does not deserve to exist. Excuse me while I enjoy this hot pocket, I find them quite alright, thank you.

revelation 13y ago

Are you trying to get people in africa/asia/wherever killed? If touching it can kill you, I wouldn't go anywhere near it with a 15 bucks meter. And for everything else, the sheer terribleness of these will soon annoy you into buying something usable.

jzwinck 13y ago
Poor people may not be able to buy expensive equipment. It may be that having worse equipment is better than none. We shouldn't always apply the same level of "if one person gets hurt it is unacceptable" protectionism to other societies.
- userbinator 13y ago
  If your choice is e.g. between using a not-safe-as-a-Fluke meter to help fix your vehicle that broke down in a remote area, or starve to death, would anyone really choose the latter? Some very good examples of this principle: http://mackys.livejournal.com/838591.html?nojs=1 http://mackys.livejournal.com/838591.html?nojs=1 http://www.afrigadget.com/2010/02/28/jua-kali-dressed-in-mitumba/ http://www.afrigadget.com/2010/02/28/jua-kali-dressed-in-mit...
- noonespecial 13y ago
  I wish people would consider this more often. We seem to have an epidemic of "if we can't do it perfectly, we shouldn't do it at all" infecting many areas of American life at the moment. Unfortunately, this usually results very little perfect and a great deal of not doing anything.
  - drdaeman 13y ago
    Depends on particular niche. For hardware supplies, yes, having a bad device is better than having none. For crypto software - no, it must be state-of-art or we're screwed.

amartya916 13y ago

They are donating the multimeters, that's what the Sparkfun blog says at least: https://www.sparkfun.com/news/1428 https://www.sparkfun.com/news/1428

johansch 13y ago
Awesome!