Any legal minds? How can aftermarket company's make...

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Not related to saws, but related to the topic:

I was in the Mercedes dealer getting parts for my car, and there was a sign on the parts counter that had 2 lengths of chain held together by a bent paperclip. The text of the sign went something like, "Using aftermarket parts is the weakest link in your Mercedes."

The parts manager was there and he and I are quite friendly. So, I pointed to the sign and made some silly comment. The parts manager pulled up his chair and started talking with me. He told me basically the following:

Mercedes like all manufacturers contracts out building many of its parts to other manufacturers, and those manufacturers stamp the Mercedes logos onto the parts. Buying the same part from the manufacturer rather than from mercedes didn't affect quality. These are called OEM or OES parts.

Also said that some manufacturers that weren't the original equipment manufacturers made parts that fixed a particular problem that cropped up years later and wasn't anticipated by the manufacturer (In this case Mercedes) or for special applications that were outside of the manufacturers recommended use of the original product. Most of these parts were well manufactured, and actually improved the quality of the car. These included coil over suspensions to replace hydraulic, or racing suspensions for track days. He went as far as to say that some of the mechanics would put those parts on their own cars on their own time in the shop.

Then there are the knock off aftermarket parts that were a lot cheaper that were made from inferior materials, sloppier machining specs, poorly lined up fastener holes, etc. Those were the parts that made the techs and the shop nervous.

For liability reasons, they would only use Mercedes branded parts on the shop unless the customer supplied their own in which case there was always notes made of that for insurance liability reasons.

Anyways, I hope this helps someone understand what is going on.
 
For example, how can company's like Cannon, Sugihara, Oregon, etc. make guide bars specifically for Echo, or Husqvarna saws and even use the name Echo or Husqvarna on their websites, and the bar mount pattern is specifically for a particular model of saw. Why don't the aftermarket company's get sued?

In copyright, patent and trademark law, there's the concept of "fair use" and some things are trademarkable and some things aren't. Just because Edison invented the lightbulb (he didn't really -- he just found a filament that gave a decent lifespan) doesn't mean that no one else can ever make a lightbulb.

It wouldn't be fair, or in the public interest, to let Goodyear patent the idea that "tires are round" and force everyone else to make non-round tires. Probably the shape of chainsaw bars is protected as "public domain" under similar reasoning ... there's nothing really "new" or innovative about this or that particular way of mounting a chainsaw bar...they're just different, just as Ford, GM and Toyota use different bolt-hole patterns on their wheels. And allowing other companies to make wheels (or chainsaw bars) that fit saws made by other companies doesn't really "harm" the original company (except in the fact that they no longer enjoy a monopoly on wheels or chainsaw bars for their cars or saws), nor should they be protected, since they didn't really "invent" anything truly "new" that had unique benefits not offered by competitors. All they did was change something enough to make it unique.

Changing chainsaw bar-mounting schemes, like changing car wheel bolt patterns, just to be different is like making a key to a lock that no one else is thereafter allowed to open (or make a key to) ... it's not fair to competitors, it's not in the public interest, and it shouldn't be protected, since it amounts to the same thing as padlocking a public park and then charging the public a toll to enter.

Any idiot can make a new lock with a unique key. Should that allow them to be the sole source of keys to that lock (at inflated prices) forever more?
 
Well, I remember that MTD had something on their hole,

and the aftermarket guys had to use a different shape.





That doesn't sound right.............
 
A lot of times it just comes down to "which company is richer and can afford more and better lawyers."

A small company forced to spend two years' worth of profits just to defend themselves in court will "lose" even if they "win" the case in court. They can be bankrupted simply by the fees charged by lawyers. That's what's called a Pyrrhic victory.

Kinda like winning a battle that gets all your soldiers killed. Did you really "win" if your whole army is dead? Who's gonna hold the territory? And what difference does it make that you won, when the cost of winning bankrupted you?

So they back down ... or pay off the plaintiffs (through a settlement). But that doesn't mean the plaintiffs are right. It just means they won (even if they lost in court) in the sense that they killed their competition and preserved their monopoly.
 
Back
Top