×

We will be closed on November 25, 2021 and November 26, 2021 in observance of the Thanksgiving holiday. We will resume normal operations on November 29, 2021. Wishing you a safe and happy holiday from all your friends at SparkFun!

×

Receive a free SparkFun USB Thumb Drive with every order this weekend. Details.

Member #533536

Member Since: March 19, 2014

Country: United States

  • While it's certainly understandable that you would not want to make negative comments about a competitor and that you don't have any intent of actually infringing on valid trademarks, it is worth nothing for public edification that the general exclusion order that's now costing you guys tens of thousands of dollars is something that Fluke actively sought (as in, they sought not only to punish actual existing wrongdoers but further sought and obtained an order punishing future infringers or possible-infringers-in-the-discretion-of-customs-officials, innocent or not) and actively maintains (the exclusion order lasts only if they provide an annual affirmation to the government).

    This is an incredibly frustrating situation. I did some quick poking around and found a law review article out of Northwestern with some discussion about some of your options: http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1602&context=njilb -- suggestions pertinent to your situation are in section VI (of course, for all I know, your lawyers are already well-versed in these issues, but hey, free law review article is free law review article). Best of luck to you.

No public wish lists :(