ilovefuzz.com

Iommic Pope wrote:The latter is the reason not too many ILFers will be taking the bar.

Chankgeez wrote:[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbpPIYy_YQk[/youtube]

Chankgeez wrote:[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbpPIYy_YQk[/youtube]

behndy wrote:whoa. ebows are a hundy? gonna stop at Good Vibrations and grab a cheap vibe to wibble around with.

GIGGETY.

gordian knot wrote:

culturejam wrote:First of all, I hope for a positive outcome for the Dwarfcraft folks. Bummer that there is drama. Yinz seem like good people, and I hate to see good folks caught up in a shitstorm of drama.


Having said that, and without knowing the specifics of the contract that was mentioned, non-competes pretty much always have a time limit (and sometimes also a geographical limitation) in addition to the scope of business operations that is included. Even if the agreement was worded so that Devi (or whatever her name is at this point) could *never* build more pedals as part of a business venture, such an agreement is not enforceable. You cannot enforce "in perpetuity" limitations on a person's ability to seek work or conduct business, no matter what the wording of the contract says. And unless the contract included intellectual property covering all former Devi Ever brand names, using Effektor 13 probably isn't in breach either. Is it douchey? I'll leave to the judgement of the individual.

yeah, good point in perpetuity isn't generally enforceable.
there are some considerations to keep in mind though that could really weigh heavilly in dwarfcraft's favor.

Non-compete ancillary to employment and non-compete ancillary to sale of business are often handled differently since the latter is agreed to in an "at arm's length relationship"

Most states have separate law for those classes

For sale-of-biz non-competes things are usually a bit more liberal because of the relative parity of the parties. For example, IIRC in Wisc a non-enforceable employment non-compete can void the whole thing, where a sale-of-biz non-compete goes by a partial enforcement (ie the agreement will be enforced as per "reasonable" terms).


it's case by case, but 3-5 years is pretty typical (though that can depend). I think the situation of the thread is currently at something like only 18 months...that'd likely be within 'reasonable' period

The geographic stuff is also case-by-case as far as "reasonable" geographic area of operation. Like if the biz is installing multi-ton HVAC units, the geographic area will probably be more limited than, say an internet based provider. Since the pedals have typically been sold over the internet nationally, the geographic area of competition is probably pretty large.

The name stuff is a sticky one. It's tough to tell without seeing the contract, but the Effector13 name may be tied part-and-parcel to the Devi Ever brand (part of the Good Will assets transferred) since Effector13 was never a separate business venture, but was just a renaming of the company --- even the products didn't change name. At least that's the argument dwarfcraft could forward.

The "Devi Ever" moniker is both tougher and easier. I think it's Devi Ever's legal name, BUT it looks like she did sell that brand. One big big hitch for Devi though is that she basically abandoned that name (even criticizing that people who used it in relation to her were being disrespectful) and was representing herself, both personally and professionally using other names ...only switching back to Devi Ever right at the time she decided to return to effects building.
So it could be argued that she is trying to use the cache of the name in trade in a backhanded fashion.

There's never a certainty in litigation, butI'd think dwarfcraft would have a pretty decent case. since :
1) it's ancillary to sale of (so less constrained than employment related non compete)
2) the current duration of non-compete before alleged breach is only around 18 months
3) the nature of the biz is rather geographically wide (the areas served is going to be similar if not identical)
4) the type of offerings are very similar (devi's fuzzes are basically variations on the same circuit topology) and certainly no phasers or delays or anything, I doubt even other fuzz circuit topologies
5) the name change back to "devi" was essentially simultaneous with setting up shop again (which doesn't reflect well on good faith efforts of Devi the person)


It's a damn shame this is going on, but not totally unexpected as -- and I don't mean this as a personal slight, but let's be honest here -- Devi Ever's (person) way of conducting business is a complete and utter mess.

D.o.S. wrote:
OK this is exciting and all but level with me: Joe Bonamassa. Greatest now, or greatest ever?