your warranty on your Ride snowboard is void if you use non-Ride bindings on it
every company has CYA crap like this
every company has CYA crap like this
Burton douchery?
This is basically a question, but I am a sucker for a punchy headline.
I just took delivery of a new 2010 Sierra Crew and (as I understand) they are made in Burton's factory in Austria and, lo and behold, it came in a Burton shipping bag.
Now, I've never bought a board that came in a bag (oh the glow) but on the bag I read this:
"The 3D board is part of a board and binding system cover by U.S. patent... You are licensed under the patent to use your 3D board with a Burton 3D binding or a binding from an authorized licensee. Your license under the patented system does not extend to the use of this board with any other binding."
When you go to the hill the back of the lift ticket always says something about "inherently dangerous" blah, blah, blah which is basic liability language but this seems kind of, well, douchey.
I figure this is Burton's way (and I imagine this would be Burton's explanation) of ensuring that a given binding is compatible with their insert package but I wonder if any other manufacturer has that sort of language on their decks.
I just took delivery of a new 2010 Sierra Crew and (as I understand) they are made in Burton's factory in Austria and, lo and behold, it came in a Burton shipping bag.
Now, I've never bought a board that came in a bag (oh the glow) but on the bag I read this:
"The 3D board is part of a board and binding system cover by U.S. patent... You are licensed under the patent to use your 3D board with a Burton 3D binding or a binding from an authorized licensee. Your license under the patented system does not extend to the use of this board with any other binding."
When you go to the hill the back of the lift ticket always says something about "inherently dangerous" blah, blah, blah which is basic liability language but this seems kind of, well, douchey.
I figure this is Burton's way (and I imagine this would be Burton's explanation) of ensuring that a given binding is compatible with their insert package but I wonder if any other manufacturer has that sort of language on their decks.
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
burton has been guilty of the ultimate douchery ever since Jake tried to patent "snowboarding" in the early 90s (as if he invented it)...he was trying to be able to license "snowboarding" in any form, but, fortunately for us, that didn't work out.
The 3D insert design was the next in a series of attempts to get people to use only their products. Notice how the disclaimer says nothing about warranty...it's more like intimidating lawyer speak for "use only our stuff, or we'll see you in court"
From a business standpoint, you have to give burton credit for trying just about everything in their power to make us theirs, and only theirs...but their reputation has suffered, too
The 3D insert design was the next in a series of attempts to get people to use only their products. Notice how the disclaimer says nothing about warranty...it's more like intimidating lawyer speak for "use only our stuff, or we'll see you in court"
From a business standpoint, you have to give burton credit for trying just about everything in their power to make us theirs, and only theirs...but their reputation has suffered, too
That's lame. Yes, a nice attempt to increase market share but it is also exactly why I am looking at all brands EXCEPT Burton.
Unfortunately, many riders in my area still think Burton is the ONLY way to go. I'm not really into riding whats popular so f-em.
Unfortunately, many riders in my area still think Burton is the ONLY way to go. I'm not really into riding whats popular so f-em.
I have to say, I've never been on the bash-Burton bandwagon. When I started riding I simply couldn't afford their equipment.
Eventually I ended up on their freestyle S/I binding because I much preferred them to the K2 set up and I hated sitting on the snow.
When shopping for new gear this year I noticed their ICS system and felt about that system what I feel about Apple's minuscule changes to the physical dimensions of the iPod Nano... every time a new x comes out, not only do you have to buy the device, but all the damn accessories.
But this, as Extra points out, threatening is just too much. I may not be fully aboard the bandwagon (I don't know enough about their gear to criticize it) but my feelings about the company are now pretty much set.
Eventually I ended up on their freestyle S/I binding because I much preferred them to the K2 set up and I hated sitting on the snow.
When shopping for new gear this year I noticed their ICS system and felt about that system what I feel about Apple's minuscule changes to the physical dimensions of the iPod Nano... every time a new x comes out, not only do you have to buy the device, but all the damn accessories.
But this, as Extra points out, threatening is just too much. I may not be fully aboard the bandwagon (I don't know enough about their gear to criticize it) but my feelings about the company are now pretty much set.
That's why I'll never buy anything burton...they're not trying to spread the shred they're trying to monopolize it.
Love the misinformed garbage. I suggest you read through some of these, particularly the last one. He didn't try to patent "snowboarding". He actually bought the patent for it. I found so much garbage from people posting on forums about this move. Not that I'm surprised, just a bunch of speculation. Seems to the be the most common theme amongst haters of any type. No better than conspiracy theorists.burton has been guilty of the ultimate douchery ever since Jake tried to patent "snowboarding" in the early 90s (as if he invented it)...he was trying to be able to license "snowboarding" in any form, but, fortunately for us, that didn't work out.
The 3D insert design was the next in a series of attempts to get people to use only their products. Notice how the disclaimer says nothing about warranty...it's more like intimidating lawyer speak for "use only our stuff, or we'll see you in court"
From a business standpoint, you have to give burton credit for trying just about everything in their power to make us theirs, and only theirs...but their reputation has suffered, too
Jake Burton - Profile of Jake Burton - Burton Snowboards - History of Snowboarding
Burton Snowboards Inc. -- Company History
The History of Snowboarding | HouseJunkies
Jake Burton Carpenter and the Snowboard, Graphic Library Books Series, Michael O'Hearn, Book - Barnes & Noble
Snowboard History Timeline Part 3(1990's) :: Extremus info :: Åêñòðåìíî ïðèêëþ÷åíñêè ïîðòàë. Ôîðóì çà åêñòðåìíè ñïîðòîâå è ïðèêëþ÷åíèÿ
By the way, a prime example of a garbage post.
"Hmm so great of him to sue snowboard companies through a false name to make it look like he wasn't doing it.
Here's some more great writing about your Precious Jake."
From this forum.
Jake Burton Carpenter was his actual birth name. He took his middle name as his last name after college.
I thought the idea of Burton trying to patent "snowboarding" was interesting so I googled it. Obviously, it turned out to be a fact that was twisted by Burton haters.
Legally, they can't do shit if you use another binding. A patent covers an idea or a prototype so others cannot create and sell a copy of what someone tries to patent for their own profit. The so called license is likely in reference somewhere along the lines of relating to the warranty. If it's not then, it's laughable at their attempt to control what you use. Sorry but you can't do that.
It's your board you bought, and therefore can do whatever the hell you want with it.
It's your board you bought, and therefore can do whatever the hell you want with it.
They're not trying to stop you from using other bindings with their patent. I think the whole point of it is to void your warranty if you do. Which in a way is trying to stop you from using other bindings I guess :laugh::laugh::laugh:Legally, they can't do shit if you use another binding. A patent covers an idea or a prototype so others cannot create and sell a copy of what someone tries to patent for their own profit. The so called license is likely in reference somewhere along the lines of relating to the warranty. If it's not then, it's laughable at their attempt to control what you use. Sorry but you can't do that.
It's your board you bought, and therefore can do whatever the hell you want with it.
At any rate, they aren't the only ones doing this.
Burton did buy the patent and they did try to get all companies making snowboards to pay them a royalty or license fee. That is a fact. They also tried to cover it up saying they were required to do it and then when someone actually looked at who bought the patent the cat was out of the bag. No they didn't try to "patent" snowboarding, but what they tried to do is pretty much what was said. This has always been why I don't care for Burton. A completely lame move that you'd expect from a bunch of "suits".
Actually, Jake Burton said he bought it to keep Brunswick from acquiring it. I know it is very far fetched and looks completely bad, but all you can do is take the man's word for it.Burton did buy the patent and they did try to get all companies making snowboards to pay them a royalty or license fee. That is a fact. They also tried to cover it up saying they were required to do it and then when someone actually looked at who bought the patent the cat was out of the bag. No they didn't try to "patent" snowboarding, but what they tried to do is pretty much what was said. This has always been why I don't care for Burton. A completely lame move that you'd expect from a bunch of "suits".
I know first hand what it feels like to be caught in a situation where I look blatantly guilty, no matter what I said. I've been caught in this situation numerous times actually. One particular incident involving my female best friend and my now fiancee's misinterpretation of the events.
Shit happens. People under public scrutiny have it worse. This is why I always give everyone the benefit of the doubt. I know how if feels on a much smaller scale. I can only imagine what it's like for these public figures. This is why I don't go around spewing slander.
There is a huge difference between someone saying Burton tried to patent "snowboarding" and the fact that he bought a patent on Skiboards.
And if he was in fact doing what you all say, what is so incredibly outrageous about it? Every single company tries to patent everything they can. That's just business. Some just try to do it on a bigger scale.
Don't misinterpret my responses though. I'm not a Burton fanboy by any means. I love and hate their products. Same goes for every other brand I use though.
At least Burton isn't as bad as Wal-Mart. I bet a lot of you shop there.
^you were sure defending burton like someone who worked for them or maybe has stock or investment in the corp(?).
I also have to wonder why shaun white, their number 1 rider, doesn't use thier current proprietary binding insert system (ics/est). Just saw him on TV and it looked like he was back on the 3D system.
I also have to wonder why shaun white, their number 1 rider, doesn't use thier current proprietary binding insert system (ics/est). Just saw him on TV and it looked like he was back on the 3D system.
I defend any company when people make ignorant remarks about them. I don't have any investments in that company. In fact, if it weren't for Shaun White and their billboard beanies (I have a huge head and these look the best on me), I probably would not have any of their gear. I don't like their bindings at all. I actually do like their ICS system though.^you were sure defending burton like someone who worked for them or maybe has stock or investment in the corp(?).
I also have to wonder why shaun white, their number 1 rider, doesn't use thier current proprietary binding insert system (ics/est). Just saw him on TV and it looked like he was back on the 3D system.
As for Shaun White, his boards are ICS now. I heard that they changed the system around a bit for 2011 and he was using all 2011 stuff down to his goggles. I will be going to a test fest soon and will let you guys know what the changes in the binding system are.
The whole "Burton sucks" thing is super old to me. 90% of the Burton haters go off of hearsay and most haven't even tried a Burton product worth trying i.e. "I had the Burton Clash with Custom bindings."
Burton makes good shit and that's all that matters to me. Unless of course I hear about them mistreating their employees like Wal-Mart. Then I will put a personal ban on them like I did with Wal-Mart. Business is business to me. Every company is out there to make more money.
By The Way, I wonder how many people would flame me if I attacked Union. BurtonAvenger did in another forum and some people weren't too happy about that. Those same people were bashing on Flows... go figure :dunno:
You don't have to try a company's product to not like their way of working or rather, their ethnics. Burton did the same patent move with board technology that was developed I believe by F2 in Austria and then bought a patent for their concept and technology they were using (basically stealing it) and then turning it around asking them to pay royalties for their own design. Their response? You should be embarrassed with yourself. They never heard anything from Burton after that.
I enjoy their clothes, but I won't buy their actual board gear with their sketchy antics.
I enjoy their clothes, but I won't buy their actual board gear with their sketchy antics.
Why did he send legal notices to a bunch of snowboard companies saying they needed to pay a royalty? Look it up, the did that as a company.Actually, Jake Burton said he bought it to keep Brunswick from acquiring it. I know it is very far fetched and looks completely bad, but all you can do is take the man's word for it.
I know first hand what it feels like to be caught in a situation where I look blatantly guilty, no matter what I said. I've been caught in this situation numerous times actually. One particular incident involving my female best friend and my now fiancee's misinterpretation of the events.
Shit happens. People under public scrutiny have it worse. This is why I always give everyone the benefit of the doubt. I know how if feels on a much smaller scale. I can only imagine what it's like for these public figures. This is why I don't go around spewing slander.
There is a huge difference between someone saying Burton tried to patent "snowboarding" and the fact that he bought a patent on Skiboards.
And if he was in fact doing what you all say, what is so incredibly outrageous about it? Every single company tries to patent everything they can. That's just business. Some just try to do it on a bigger scale.
Don't misinterpret my responses though. I'm not a Burton fanboy by any means. I love and hate their products. Same goes for every other brand I use though.
At least Burton isn't as bad as Wal-Mart. I bet a lot of you shop there.
Buying the patent is one thing, trying to strong arm other companies is another.
Burton also got egg in their face for this and had to make a public admission about their intentions. It's all out there. In fact I am pretty sure ESPN has it covered on their X games website. Other sources too. I am not sure where you are getting the info making them sound good, but the fact is, they did buy the patent and they did try to force everyone else to pay them. All of the other stuff was them trying to cover their ass.
^^^^^^^^ but he said he didnt!!!
He doesnt lie!!!!
I have to take his word!!!
(ME=TROLLING)
He doesnt lie!!!!
I have to take his word!!!
(ME=TROLLING)
You got me wrong, I'm not trying to make them look good. I'm just trying to say not to twist the facts.Why did he send legal notices to a bunch of snowboard companies saying they needed to pay a royalty? Look it up, the did that as a company.
Buying the patent is one thing, trying to strong arm other companies is another.
Burton also got egg in their face for this and had to make a public admission about their intentions. It's all out there. In fact I am pretty sure ESPN has it covered on their X games website. Other sources too. I am not sure where you are getting the info making them sound good, but the fact is, they did buy the patent and they did try to force evefyone else to pay them. All of the other stuff was them trying to cover their ass.
You are right, their lawyers did send out that notice. It's even in the links that I posted.
But like I've said before, hate them for facts, not here say. "Burton tried to patent snowboarding" <--simply absurd statement right there. Who in their right mind would try to patent an entire sport. In the 90's no less
Instead, you have to take the media's word and believe everything else other than the person in question. Killclimbz just shot down any excuse for what Burton did, but that doesn't make every single situation like this the same case.^^^^^^^^ but he said he didnt!!!
He doesnt lie!!!!
I have to take his word!!!
(ME=TROLLING)
Sometimes, the situation does look worse than it actually is because of what the media says.
Here's one of the brief synopsis of what Burton tried to pull.
Sure, I'll buy it that Burton bought it to keep Brunswick from having it. Really though, does it entitle them to 3% of all sales from other snowboard companies?
That's bullshit...
Sure, I'll buy it that Burton bought it to keep Brunswick from having it. Really though, does it entitle them to 3% of all sales from other snowboard companies?
That's bullshit...
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums
A forum community dedicated to all Snowboarding enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about equipment reviews, tips, traveling, gear troubleshooting, share photos, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
eLi_1119*
68 Replies
Cambered234
53 Replies
SennaBlast
38 Replies
Recommended Communities
