Comparison Yanmar lawsuit.

[clemsonfor]

The question the Supreme Court is considering is, "does the first-sale doctrine apply to imported goods?".

Interesting development. Yanmar called off their dogs (attorneys) from eastern US dealers who agreed to cease and desist the sale and support of gray market Yanmars. Will they do so in the south/central US? It's looking like, initially, they're not. We'll see.

Some things for Yanmar to consider. Existing gray market dealers are a virtual dealer network waiting to be snatched up. Some dealerships (like mine) are already taking steps to replace the lost revenue from not selling Yanmar. New unit sales will easily make up for lost revenue and profit (they already have, with one line we took on). If someone at Yanmar has common sense, they'll run around to all these gray Yanmar dealers and set them up selling new ones as part of the deal for ceasing the sale of gray tractors.

so atre u saying your a dealer?

 

[tb8100]

Yes, we are.

 

[tb8100]

Well, I for one prefer the yellow and black paint scheme, but if you want to see the tractor models and colors Yanmar sells to all other Non-North America and English speaking countries you can visit this web site: Tractor | Agriculture | Yanmar

Yeah, black and yellow is pretty sharp, but that is definitely a Cub Cadet color scheme. Besides, red would make people think it was an Agco from 20 feet. Just like the Kioti color scheme is no accident.

 

[John47]

Well like I stated earlier, they have lost me as a potential customer, had I not had a grey market Yanmar, I would never have known how great the brand is, but with this attitude of theirs, looks like red or orange or maybe even blue will be my next choice.
And to answer the OP, my wife is "old school" like myself, if she or I took a stupid risk and got hurt, we take the blame for our own silly actions not blame others.
Much like the Ryobi contractor saw incident, how on earth would a court allow a lawsuit against a company when it's blatantly obvious it's neither their fault or way out of their hands???
I had a JD before the Yanmar, no ROPS, no PTO cover and no safety switch on the clutch......

 

[phatgemi]

Just think, there are hundreds of thousands of old JD's, Fords, Massey's, Oliver's and IH that dont have ROPS, safety switches, PTO covers, etc. Wonder if the parent companies will follow yanmar's lead????
It's crazy!!!!

 

[phatgemi]

Just think, there are hundreds of thousands of old JD's, Fords, Massey's, Oliver's and IH that dont have ROPS, safety switches, PTO covers, etc. Wonder if the parent companies will follow yanmar's lead????
It's crazy!!!!

 

[Katahdin]

Courts have allowed these frivolous lawsuits against Yanmar. Read this one: http://opinions.aoc.arkansas.gov/WebLink8/0/doc/273420/Page1.aspx

I don't think you can say JD, Ford, Massey, etc are in the same situation. Are their old exports being imported into the U.S. and re-sold in like-new condition? Are they being sued by buyers who get injured or killed using these gray market imports? Nope.

One could say that this situation the gray market dealers have created, either directly or indirectly, has harmed Yanmar by turning off potential new equipment buyers like yourselves. I feel sorry for those people, I guess they'll be stuck buying either over-priced or inferior equipment.

 

[284 International]

Courts have allowed these frivolous lawsuits against Yanmar.

But if one reads that case you posted, Yanmar's appeal (Both Yanmar Japan and Yanmar America) was found correct, and the decision was reversed and dismissed. While the courts certainly have and do allow frivolous lawsuits, it appears in the cases I have found that the courts have generally absolved Yanmar from responsibility-as they should have done, in my view.

So there some hope for justice, at least.

There is no shortage of stupid decisions in this world, whether on a personal, corporate, or national level. In the oil and lubricants section of the board, there was some discussion about the bankruptcy of Blitz, a company that builds gasoline containers:
"In the one case Blitz lost, in 2010, a Utah jury awarded more than $4 million to the father of a 2-year-old girl killed when a Blitz can exploded after the father, David Calder, tried to start a fire in a wood-burning stove in his trailer home by pouring gasoline on the flame. "

How anybody could think it is the builder of a gasoline can's fault that somebody poured gasoline on an open fire, thus causing a fireball, INDOORS, no less, utterly baffles me. I just don't see how systemic flaws in tort law in the United States should make systematic dismantling of a person's free speech and property rights a good thing.

I don't think you can say JD, Ford, Massey, etc are in the same situation. Are their old exports being imported into the U.S. and re-sold in like-new condition? Are they being sued by buyers who get injured or killed using these gray market imports? Nope.

One could say that this situation the gray market dealers have created, either directly or indirectly, has harmed Yanmar by turning off potential new equipment buyers like yourselves.

Even if those companies were in the same situation, it still shouldn't change the core question at hand in this particular lawsuit: Should a person be able to sell something that is legal to possess, acquire, or sell, and advertise it in print or online, or should they have to get permission from the company first?

Another key question in this lawsuit is whether manufacturing a product overseas gives a US company preemptive authority over someone's ability to sell an item they legally purchased. Currently, if I buy a product manufactured in this country, once it is mine I can use the trademarked properties of that product to sell it and be legally protected. (This refers to the case referenced by California and others earlier that will be heard and tried by the Supreme Court)

Hopefully all these unjustified lawsuits will be found without merit, and dismissed with prejudice. I'd like to see Kubota Tractor Corp V. Wallace International Trading revisited and overturned, too.

The next few months promise to be an interesting time for those interested in Supreme Court cases and other developments in the legal field.

 

[phatgemi]

Courts have allowed these frivolous lawsuits against Yanmar. Read this one: http://opinions.aoc.arkansas.gov/WebLink8/0/doc/273420/Page1.aspx

I don't think you can say JD, Ford, Massey, etc are in the same situation. Are their old exports being imported into the U.S. and re-sold in like-new condition? Are they being sued by buyers who get injured or killed using these gray market imports? Nope.

One could say that this situation the gray market dealers have created, either directly or indirectly, has harmed Yanmar by turning off potential new equipment buyers like yourselves. I feel sorry for those people, I guess they'll be stuck buying either over-priced or inferior equipment.

So do you think this came to a head when the Viet Recons started a new page in the yanmar story. Back when dealers sold them looking like they would for a 20-25 year old tractor everything was ok. But then some started alluding that their tractors were "new --completely reconditioned" ones?

 

[California]

That's my guess. Particularly, claiming 'factory reconditioned' when the VN shops can't buy a single factory part from Yanmar.