Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 10:15:14 08/25/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 25, 1999 at 12:53:31, Mark Young wrote: >On August 25, 1999 at 09:22:37, Steven Schwartz wrote: > >>On August 25, 1999 at 01:29:49, Robert C. Maddox wrote: >> >>>On August 24, 1999 at 20:42:56, Steven Schwartz wrote: >>> >>>>The case went to trial in 1991 and lasted three weeks. Fidelity >>>>tried to convince the jury that a full page ad which we ran in >>>>Chess Life magazine (The Federation publication) in September of >>>>1985 saying that the Sensory 9 played "Over 1700" damaged them >>>>to the tune of 1.5 million dollars. Why? Because Fidelity was >>>>telling all their distributors that the 9 was playing "Over 2000" >>>>and we caused them to lose about 50,000 Sensory 9 sales. In >>>>fact, the Federation at that time had just about 50,000 members, >>>>so that meant that ALL were planning on purchasing a "9" and >>>>our "Over 1700" ad convinced ALL of them not to. >>> >>>In the first half of 1992 edition of CCR, in an article entitled "Now it Can Be >>>Told" you describe a lawsuit of this kind with Fidelity, but the computer >>>involved was the "Excellence." >>> >>>Were you sued twice by Fidelity? :) >>> >>>BTW, I have a working 9, and it does indeed give a hint move when turned on. I >>>love that old computer! >>> >>>Robert >> >>The body is willing but the mind is going... >>You are absolutely correct. We were sued only once by >>Fidelity and it was over the Excellence not the Sensory 9. >> >>At the time, it was the most important event in my life. >>I could not have made that mistake if my life depended >>upon it, but 8 years have passed and Sensory 9s blend >>in with with Excellences. However, I believe that they >>were VERY closely related, and the Excelence claim to >>fame was that it was selling for under $100 whereas >>the older 9 was closer to $200. The Excellence was >>a GREAT deal. It just wasn't "Over 2000" as Fidelity >>wanted everyone to believe. >> >>Fidelity used my article (if you wish to reprint >>it here, please do so) as their "proof" that I was >>trying to hurt Excellence sales because I suspected >>some attempt by Fidelity and the U.S. Chess Federation >>to push ICD out of the chess business so the Federation >>could have it all to themselves. Paranoia? I don't think >>so. > >The U.S. Chess Federation trying to run you out of business so they can control >all chess sales? I'm sure that never crossed their minds..... Ethics and fair >play have always been trademarks of the USCF internal structure. As it is >today... I better stop its getting pretty deep in here.:) > >> >>- Steve (ICD/Your Move) Well, Fidelity is gone, and ICD is not, so I guess Steve gets the last laugh. This does leave me with a "2265" tabletop that I can't get fixed, but oh well. Crafty would club it over the head anyway. :-) Dave
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.