Author: Steven Schwartz
Date: 10:25:23 08/25/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 25, 1999 at 13:15:14, Dave Gomboc wrote: >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 But if you put a sail on that 2265, it would make one heck of a bathtub toy:-)) - Steve (ICD/Your Move)
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.