Quoted from SuperMica:

> Mirco makes products under license from Planetary [PPS].
> A trademark licensor can be held liable for defective goods produced by their licensees.
> Therefore, PPS shares in the responsibility for damages caused by products on which their trademark appears.
> PPS bares liability even though they are not the manufacturer or the retailer.
> All entities that take part in production or marketing are strictly liable for any injuries resulting from such entity placing a defective good in the stream of commerce.
> This reasoning is based on an always-moving cost-benefit analysis that holds entities which benefit from the sale of defective products are responsible for the costs.
> The Lanham Act permits a trademark owner to license its trademark to a licensee that is a related company.
> The act defines a related company as "any person whose use of a mark is controlled by the owner of the mark with respect to the nature and quality of the goods or services on or in connection with which the mark is used."
> Under the Lanham Act, a trademark licensor [PPS] cannot be completely uninvolved in the manufacturing or they risk forfeiture of the mark.
> If PPS declares they have “nothing to do with the goods” other than placing their trademark on the products then they have failed to exercise the mandated control over nature or quality.
(See Lanham Act § 45, 15 U.S.C. § 1127)

Quoted from smalltownguy2:

Wow. Just, wow.
No words.
Wow.
[quoted image]

Quoted from slochar:

Are you missing text on the door on twilight zone?

Quoted from Warzard:

In the US, you have (I think) more power than we do have in Europe.

Quoted from smalltownguy2:

Wow. Just, wow.
No words.
Wow.
[quoted image]

Quoted from Zitt:

I'd commit to a gofundme donation for any group of people that are willing to file a real lawsuit against PPS for defective Mirco PFs. Seriously. no joke here.

Quoted from Warzard:

pretty much agree.
At the end it's pretty unknow how many abused customers they are, but with massive production such as JJP pins and the WMS pinball swapped, I think there are a lot of defective playfields out there (among other products from Mirco) and a lot of people don't say anything (resale value?) or just let it go, because of the stress don't worth it maybe.
There is no reason than, if the manufacturing process was not ok at some point, one playfield will be scrap and others ok: they will all turn defective for this period of time the process was "off".
I think people in here are the tip of the iceberg.
In the US, you have (I think) more power than we do have in Europe with your class action, it protect customers from abuse from major player. It requires a lot of coordination and effort though unfortunatly.

Quoted from SuperMica:

As the trademark holder PPS is liable for defective products manufactured >under license< by Mirco. Therefore, submit a claim to PPS.

Quoted from Doctor6:

[quoted image]

Quoted from underlord:

Be sure to repost this in Godfather thread. Goldfish memory going on with new and shiny.

Quoted from Wmsfan-GAP:

The Diner PF was a CPR….

Quoted from Doctor6:

I'm shocked by the positive reactions that game is getting considering the circumstances.

Quoted from radium:

Same. JJP dead to me with those playfields. I did see a few mentions but people will still buy.

Quoted from SuperMica:

> Mirco makes products under license from Planetary [PPS].
> A trademark licensor can be held liable for defective goods produced by their licensees.
> Therefore, PPS shares in the responsibility for damages caused by products on which their trademark appears.
> PPS bares liability even though they are not the manufacturer or the retailer.
> All entities that take part in production or marketing are strictly liable for any injuries resulting from such entity placing a defective good in the stream of commerce.
> This reasoning is based on an always-moving cost-benefit analysis that holds entities which benefit from the sale of defective products are responsible for the costs.
> The Lanham Act permits a trademark owner to license its trademark to a licensee that is a related company.
> The act defines a related company as "any person whose use of a mark is controlled by the owner of the mark with respect to the nature and quality of the goods or services on or in connection with which the mark is used."
> Under the Lanham Act, a trademark licensor [PPS] cannot be completely uninvolved in the manufacturing or they risk forfeiture of the mark.
> If PPS declares they have “nothing to do with the goods” other than placing their trademark on the products then they have failed to exercise the mandated control over nature or quality.
(See Lanham Act § 45, 15 U.S.C. § 1127)

Quoted from SuperMica:

As the trademark holder PPS is liable for defective products manufactured >under license< by Mirco. Therefore, submit a claim to PPS.

Quoted from ViperTim:

I know there’s been instances of US sellers selling inventory here in Sweden where they got claimed for faulty product and realized they had much more liability here than in the US.

Quoted from goingincirclez:

Here's the thing: All you folks in Europe love to (perhaps rightly) crow about how you have such superior consumer protection and vendor liability laws.
So what I can't understand is, since Mirco is based in Europe, how the hell is this allowed to continue??? Methinks your laws aren't as good as you claim.

Quoted from greatwichjohn:

Some playfield manufacturers are ramping up their production & facilities. Pinball manufacturing continues to grow with more companies getting into the pool. Mirco will have no problem with lack of demand by companies or consumers. He has the robots & machinery as a big player. Is his product & customer service the best. The answer is no at times. But it is not likely any worse than any other playfield manufacturer having problems at times. My best guess is 1% - 3% of playfields having serious problems with pooling, ink adhesion, or finish clear problems. Could be higher but we will likely never know.

Quoted from Lostcause:

I complained recently to PPS about MOP’s quality of a licensed playfield decal set, they replied and basically said it is what it is.

Quoted from radium:

Same. JJP dead to me with those playfields. I did see a few mentions but people will still buy.

Quoted from PinballBuzz:

Where are you getting this information from. Too much salt in your head from the sea. Stop just speculating things.

Quoted from goingincirclez:

Here's the thing: All you folks in Europe love to (perhaps rightly) crow about how you have such superior consumer protection and vendor liability laws.
So what I can't understand is, since Mirco is based in Europe, how the hell is this allowed to continue??? Methinks your laws aren't as good as you claim.

Quoted from Bmad21:

Playfield wear and tear is a fact of life. Dimpling is a fact of life.

Quoted from Bmad21:

People surprised at playfield wear.
Ladies and gentlemen things wear out. You play something more with high frequency you will wear it out faster.
It's like we convinced ourselves this can't happen in pinball.
You have a ball, metal using friction gliding and rolling and banging into things and things breaking, shocking isn't?
When it comes to dimpling you act like it's a war crime and it shouldn't happen.
But people on here get freaked out because nature does its thing. Nothing in this world is truly indestructible except for one thing.
At some point indestructible things get worn out and become destructible.
Playfield wear and tear is a fact of life.
Dimpling is a fact of life.
Who knew that people playing pinball for hours on end for months is make things wear down quicker.

Quoted from ViperTim:

It’s still difficult to use that protection between the countries.
It’s great on paper, difficult in real life.
If he would’ve had a distributor based here in Sweden it would’ve been a lot easier because then you’d go against the distributor in your own country.
I mean, Americans aren’t those who should talk when the law sometimes doesn’t even work over state borders within the US. So thinking it would be easier between different countries is crazy talk.

Quoted from Bmad21:

You have a ball, metal using friction gliding and rolling and banging into things and things breaking

Quoted from Bmad21:

People surprised at playfield wear.
Ladies and gentlemen things wear out. You play something more with high frequency you will wear it out faster.
It's like we convinced ourselves this can't happen in pinball.
You have a ball, metal using friction gliding and rolling and banging into things and things breaking, shocking isn't?
When it comes to dimpling you act like it's a war crime and it shouldn't happen.
But people on here get freaked out because nature does its thing. Nothing in this world is truly indestructible except for one thing.
At some point indestructible things get worn out and become destructible.
Playfield wear and tear is a fact of life.
Dimpling is a fact of life.
Who knew that people playing pinball for hours on end for months is make things wear down quicker.

Quoted from loren3233:

Can you explain the pooling under the sling posts/any post where the ball does not have any interaction with the playfield?

Quoted from Bmad21:

People surprised at playfield wear.
Ladies and gentlemen things wear out. You play something more with high frequency you will wear it out faster.
It's like we convinced ourselves this can't happen in pinball.
You have a ball, metal using friction gliding and rolling and banging into things and things breaking, shocking isn't?
When it comes to dimpling you act like it's a war crime and it shouldn't happen.
But people on here get freaked out because nature does its thing. Nothing in this world is truly indestructible except for one thing.
At some point indestructible things get worn out and become destructible.
Playfield wear and tear is a fact of life.
Dimpling is a fact of life.
Who knew that people playing pinball for hours on end for months is make things wear down quicker.

Quoted from goingincirclez:

I get the cross-border bureaucracies, and your states comparison is fair. But what I mean is, aside from the Euro-zone trade laws allegedly streamling the process... why haven't any of his German customers shut it down? Seems a fair majority of Euro pinsiders have a German flag by their name so it's not like the market is too small, surely enough have been burned. If they fought back he'd might have to change overall.

Quoted from ViperTim:

I fully understand your point.
Someone should have done it.
But it would better off if everybody would just stop supporting a crook.

Quoted from Warzard:

I still don’t understand why major company, such as JJP, is still going with Mirco. I’m pretty sure that this is affecting their sales. Maybe, it would have been a much better long term solution, such as CGC, that they change supplier or built their own playfields. It would have been an investment for sure, but much better long term solution and much better to deal with issues with customers if issues or change any manufacturing process themselves.

Quoted from Haymaker:

Because Mirco is allegedly an investor in JJP. Face it folks, he ain't going anywhere

Quoted from Haymaker:

Because Mirco is allegedly an investor in JJP. Face it folks, he ain't going anywhere

Quoted from SuperMica:

> Mirco makes products under license from Planetary [PPS].
> A trademark licensor can be held liable for defective goods produced by their licensees.

This doesn't really apply here.. as there really isn't a case for PPS to be identified as the manufacturer of the product. There is no real 'apparent manufacturer doctrine' in play here - the goods are clearly marked as Micro and sold as such.

> PPS bares liability even though they are not the manufacturer or the retailer.

Quoted from SuperMica:

> All entities that take part in production or marketing are strictly liable for any injuries resulting from such entity placing a defective good in the stream of commerce.

Quoted from SuperMica:

> Under the Lanham Act, a trademark licensor [PPS] cannot be completely uninvolved in the manufacturing or they risk forfeiture of the mark.
> If PPS declares they have “nothing to do with the goods” other than placing their trademark on the products then they have failed to exercise the mandated control over nature or quality.
(See Lanham Act § 45, 15 U.S.C. § 1127)

Quoted from mbeardsley:

But since PPS licensed the B/W stuff from Scientific Games, maybe THAT's who you have to go after?
If something is licensed four layers deep, who is "really" responsible...I would guess it's probably no one.
Each person has someone else that they can point at, so no one is actually responsible.

Quoted from pinballizfun:

That's just layers getting pulled up by friction from the posts being tightened and/or moving on impact.

Quoted from Lostcause:

I complained recently to PPS about MOP’s quality of a licensed playfield decal set, they replied and basically said it is what it is.

Quoted from Zitt:

Let the flood gates open.
Rick; I can state with 100% certainty; I will never, ever by a Mirco PF because of the way he has treated customers and "supporters".
This there is FULL of documented cases.