login | register | Subscribe To Snowboard Magazine

Law suit for Releaseable bindings.

A recent law suit was concerning releasable bindings.
Here is the story from the Oregonian this week. Click on the image to read it.

Oregon Case 1
Oregon Case 2

///

mr. miller is bullish in his attempts to monopolize and force other companies into using his products-the polar opposite of free market enterprise.

it should also be noted that mr. miller is no better than an ambulance chasing law firm-piggy-backing his company in a case of (believed) wrongful death with the hopes that his company will benefit financially.

mr. miller is everything that snowboarding should not be about: corporate greed.

I KANOT RIID THEZ ARCTIKUL

I'm having trouble reading the article. I click on it, but after that the newsclipping only gets smaller than the original version posted below. Anyone got a transcript of this thing?

NEBERMAIND

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/front_page/1117274376112361.xml&coll=7

(found it at the above link)

yo

I read the article and feel bad for the parents - or for the families of any who die young - but I honestly think their athletic, outdoorsy daughter would be a little embarrassed for her parents doing this. The arguments against their case are just too strong (e.g. their case is bullshirt).

But, who is Earl Miller? There was no mention of him, but I gather he tried to sue another company on similar grounds? Pray thee, tell!

:wink:

the case before this one...

the 2nd most recent case took place in california vs Burton. They actually sued the Ski Area, the shop that sold the board, the shop owner and Burton.

All accounts were dismissed and the case never made it to trial. The shop owner actually found a liability waiver form that Burton made people sign that stated the bindings didn't release.

The Svitek case is the first actual case to make it trial. This ruling was very important.

One of the grounds for this lawsuit is that their is a conspiracy set up by Jake Burton himself and all snowboard companies. The theroy is that snowboard companies made a pact not make releasable bindings because it would admit guilt and they would have to pay Miller for his patented binding (the patent has since expired and they try to renew it each year).

In the end if releasable bindings were better you can bet your ass that Burton, K2, Rossi, and all the big players would all invent their own system and own that market too.

http://www.natives.co.uk/news/2003/09/29bind.htm

link to article not really related to the case but sheds some light.

Testify

I had to testify in this case and it was very odd. I went to school with Kate. I hooked her up with her first board. Truly a sad situation for me and all my friends who have been snowboarding our whole lives.

To shed some light on the question of who is Earl Miller: Earl Miller is the man who invented the ski break and a releasable binding for snowboarding. He died a couple years ago but spent his whole life trying to sue snowboard brands for suffication deaths in snowboarding. His legacy lives on in Revolution MFG out of Utah and his son now carries the tourch.

What this article doesn't mention is that every expert witness for Nidecker was not an employee of Nidecker. Every expert witness for the Svitek family was either an employee of Revolution MFG or someone who would benefit from Miller/Revolution winning this case.

I am personally angered by this case because i feel that Revolution tried to use the death of a very dear friend of mine to make money.

Please do not support Miller or Revolution MFG. They do not support snowboarding or the lifestyle that goes with it.

If you have any questions about this case please don't hesitate to ask.

damn

Thank you for that insight, WJT. The gross exploitation of this tragic incident is disgusting. I posted this article on another message board after I saw it here, and I'll include your info about Miller and Revolution there as well.

this is bad for snowboarding

its sad that people are trying to make money off a death of a snowboarder. i think it is intersting that the svitek fmaily only had "experts" that would benifit form a win in this case. they should be ashamed!!

snowboarding is FUN

Lame.

It's pretty awful that people try to use the tragedies of others for their own personal gain. Maybe in certain situations (tree wells) a releasable binding would be helpful but thinking about it it seems that for the most part they would suck, i.e. if one released and the other didn't or if they released while you were riding or something. If by some longshot Miller ever wins one of these cases could they force a change in the entire industry? That would blow.

Goodkind v. Burton Snowboards, et al.,

http://users.aol.com/angerinc/news/goodkind.txt

memorandom from an earlier case.

http://www.natives.co.uk/news/2003/09/29bind.htm

an article that quotes earl miller's son owner of Revolution MFG

www.rideharder.com

Revolution MFG's Website with the ZIN Binding.

Watch the promo video...

///hate mail: info@revolutionmfg.com & 888.542.7669///

a more direct link to the video is: http://www.rideharder.com/revolution_V2.html

try not to laugh.

ps-i got dibs on the music

snowboard.com

employees of Revolution hang out in snowboard.com...

a site that actually blocks you from posting Snowboard's web address.

Haters

We've had a few issues with snowboard.com already. There are a lot of haters out there. I predict within one year, most of the snowboard magazine/snowboard sites will redisgn their sites to resemble this one, and make them more interactive.