From WebStreet Golf Report:
"ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE: The battle over golf ball patents appears to be accelerating rather than drawing to a conclusion between Callaway Golf (ELY: NYSE) and Titleist (FO: NYSE). Callaway said it has filed a new patent infringement lawsuit that alleges the new 2009 Titleist Pro V1 and Pro V1x golf balls infringe on it’s golf ball patents. “We were disappointed to discover that Titleist and Acushnet (parent company to Titleist) have again used patented Callaway technology in their Pro V1 golf balls,” said Steve McCracken, Senior Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer, Callaway Golf. “As long as Titleist - or any competitor - continues to introduce products that we believe infringe our patents, we will continue to seek relief in the courts. We expect to prevail in this second suit as well.”
While it may take a rocket scientist to design a golf ball, it doesn’t take one to figure out Titleist’s response on the matter. In a prepared statement it said, “These claims are without merit, as Acushnet has designed its new Pro V1 models to be outside the claims of all Callaway patents. Acushnet has asked the court to rule that the patents asserted by Callaway are not infringed and are invalid.”
Meanwhile, under the heading of a good defense is a strong offense, Titleist pushed back with a patent lawsuit of its own. In its complaint, Acushnet asserts that Callaway’s Tour i and Tour ix golf balls infringe on nine of Acushnet's United States patents covering multi-piece, solid core technology.
“As the industry leader, we respect the valid intellectual property of others and expect others to respect ours,” said Joe Nauman, Executive Vice President, Corporate and Legal, Acushnet Company. “We believe that disagreements like these are best dealt with between the companies involved and we have repeatedly attempted to resolve these disputes. When these discussions failed, Callaway left us with no other course of action but to move forward with this lawsuit. We are hopeful that these matters can be resolved, but we will continue to protect our intellectual property rights. It’s regrettable that one of our competitors would rather compete in the courtroom than in the pro shop,” Nauman concluded. “However, we are committed to seeing these matters through to appropriate conclusions. While all litigation is uncertain, we remain confident that we will prevail.”
