Breaking: Smith & Wesson Going After Apex, et al?

1412663_10154079910784381_3999330697979114961_o

Any of you that run an M&P may have an opinion about the stock trigger, and may have considered an upgrade via Apex (we posted in August about a replacement trigger; and other parts for that matter).  Well, it seems Smith & Wesson is not terribly pleased about [EDIT: the M&P Dream Gun] and has sent their legal team after Apex, Brownells, DP Custom Works, Blowndeadline Custom, and SSVi.

I know a number of people that only bought an M&P because of Apex’s trigger for it (that was a deciding factor).

I can marginally understand them going after the unauthorized use of the trademark, but to claim unlawful modification?  Does that mean when you buy from Smith & Wesson you are leasing the gun?  I understand (as should everyone) that you are null and voiding the warranty if you have custom work done, but that should not preclude you from doing whatever the hell you want to do to your own gun.

Readers, what are your thoughts?  Is this an over reaction?  Is this okay for Smith & Wesson to do?  What does this mean for other companies that do custom work?  My personal feeling is that once you buy it, you can do whatever you want as long as you are not violating NFA and are willing to take full responsibility for those mods.

The post was made by SSVi on instagram here: https://www.instagram.com/p/_miiI5F8ZN/

[UPDATE]  One commenter posted that it may be related to the Dream M&P Build showing at SHOT.  Which does seem more plausible than a blanket C&D to several companies.  It would clarify to see the full letter–still looking.  Thanks to Barry for the insight.

[UPDATE 2]:  Ballistic Radio has published the whole letter on their Fabebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/ballisticradio/photos/pcb.738309049633261/738308282966671/?type=3  So, yes the C&D is initially focused on the M&P Dream Gun concept but it also has some ambiguity about promoting gun smithing skills.  And Demand #2 requests a cease of sale of any modified S&W that bears their logo/trademark.  Lawyers in the group, please chime in–thoughts?

[UPDATE 3]: We were sent the full copy of the letter:

12376438_738308246300008_4474133845907129540_n (1) 12360422_738308252966674_726650459240512649_n 12348007_738308276300005_58560028049511532_n

535094_738308282966671_3059115125437244127_n



Tom is a former Navy Corpsman that spent some time bumbling around the deserts of Iraq with a Marine Recon unit, kicking in tent flaps and harassing sheep. Prior to that he was a paramedic somewhere in DFW, also doing some Executive Protection work between shifts. Now that those exciting days are behind him, he has embraced his inner “Warrior Hippie” and assaults 14er in his sandals and beard, or engages in rucking adventure challenges while consuming craft beer. To fund these adventures, he writes medical software and builds websites and mobile apps. His latest venture is as one of the founders of IronSights.com; a search engine for all things gun related. He hopes that his posts will help you find solid gear that will survive whatever you can throw at it–he is known (in certain circles) for his curse…ahem, ability…to find the breaking point of anything.


Advertisement

  • James R.

    Interesting. If someone can get a full copy of the letter and send it to me, I’ll try to use my real person job skills to opine on the merits.

    • Doc Rader

      That is the current hunt right now… Since SSVi just posted a pic to their Instagram, there is hope they will leak the full document.

    • KestrelBike

      Would a C&D ever reference and Cc: multiple offenders in the same letter? That’s like saying “hey guys we’re coming after you, but you go ahead and team up with all these other guys to pool resources and information to defend yourselves with!”

      Oh crazy, looks like at least Ballard Spahr has represented S&W quite a few times this year, with one of the recent ones being a property case.
      http://www.law360.com/companies/smith-wesson-holding-corporation/outside_counsel/ballard-spahr

      • James R.

        Good question. While S&W may be under no obligation, pre-suit, to identify all defendants or make their identity known to each other, they would almost certainly have to eventually join all of these defendants in the same suit, assuming the suit arises from the same facts (which it appears to be). That’s where all the ‘resources’ would go anyways. Plus, S&W’s object shouldn’t be to harm these guys financially, only to get them to stop what they are doing.

      • James R.

        Re: prior representation, that’s par for the course, especially with older, larger companies like S&W. They usually have a firm that they have used for years with pre-negotiated rates, which firm will basically have all of the common issues from that client (e.g., C&D letters like this) already in a standard form so they can just change names and fire it off.

    • We will also have a post on this Apex, Brownells pistol.

    • Bobb

      Just as a point. It doesn’t look like they’re showing the gun as a S&W M&P. They’re pretty honest on the fact that it’s a build of that base gun.

    • Bill

      I’d be really cautious regarding your last paragraph – essentially taking an M&P and sterilizing it doesn’t make it not an M&P.

      • James R.

        “Entirely possible” and “could”. Not my first rodeo, Bill. 😉

      • bmrtoyo

        and they say glocks are ugly ,thats one ugly frankenfunk

    • Vanns40

      Not being of the legal persuasion, at least on point #3 I would tell them to pound salt.

  • Big Daddy

    I sold all my M&Ps, they had terrible triggers and the APEX kit helped but the overall cost was not worth it. I still did not like the trigger even with the APEX kit. This is a company that is a corporate entity now and is not interested in anything but making as much money as they can no matter what. But this will actually hurt their business, it’s not as though the company is copying some trademark or patent, they just offer an upgrade kit. The question is do they just want a piece of the action?

    • Rick5555

      You might want to read the entire letter. S&W is reacting like any other company. Apex, Brownells, et. al. are using S&W trademark without permission. Apex et.al created a gun based off the M&P and revealing it as a S&W, M&P. Apex did modifications and presenting the firearm as if its a Smith M&P. You can’t do that in the business world due to intellectual property rights. Now if Apex, Brownells, et. al, just presented the modified firearm as “The Dream Polymer Gun” and left out the SW. Then Apex would be fine. Normally, if a company did something like this. They would get the base companies permission or authorization to phrase the firearm like that. Sometimes paying a small fee to use the name. As long as, a company like SW agrees with the finished product. Essentially, Apex didn’t do any of those things. Sort of when a motion movie or tv show uses songs in their movie. Without the consent of the artiest or whomever owns the rights to that song(s). Not like SW is suing at this time. They simply issued a cease and desist letter in using their name and especially their logo. If Apex complies and changes the name by removing SW and not using the logo. Then everything will be fine. No foul, no harm….everyone is happy.

      • AndyHasky

        Someone who actually knows a thing about trademark laws and why this whole thing is a non-issue?!?!?! I can’t believe it

    • Jason Lewis

      I’m sticking with Glock after reading this.

      • bmrtoyo

        never left , lol

  • BKE Evers

    I replaced the sites on my Springfield 1911, does that mean I get a letter too? How about the Jewell Trigger on my 700? Or the new stock for my 110 Savage? What makes Smith and Wesson so special?

    • Anomanom

      You aren’t marketing a product. When they are marketing the “M&P Dream Gun” M&P is a trademark of Smith and Wesson. The fact that they are re-marketing the gun, after modification, with the original Smith and Wesson and M&P trademarks, is what makes it an infringement.

      If they said, on the other hand, “send us your M&P and we’ll turn it into a dream gun” and then did all the same mods to it, that would be A-OK.

      Does this making the understanding clear?

  • I wonder if Russia will come after me if I mod my Mosin?

    • Schutze

      NYET, rifle is fine.

      • Fritzthedog

        In holDover Union, rifle modifies you!

    • President Kalashnikov

      Nyet. You’re good. Just don’t touch the AK.

      • FalconMoose

        Ooops!

  • Twilight sparkle

    Smith and wesson’s legal team went the wrong direction here, they should have partnered with apex to release a new gun with this trigger.

    • Ben

      They should have just bought out Apex years ago and folded them into the S&W Performance Center facility when Apex became the trigger to put into your gun.

  • Barry

    It’s in response to the Brownell dream M&P that the listed companies were going to display at SHOT. It is not a C&D for the aftermarket parts they sell to the general public. I’m disappointed that this site posted it without the full letter.

    • Doc Rader

      Didn’t have the full letter. Just based on the pic that SSVi posted to instagram. Do you have a source on the full letter?

    • James R.

      This would make more sense in the context of the letter (especially in including BlownDeadline, a finishing company), but in defense of TFB, if you read the Instagram post with the letter, the post does not present the letter under that pretext at all.

      • Barry

        The Instagram post is totally misleading as I think it was intended to be. But if you read the letter you can tell there is more than one page. And posting just that one page and not digging around for the rest of it is a bit irresponsible especially when it could be found on AR15 and was posted an hour or so before it was here. And doc I’ve tried uploading it in the comments section but it won’t let me.

        • Doc Rader

          Thanks, Barry. I added the link to the Ballistic Radio. I couldn’t find a clear link on AR15 (I was in the industry section and they just posted a number of images which looked to be from Instagram)

    • Nobody had the full letter but I did find it and its been posted.

  • allannon

    Are Apex, etc, reselling whole modified guns? That might be different than just selling parts.

    If S&W is suing over parts, then screw ’em; it’s not their gun once sold.

    • No it’s over a joint project gun with Apex and Brownells as well as the other companies contributing to the gun build.

    • Rick5555

      SW is not suing…they issues a cease and desist letter. This isn’t about modified parts per se. Its about how the other companies built a particular gun based off the M&P series and using SW name and logo without SW permission or authority. This is not unusual. Many companies like SW have to protect their intellectual property rights. Or else, everyone and their mother (other companies) will do this.

      • Lt_Scrounge

        They do it because once that weapon leaves their factory, they have no control over the modifications. If they allow other companies to use their name and logo on a modified product and there is an accident because of one of the modifications adversely impacting the engineering, they could be sued because their logo was on the weapon or marketing material. It could be misconstrued as tacit consent to the modifications and thereby leave them potentially liable for any damages that might occur, even when they produced a safe product initially.

        Think of it this way. What happens if someone at a custom shop accidentally installs a piece that hasn’t been hardened properly and it wears down causing the weapon to go fully automatic and someone gets hurt. Is the original manufacturer at fault for the injury? IF they allow the company selling the modified weapon with their logo on it or the advertising materials without specifically stating that the original manufacturer is not responsible for any injury or damages from the modifications, the answer could be decided to be “yes” by a jury. I used this example because a former military non commissioned officer went to prison because a part in his personal AR wore out and the thing went full auto on him and he was found guilty of owning an illegal machine gun. It turned out that one of the replacement parts he had installed had been defective. The manufacturer had a shipment of them that they had failed to harden properly.

  • OptimusDerf

    Ballistic Radio has the full letter on their Facebook page.

    • Doc Rader

      Thanks for the pointer. I updated with that info

  • 6ShotsOr5?

    I didn’t let the warranty issue stop me from installing the Apex stuff in my M&P 40c. With my J-frame model 442, I let S&W replace my barrel that came with a bunged up crown under warranty before I installed the Apex kit to drop the DA trigger down to 9#. Instead of going after the little guys, S&W should just install better triggers. Ruger finally figured that out with their LCR.

  • Doc Rader

    What would have been better is if S&W was like “Hey guys, you’ve listened to the consumers and are providing a neat package. Carry on, but kick us back a royalty for use of the name and trademark, and make sure you own the warranty on your implementation.”

    Or something similar. That way everyone wins. Not everyone wants the highly modded version, gunsmiths aren’t punished, and S&W comes out looking good and supportive, not to mention more exposure at SHOT and people talking positively about them.

    I get their argument on the infringement. But there is a way to handle it that should be a boon for everyone.

    • TechnoTriticale

      I suspect S&W is a lot less concerned about royalties and warranties than they are about liability. This doesn’t seem to be about aftermarket mods generally, but about the specific case of re-selling a new branded product that’s been modified. The modder needs to be clear about whose product is for sale, and where to serve papers on if there’s an unhappy downstream event.

      • Glenn Bellamy

        “This doesn’t seem to be about aftermarket mods generally, but about the
        specific case of re-selling a new branded product that’s been modified.” Except that is NOT the case here! The blog copy that S&W’s attorneys attached to the letter makes it clear they knew this already. ALL of the promotion by Brownells, Apex BDL, etc. makes it perfectly clear that they are NOT reselling a branded product. Brownells is only selling aftermarket parts and the other are selling modification services for customer-owned guns.

  • Vitsaus

    So many big companies suing little ones these days. Makes you wonder.

  • Brian

    If it wasn’t for Apex and their parts. M&P would not be anywhere near as successful.

    • Old Fart

      Hear hear!

  • Old Fart

    S&W is laughable. If I decided to buy one of their products, the item becomes legally mine, which means I can do with it as I please. If they can’t stomache the aftermarket that’s their problem. Nowehere does APEX brand their M&P upgrades as genuine S&W kit, so any claims made bij S&W won’t hold up in court. SIG Sauer [226], when it counts!

  • NCJohn

    So S&W wants to piss off Brownell’s eh? well as craptastic as S&W’s line of pistols has become I suppose it couldn’t hurt them any more.

    • Curious_G

      M&Ps are craptastic? Sheilds are craptastic? Who knew.

  • Brian

    I don’t see what the upside is for S&W to do this? Personalizing guns is part of the fun. Also, some guns do perform better after such parts or modifications are added to said weapon.

    • Ben

      S&W’s lawyers couldn’t get a lawyer lock put on the semi’s so they had to do this instead to keep themselves occupied 😛

  • john huscio

    I love s&w wheelguns, but if I was given an m&p, I’d sell it straightaway, no desire for a pistol that needs aftermarket triggers to be shootable……..strangely enough I’ve come full circle on glocks……..put a 30s on layaway yesterday…..

    • Hilltop

      Just get a Walther PPQ. Unless you just like paying for more parts and working on your guns. PPQ comes PERFECT. I’ve still got Glocks but I don’t know for how long…

      • Curious_G

        The turnoff for me on the Walthers is the lack of aftermarket support – holsters, sights, etc.

        • Hilltop

          cant argue with that.

      • john huscio

        I like the pps and p99, the ppq is good….but I liked the vp9 a little better.

        • Hilltop

          Like all H&K stuff, I’m sure it’s good. But, the PPQ trigger is magical.

      • BigFED

        While Walther’s are good pistols, there doesn’t seem to be ANY U.S. (domestic) agency that has adopted ANY Walther product for duty use or as standard issue. There may be some agencies that allow them as an approved alternate or for off-duty, but not first line. And understand that I am NOT talking about any specific model, but the entire name brand. I do confess that I do NOT have “extensive” knowledge of what all or any agency authorizes, but in over 50 years the only presence of Walther I ever saw was as off-duty/back up. I carried a 1967 PPK in that role.

        • Anthony Rosetta

          Walther does make a fine handgun! I own two of them and they’re excellent.

        • tarnishedcopper

          The Germans sure liked the P-38 and PPK in WWII!!LOL!!!

          • BigFED

            The P-38 started out as a decent pistol, but like all German small arms, as the war progressed poorly for the Germans, manufacturing suffered badly. Add the fact that many of the workers involved in manufacturing were forced/slave labor, they didn’t pay strict attention to QUALITY! Tolerances were sloppy and heat treatment was immensely suspect. Those folks were NOT enthused about making the item and had hopes they would “hand grenade” in the users face! I had more than one WW-II vet come in to our range wanting to shoot their war trophy P-38. Most did NOT take it kindly when I calmly informed them it was highly suggested they just put it in a case and brag about it. I told them to look it up for themselves that the 1944-1945 manufactured ones were suspect, but it was their hands and faces!!! Even when I showed them the milling marks and other signs of poor workmanship. I usually used the analogy of a Yugo with a Mercedes badge or wanting to make 1,000 mile drive in a vintage, i.e. original condition, Model “A” Ford.

            Now the early production ones ARE good guns, there are still issues with those since tolerances were still suspect.

  • Mike

    Maybe if S&W put better triggers in there new guns
    companies like Apex would not be so successful.

    • bmrtoyo

      yes , i shot my friends ,felt like a wet sponge ,pushing on an eraser , engaging a wet piece of liver ,,what a POS

  • Jon G

    Did anyone else notice that the deadline for this has already passed technically due to error (i.e. January 5 2015)?

  • Gidge

    Talk about utter stupidity. A big part of what makes Glock so popular is the wide range of high quality after market pays available that are either drop in or require minimal tools and skills to fit. What the hell are they thinking?

    • Laserbait

      And the AR15, and 1911 markets too. If they helped aftermarket companies, it would help them sell more guns!

    • Bullphrog855

      Ironic, it’s not even about after market products.

  • nohilderbeast2016

    Sold my M&P9….the trigger felt like a gritty rubber band, the gun was not for me.

  • Bill

    Surprisingly enough, given their history over the SD, Smith’s best defense may be GLOCK, and also Colt, two manufacturers who’ve basically had their designs replicated by the aftermarket, though I ‘m confident Colt’s patent on the SAA and 1911 has expired, and while the AR/M4 is a little legally murkier, there is precedent….

  • Rick5555

    This article needed more research and conformation before it was subsequently published. This is why many of the larger firearm manufactures refuse to provide T&E guns/gear to bloggers, You Tube Channels, etc. Because, many times, misinformation or simply wrong info is passed down. Doing a company potential harm. Just read the comments, before James chimed in with the various “edits.” Providing further explanation. Or when the entire C&D letter was made available. People are bashing S&W, and making assumptions based on half the information. Responsible journalism would’ve waited a bit longer to get all the facts/info before posting something. Just my opinion. But I do understand why large firearm manufactures are subsequently reluctant in providing T&E guns for review. Too many people just get things wrong. Having no clue what they’re talking about….essentially being amateurs. Which can wrongfully harm a companies reputation and its sales.

  • Xia Tianhun

    Screw S&W and the horse that road in on them. They have been letting gun shops and gun smiths do this type of thing for over 100 years. You cannot just suddenly one day say oop no more customizing then selling the weapon as and S&W. This is no different then say a company engraves a Colt 1911 and sells it as a Colt 1911. Its NOT a factory weapon and the engraving removes the factory warranty. Just because it is modified beyond factory spec does not change the fact that a Factory did indeed make it.

    S&W will find that the courts to do not appreciate people who suddenly change their minds about something that has been done as long as the company has been around.

  • derfelcadarn

    Being unfamiliar with S&W’s gun or the quality of its trigger system, if the performance of the Apex system is that superior that it existence is the tipping point for purchases then S&W should market the weapon in conjunction with Apex and sell more guns. Win, win for everyone S&W, Apex and especially the consumer.

  • NightRavenGSA

    My only thought is that they’re using legal precedents that revolve around the firearm legally being a “new construct” however existing law on the subject would appear, to me, to suggest that no matter what you do to a firearm, it would not be a new construction under the law. (Note: I am not an attorney, and NOT licensed to practice law in what ever state you may reside)

  • Cal S.

    Yeah, S&W has a product life-time warranty barring the standard misuse clauses. In other words, like a Hi-Point, the warranty follows the product regardless of how many times it changes hands. My guess is they don’t want one of these “New” guns showing up at their shop and being liable for fixing something someone else broke.

    If that’s the case, I can completely agree with S&W on this.

  • Leadsled

    Does Glock do this?

    • Jason Lewis

      Nope.

  • Marc Walker

    S&W are POS’s and have been for years, I wouldn’t own one and it’s obvious most people wouldn’t even buy their crappy ass guns if there weren’t aftermarket parts available to make them decent. If S&W doesn’t like the aftermarket parts they should put out a quality gun in the first place and that would eliminate the issue itself.

  • William Taylor

    Smith DOES have experience with this sort of thing. They instituted a number of lawsuits protecting another patent of theirs some years ago. 1857 I think it was, something about bored-thru revolver cylinders. Rollin White patent, I believe it was? Sounds like their mood hasn’t gotten much better since then ;-).

  • survivor50

    I have been seriously considering buying a few of these very pistols for wifey, myself, and daughter… but after this pi$$y little tirade by S&W, I believe the competition, I think I’ll go for their competition. Both have similar features, and specs. This pushed me over the line… What a bunch of little tyrants…and from S&W no less.
    No more S&W for my family…

  • BigFED

    If S&W had a decent trigger on ANY of the semi-autos, installing the APEX kit wouldn’t be necessary!!! Those M&P triggers are not ANY better than their “entry level” Sigmas!!! Whenever someone came into our shop looking for a S&W auto, once the looked at both, most folks would select the Sigma since it was cheaper and they couldn’t tell the difference in trigger pull! The funny part is that most of those “pros” out there that swear by the “better” M&P are really good enough shot to where a “better” trigger pull makes a difference!!!

    My old saying for over 50 years, “There are those folks that no matter how bad the gun, can shoot and there are those that no matter how good the gun, can’t shoot”!!!

    • survivor50

      A million years ago, a police buddy suggested I pick up a Keltec P3AT for MY particular carry application. That thing certainly doesn’t have any sort of “GREAT” trigger in it. It can’t even be improved much. BUT…he was right, with the “right” technique” you can make it work. Still, I’d love to have something that concealable, and with a “GREAT” trigger.
      S&W… you screwed the pooch…

  • paul

    It seems to me that S&W are complaining about selling a new firearm with thier name on it after modification. That is different than modyifing a firearm that you bought for them to modify.
    Look at Shelby. He did many modified new cars, but only with the approval of the company. The company should have rights on newly manufactured items, if thier name is on the outside.
    When you buy a Winnebago, thier name is on the product, but the running gear, frame, etc is not made by them, it is manufactured by someone else. The company that made the item might have a nameplate on the front, that is the part they cover as thiers, not the added on part. It is not like the running gear is modified. If it is, the company should have thier rights to whether or not they want to be part of it. Thier name is important to them. If something wrong happens with these products’ modifications, they need plausable deniability.

  • Dan Hermann

    Grind off all S&W markings

  • Bobby McKellar

    Edit #4: S&W has retracted all the letters and apologized for putting their stupid foot in their collective mouths. They overreacted (at a minimum) and “went full potato” at worst.

  • MontieR

    When smith and Wesson take a finacial hit because they are jackwads maybe they will get it. This is stunningly STUPID. NOBODY would think that this wonder gun is factory stock but some anti gun bone head or a completely ignorant of guns lawyer.

  • cwolf

    James Debney, President and CEO of Smith & Wesson, said, “I would like to clarify that we fully support the Brownells Dream Guns® Project and we appreciate that it showcases the many ways in which our customers – loyal fans of our M&P brand – can choose to customize their M&P firearms. Our decision to contact the companies that worked on the project was intended to protect the trademarks that support the M&P brand. When a product bears the Smith & Wesson and M&P trademarks and is purchased new with our lifetime service policy . . .

    we want to be sure that the consumer knows it has passed our demanding quality standards. In our efforts to protect that promise and to preserve the brand that we and our customers cherish, we did not fully understand the intent of the Dream Guns® Project and we overlooked the opportunity to convey our enthusiasm for the creativity and innovation that Brownells and all of the companies involved have demonstrated. We look forward to seeing the firearm on display at the upcoming SHOT Show in January and at the NRA in May.”

    ‘I have spoken with James Debney, President of Smith & Wesson, who called me regarding the M&P® Brownells/Apex Dream Gun™,’ said Matt Buckingham, Brownells President. ‘It was a simple misunderstanding about the intention of the project. He made it clear that Smith & Wesson is excited to have their product featured in this fun and unique way. For our part, we are honored to include it in our Dream Gun lineup. Smith & Wesson is a legendary brand in this industry and we continue to be proud partners with them.’

  • uisconfruzed

    This from the company that released the Sigma :/
    The S&W trigger SUCKS. I’ve owned two S&W pistols, sold them both off, glad I did. Still love my 15 yr old Glocks and Sigs.
    An improvement is made, and S&W products sell. Instead of being happy that they’re moving more product, they sue.
    SilencerCo NEEDS to find a different base handgun for their integrally suppressed pistol now.

  • tarnishedcopper

    For God’s same, please don’t tell S&W about my custom N-Frame 2 inch .45 ACP revolver in that nasty old parkerized finish….I might end up in debtor’s prison….

  • Jason Lewis

    Seems pretty idiotic on S&W’s part. I don’t know why they do business like this. I bought a M&P10 and after decided to buy parts to rebuilt the bolt to have around just in case. Come to find out they don’t sell parts they want you to send the whole gun to them after it breaks. I supposes it’s buyer beware.

  • richard kluesek

    The problem with S & W is that they need to offer to the customers the features and benefits on the products that they want. Eliminate the “Hillary hole” locks, known to self activate when firing, on revolver frames. Fire the lawyer who recommended this. Provide the trigger pulls achieved by Apex Tactical as options. Remedy the reliability and breakage issues rumored about the M&P polymer service pistol line.

  • LetsTryLibertyAgain

    Reading between the lines, this looks like a lawsuit alleging Definition Of Character (the tongue in cheek version of defamation of character). S&W sees the M&P Dream Gun as essentially pointing out the deficiencies in the standard M&P. The character of the M&P is defamed, not through false allegations, but in an honest market description of the M&P. S&W can’t sue people for stating the obvious, so they attack them based on a frivolous trademark infringement. I don’t doubt that S&W is on solid legal ground, but I still think it’s a crummy thing to do. I don’t see that any offense was intended. Brownell’s and the after market manufacturers’ intent seems to be more of a “making a good gun better” sort of promotion, and S&W thanks them for the cross branding promotion with a lawsuit.

    There are enough legal problems being created to weaken the firearms industry without S&W’s little internecine legal battle.

    Every time I’d mention S&W jumping in bed with Bill Clinton to promote gun control (magazine limits in the runup to the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban) in the hope of getting a lucrative military contract that never materialized, S&W fanboys are quick to tell me that the company is under new ownership and we should forgive and forget, and the new company is very pro-gun. Riiiiight. That’s why they’re suing firearms accessories companies, which sounds more like a tactic of Bloomberg, Brady, A Million Moms, etc.

    I prefer Glock, where their legal battles are all internal sordid family issues instead of attacking people who offer improvements and accessories for their products.

  • BigFED

    After S&W have over the past years, shot themselves in the foot so many times with this and other crappy guns, they now have to aim for the groin in order to get any sensation. So they are officially nuts about to be nutless. The buying public doesn’t tolerrate this crap, especially when there are better alternatives!

  • Read the later post. S&W screwed up and dropped the CD and apologized to all involved. It’s over—