Legal developments FCC dispute In February 2006, the US
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) fined Behringer $1M. The FCC issued a Notice of Apparent Liability claiming that 50 products had not been tested for conducted and radiated emissions limits as required by US law, and noted that it continued to sell the products for a year after being notified.
Legal cases In June 1997, the
Mackie company (now LOUD Technologies) accused Behringer of trademark and
trade dress infringement, and brought suit seeking $327M in damages. The claims were later rejected by the court. In their suit, Mackie said that Behringer had had a history of copying products by other manufacturers and selling them as their own. The Mackie suit detailed an instance, in which Behringer was sued by
Aphex Systems for copying the Aural Exciter Type F. In that case Aphex Systems won
DM690,000. In 2005,
Roland Corporation sued to enforce Roland's trade dress, trademark, and other intellectual property rights with regard to Behringer's recently released guitar pedals. The companies came to a confidential settlement in 2006 after Behringer changed their designs. In 2009,
Peavey Electronics Corporation filed two lawsuits against various companies under the Behringer/Music Group umbrella for patent infringement, federal and common law trademark infringement, false designation of origin, trademark dilution and unfair competition. In 2011 the Music Group filed a countersuit against Peavey for "false advertising, false patent marking and unfair competition." In 2017, Music Group filed a defamation lawsuit against
Dave Smith Instruments, a Dave Smith Instruments engineer, and 20
Gearslutz forum users. The case was dismissed as a
SLAPP lawsuit.
Fictional synthesizer advertisement In March 2020, Behringer published a mock video for a synthesizer, the "KIRN CorkSniffer", which appeared to mock the music technology journalist and synthesiser developer Peter Kirn. The video received criticism and accusations of using
antisemitic imagery. Uli Behringer issued a response on
Facebook, saying the video had been intended as "pure satire by our marketing department". The apology was deleted the following day. == See also ==