Class Politics All about to kick off....

Thanks to whoever recap-ed this document:
http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.ctd.99988/gov.uscourts.ctd.99988.64.0.pdf
we know that the trial date (if a trial actually happens) won't be before October 2014. That's 15 months from now.

I think this will really damage the class. Nobody in their right mind will be buying a new Laser/Kirby Sailboat as either could become worthless depending on the outcome of the court case (and it is quite a lot of money for many to risk). And then any decision gets very close to the next Olympics and what is there is then no such thing as a "Laser" ? - ISAF will be looking pretty daft then.

So, I might rejoin the ILCA and stand for President next elections with the policy of finding an urgent compromise and solution with Kirby. Revoke the recent rule change and open immediate discussions with Kirby to find a solution. Can't be hard as I believe we would both have identical aims and would both be looking for the same outcome.

Beggars belief that ISAF/ILCA cannot resolve this without the need to go through all this court stuff. Makes one wonder what their real agendas might be.

Ian
 
I think this will really damage the class. Nobody in their right mind will be buying a new Laser/Kirby Sailboat as either could become worthless depending on the outcome of the court case (and it is quite a lot of money for many to risk). And then any decision gets very close to the next Olympics and what is there is then no such thing as a "Laser" ? - ISAF will be looking pretty daft then.

So, I might rejoin the ILCA and stand for President next elections with the policy of finding an urgent compromise and solution with Kirby. Revoke the recent rule change and open immediate discussions with Kirby to find a solution. Can't be hard as I believe we would both have identical aims and would both be looking for the same outcome.

Beggars belief that ISAF/ILCA cannot resolve this without the need to go through all this court stuff. Makes one wonder what their real agendas might be.

Ian

The boats won't become worthless - it isn't in any party's interest for that to happen, so why would it?

Good luck with your run for president. I'd suggest starting by reading the class constitution. Maybe you can get there in 10-15 years, if you start out by getting involved at the district level, becoming district chairman, do a good enough job that the other district chair people eventually vote you in as chair or vice-chair of your region, then doing the same good job at the world council level until the rest of the WC decide that you're the best among them to be the president.

Everything the ILCA has done so far has been about maintaining the status quo of the class and limiting the damage to the class and the sailors from the dispute between Kirby and LP. They seem to have done well so far - a Laser is still a Laser, class legal boats are still available in all regions, regattas are still happening (without any reduction in numbers as far as I can see).

It's not the ILCA that needs to find a compromise solution with Kirby, it's LP. ILCA continue to work towards getting the parties together for this to happen. How would you do this differently? Did you notice that Kirby withdrew his pre-judgement motion to stop the issuing of the new plaques? Do you think he just woke up one day and decided to withdraw this? Or do you think, just maybe, it was a result of discussions with the ILCA?

What will damage the class is the constant negativity and the speculation. What will get the class through this is the class members supporting the ILCA officers, good people, in their tireless efforts to sort this all out, and the class members working at the grassroots level to promote the class, rather than talking it down all the time.
 
What will damage the class is the constant negativity and the speculation. What will get the class through this is the class members supporting the ILCA officers, good people, in their tireless efforts to sort this all out, and the class members working at the grassroots level to promote the class, rather than talking it down all the time.
A healthy Laser class includes discussing issues. I see these statements about "constant negativity" being made when the ILCA is criticized for it's actions (or inaction!) ILCA's officials are not beyond reproach - and the Laser class is so big, it's difficult for it to do anything without being public. Remember the issues about the There have been some serious question raised about the ILCA, the manner in which the rule change took place. When questions go unanswered, then there would seem to be a potential cause of damage as well. Of course Redstar, you are not saying that every action by the ILCA has been perfect, I get that. It is possible to be positive and speculative, and there is such a thing as positive criticism - though as witnessed in this forum it's not always achieved.
In the latest issue of Laser World (posted 31 July 2013), Tracy gives yet another summation which I am 100% confident that I won't be the only one who has disagreement with some of the detail. However with the big picture, we are in agreement - that it's a time to remain stubbornly optimistic that something will get sorted. Tracy Usher writes: "At the time of this writing and as it seems these things go, the situation, as they say, remains rather fluid. ILCA and ISAF have met with Bruce Kirby and his representatives to discuss the situation and possible solution and we have been continuing a dialog aimed at getting all parties to the dispute to the table to find a final solution. ILCA is optimistic that a solution is going to be found and in the ideal case by the time you read this article the dispute may well be over." Unfortunately it's not over yet - or at least we if it is then we haven't heard.​
The big picture is that the class is still the number one adult sailing class in the world, and the best choice for thousands of sailors at a local level. Check out this: http://homepages.vodafone.co.nz/~garthb/results/nsf13rsl.htm - a local event that I was gutted to miss a couple of months ago: 23 Full Lasers and 19 Radials - including several 'names' that have been featuring internationally... While the 3 times and current Radial Apprentice Masters World Champ didn't win every race - he still won the series. Also great to see Tom Saunders (World youth champ in 2010) starting to sail really well. Could be a name to watch in the future. Not bad for a little town at the bottom of the world. The point I am making is that the actual sailing is still continuing and the "damage" so far is not so great. The "damage" is more that the Laser does still not have a solution for Asia (except Japan), and it looks likely that it won't be resolved until the legal process is completed - and even then - it still might not be resolved! That been said - it's hardly negative there - all that needs to be said in response is "Lijia Xu".
 
Wow - the last two are definitely worth reading. That is the at heart of the dispute and speak volumes about both Kirby's and Rastegar's positions.

This was written in October 2011:

WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Bruce,
You are mischaracterising my response to your email of the other day.
You are deliberately trying to create a situation that does not exist and you are playing on
words.
All your suggestions in your email are rejected and without basis.
You are requested to refrain from direct communication with me or any of the LP team.
Any future communication will not be replied to and the lack of reply to any future
communication does not consitute any agreement with your statements, now or in the
future.
Any communication from you should be directed to our counsel and to be formal in
nature.
Please try to conduct yourself in a professional manner and according to the request
herein.
With thanks,
Farzad
 
I also have the motion that references these:
http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.ctd.99988/gov.uscourts.ctd.99988.58.0.pdf

See page 12 of this and compare the lost of companies on it to page 3 of exhibit 4 (http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.ctd.99988/gov.uscourts.ctd.99988.58.4.pdf). I cannot see a difference between the two lists of companies. They are not in any particular order which suggests that one is a direct copy of the other. But how did this happen? I see three possibilities:
1. Kirby created the list and used the fed it to the blog owner to publish it without it appearing to come from him.
2. Kirby's "extensive" research (page 12 of the motion) consisted of reading the blog page.
3. There is an unknown source that both obtained the list from.
 
The boats won't become worthless - it isn't in any party's interest for that to happen, so why would it?

If you purchased a Kirby Torch today and Kirby lost, the Torch Class would die immediately and your boat would not be a Laser (and, given ILCA/ISAF attitudes, are they going to give you a plaque ?)

If you purchase a Laser today and got one with the plaque excluding Kirby's name and Kirby wins I doubt your boat would be considered a valid Torch (because it does not include Kirby's stuff on the plaque). But Laser would be dead any your boat would not be in any real class.

That is what I meant about a boat being worthless and where I think the damage to the class is going to start to hit as this goes on for an extended time.

Ian
 
They are not in any particular order which suggests that one is a direct copy of the other. But how did this happen? I see three possibilities:
1. Kirby created the list and used the fed it to the blog owner to publish it without it appearing to come from him.
2. Kirby's "extensive" research (page 12 of the motion) consisted of reading the blog page.
3. There is an unknown source that both obtained the list from.


I can't see too much of an issue. When I do some research for marketing reports, I may collect data from a variety of sources - including Blogs if their research seems good - then use that as a starting point - check the validity of the data etc. It would seem that the research in the Blog was good - as I can't see any changes after a cursory look. What that means is that the writer of Kirby's document simply agrees with the research in the Blog - quite a compliment to Pam - unless it came from a common source.
 
So lawyers are now cutting and pasting internet postings into court documents? I would LOVE to see the SA blow torch thread to wind up in court.
 
I can't see too much of an issue. When I do some research for marketing reports, I may collect data from a variety of sources - including Blogs if their research seems good - then use that as a starting point - check the validity of the data etc. It would seem that the research in the Blog was good - as I can't see any changes after a cursory look. What that means is that the writer of Kirby's document simply agrees with the research in the Blog - quite a compliment to Pam - unless it came from a common source.
Based on my limited experience of following a couple of lawsuits, it is my opinion that people who trumpet the strength of their case and use third parties to anonymously put out information that doesn't look good for the other side actually have a weak case.

Your comment appears to ignore my option 1.
 
I can't see too much of an issue. When I do some research for marketing reports, I may collect data from a variety of sources - including Blogs if their research seems good - then use that as a starting point - check the validity of the data etc. It would seem that the research in the Blog was good - as I can't see any changes after a cursory look. What that means is that the writer of Kirby's document simply agrees with the research in the Blog - quite a compliment to Pam - unless it came from a common source.

Thanks Gantt. My research and my post. I've gladly shared the data with Kirby, his attorney, the ILCA, Sailing Anarchy, the IRS and the FBI. And If I can find the time, I have more research to do to grab the interest of the Guardian who have a ton of leaked documents from offshore accounts. Rastegar's trail stopped in the BVIs.
 
Thanks Gantt. My research and my post. I've gladly shared the data with Kirby, his attorney, the ILCA, Sailing Anarchy, the IRS and the FBI. And If I can find the time, I have more research to do to grab the interest of the Guardian who have a ton of leaked documents from offshore accounts. Rastegar's trail stopped in the BVIs.

So you suspect that Rategar's business and/or tax arrangements are not 100% proper?

In my opinion, none of this is good for the future of laser sailing.

The setup of establishing local monopolies doesn't lead to the lowest possible price for boats and equipment, but it isn't obvious how one entity getting an almost worldwide monopoly would increase profits for the monopolist.
 
Thanks Gantt. My research and my post. I've gladly shared the data with Kirby, his attorney, the ILCA, Sailing Anarchy, the IRS and the FBI. And If I can find the time, I have more research to do to grab the interest of the Guardian who have a ton of leaked documents from offshore accounts. Rastegar's trail stopped in the BVIs.

Hope you don't get a subpoena and have to appear in court.
 
Based on my limited experience of following a couple of lawsuits, it is my opinion that people who trumpet the strength of their case and use third parties to anonymously put out information that doesn't look good for the other side actually have a weak case.

Your comment appears to ignore my option 1.


My comment did ignore your first option, because I was aware of what Pam had written shortly after she had placed it on her blog and was aware of it's inclusion by Kirby. You are very much mistaken - the information went from Pam to Kirby, not the other way around.

This case revolves around the validity of the contracts - and the idea of whether or not the builders contracts were terminated prior to 2011. That idea was put forward by Rastegar and Co, who then acted as if it was so, then convinced the ILCA to propose a rule on that basis. Note that we now know, having had the opportunity to read the builders agreements, that it had in it provisions to transfer - I am unclear on what basis the obligations of any parties to the contract have been released - this is a matter that to date Rastegar has not dealt with effectively. Kirby says that the transfer to Global Sailing was not effected properly, and that the agreement that Rastegar was still valid until 2013 when he terminated the contracts.

I believe that, in accordance with the contracts, it is up to Kirby to appoint builders. It is up to other parties, including the Trademark holder, to ratify the appointment of builders. Because the holder of the Laser Trademark is Rastegar, he effectively has right of veto for the North American, European and possibly some Asian markets. This is the bind that keep us all from moving forward. It's very unfortunate that things have reached this point - but it is a bind never the less.

Enter the ILCA and the ISAF. Unfortunately (at least for Kirby), they don't see it the same way that he does, and would rather have Rastegar continue building boats, until this mess is sorted out. Unfortunately, in giving Rastegar support, there will be no 'sorting out' outside of court, as any move different to the situation now is a compromise for Rastegar. This is because at the moment Rastegar gets to build Lasers without paying royalties. Also, if we recognize Kirby's rights, then Kirby's termination of Rastegar's companies (Laser Performance) may be effected. These two facts prevent Rastegar from engaging in any mediations in a meaningful way.

It's my judgement that the ethics favour Kirby, however if I set those aside, I still end up favouring Kirby's position. Bottom line for me is that I sail a particular boat design. I love all of the boats being the same and that I do battle with other sailors, not with differing technology. That being said, I cannot bear the design of the boat to change, while I can bear the trademark to change.

To me, there are two options:
1) Buy the Laser Trademark off Rastegar and appoint a new builder.
2) Sail the same boat under a different trademark.

Unfortunately for Rastegar, both of these options do not include him or his companies building 'our boat' - if it is Kirby's will (and it is). That is because I respect the rights of Bruce Kirby to appoint builders as laid out in the various contracts that I see are still valid. These are the same contracts formulated the enormously successful 'Laser system'. Over and above this, Kirby was a significant part (but not the only part) of the creation of the sport I have enormous passion for. Without Kirby, there would be no Laser. The same cannot be said for Rastegar.

In order to change the name of the Laser, the process of change needs to be over several years - mostly because there are already agreements in place with the ISAF for Laser Performance to build Lasers. However being a longer time scale also presents an opportunity to look in depth at the system that we have, and for the stakeholders to discuss what improvements can be made to the rights. If for example, there is to be a new trademark, (from the top of my head) I'd like to see the stakeholders buy into it (is there something better than the Torch?), have a robust discussion on where the trademark ownership is best held for the good of the class so there is no possibility of a similar bind in the future. Also there is Kirby's desire to do some 'estate planning'. Again, it is the stakeholders where these things need to be discussed - how the system will best run without Kirby - how to arrive at market values of the assets (like the 'design rights', the trademark rights etc) then how the transfer of rights is best effected without seeing any party out of pocket.

Again, the ILCA and the ISAF play a pivotal part in this.
 
I suspect that, rather than wanting someone to build "boats", the ICLA want someone to build "Lasers". At the moment, the only organization that has the rights to do this in NA and Europe are Rastegar's companies. That's probably why the ICLA seems to have given tacit support to LPE and QM.

I have absolutely no knowledge of this, but I suspect that Kirby's implication that he is the sole creator of the builder's manual is an exaggeration -- it would seem likely that the original builders would be heavily involved in developing the specifications and techniques to build a boat.
 
I suspect that, rather than wanting someone to build "boats", the ICLA want someone to build "Lasers". At the moment, the only organization that has the rights to do this in NA and Europe are Rastegar's companies. That's probably why the ICLA seems to have given tacit support to LPE and QM.

I have absolutely no knowledge of this, but I suspect that Kirby's implication that he is the sole creator of the builder's manual is an exaggeration -- it would seem likely that the original builders would be heavily involved in developing the specifications and techniques to build a boat.


I agree with Whatever about the ILCA. So long as there are two opposing parties who have control not wanting to work with each other, we have this bind. To remove that bind, there are only a few options. As said, my favoured ones are to either buy the trademark "Laser" or work around it somehow - for example have the same boat with a replacement trademark as suggested by Kirby with the Torch.

With the construction manual, Kirby does not claim to be the sole creator of the construction manual - at least anywhere I have read. (If I'm wrong, please send through what supports this). What Kirby claims is that he owns the manual (or at least copyright to it), but even that has special meaning and is outlined in the builders agreements.

Immersing ourselves in the dispute, or the idea that we must have a solution with Rastegar like the ILCA seem to be doing - perhaps there is a better way? We can wait for the legal process to take place - or we can take control and make it the way we want it. If we wait for the legal process, then chances are we'll still need to make changes for the future. In 2017, what will be the best solution? Do we still want a situation that is unclear? That has the potential to bind the parties like we have now?

The time to work on a solution is now.
 
So you suspect that Rategar's business and/or tax arrangements are not 100% proper?

He has given everyone reason to suspect. Back in 2012 in connection with the Maclaren bankruptcy, Alice Hines from the Huffington Post writes:

In March, Rastegar's bankruptcy lawyers claimed that Maclaren USA had no knowledge of the ownership of Maclaren Hong Kong Limited. Bankruptcy trustee Napolitano disputed the claim in a court document filed April 24, writing that she believed the U.S. company possessed "knowledge sufficient to allow complete responses to her requests for information." Maclaren USA owes $13.1 million to Maclaren Hong Kong Limited, according to bankruptcy filings.

Rastegar, subpoenaed in New York on May 10, testified that both Maclaren Hong Kong Limited and Maclaren Distribution Limited (the parent company of Maclaren Europe Limited) are owned by his mother and sister.
 
He has given everyone reason to suspect. Back in 2012 in connection with the Maclaren bankruptcy, Alice Hines from the Huffington Post writes:

In March, Rastegar's bankruptcy lawyers claimed that Maclaren USA had no knowledge of the ownership of Maclaren Hong Kong Limited. Bankruptcy trustee Napolitano disputed the claim in a court document filed April 24, writing that she believed the U.S. company possessed "knowledge sufficient to allow complete responses to her requests for information." Maclaren USA owes $13.1 million to Maclaren Hong Kong Limited, according to bankruptcy filings.

Rastegar, subpoenaed in New York on May 10, testified that both Maclaren Hong Kong Limited and Maclaren Distribution Limited (the parent company of Maclaren Europe Limited) are owned by his mother and sister.

That doesn't look good.

I wonder what his ultimate goal is? Wear Kirby down and then buy out Kirby's rights?
 
I wonder what his ultimate goal is? Wear Kirby down and then buy out Kirby's rights?

His history with every company he's owned in the past seems to be to run it into the ground. Whether that's intentional for financial/tax reasons or just a reflection of his business management skill is still unknown. I have no doubt that Rastegar's collective pocket is getting deeper but the pockets of his businesses are not.
 
Whatever, check out David Netto's story. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/15/david-netto-maclaren-suit-fraud_n_1600530.html

I don't know what the outcome was (or if it is still in process), however there seems to be several things not going so well in the world of Faraz Rastegar - Netto's suit was against Rastegar personally. There is a lot in the public arena, I'd encourage people to read up on it themselves and draw their own conclusions.

For me, I have not seen any evidence that either Rastegar or Kirby have intentionally constructed this dispute - yes things have been said - some regrettable things. In short, I believe it to be genuine difference of opinion.

All this being said, I don't think that we should be 'against' Rastegar per se. Nor do I think we should pay lip service to neutrality - while favouring one party in the dispute. For me, personally, I have had enormous benefit/enjoyment out of the Laser class, and the Laser, Kirby's sailboat and Bruce Kirby are inseparable. I'm not denying that Laser Performance is a big part - however put simply, in my mind Bruce Kirby is a bigger part. This is in part because he was a big part of creating it and making the Laser successful. For me, as I have outlined previously, I consider that I owe Bruce Kirby my support, and I gladly give it.
 
That is a separate issue Tim.

They probably sued under trademark infringement (which as they currently own the trademark they are entitled to do).
 
Technically a separate legal issue, but just another move in the global PR game. Quite frankly, it doesn't make sense to me for LP to toot their horn about it. They are basically admitting their failure to supply parts the last few years.
 
LP won't see it as a separate issue. They claim that there is a conspiracy to drive them out of business by Kirby / GS / PSA, and specifically mention the selling of lasers / laser parts outside of their territory by PSA.
 
I sail a boat and a special one design concept for that boat; to me, the brand is just an add-on. I recognise that the creator of the boat and concept is Bruce Kirby, and until otherwise advised believe that he owns the boat design and the special one design concept for that boat. Therefore my allegiance is with Kirby.

By the way, when I'm entering my boat in local events, I've finally thought of what name to use for my boat: "Torch".
 
Speaking to an insider who works as LP in the UK he paints a slightly different picture regarding the new sail.

He told me that all parties have agreed the change except the ILCA and that is what is holding things up. Whether this is related to the current legal action I do not know!

He also says that once the new sail is launched it will be priced around the same as the current sail (shame, I told him this was a silly idea and they should sell it at a more realistic price point) and the current stock of sails would be sold off at a large discount.....

The plot thickens...... who is actually holding this up?
 
I thought most people here knew about the new sail design?

It is a radial cut of the current full rig using a standard cloth and has been developed over a long period of time to ensure it is no faster than the current sail but more durable than the current sail.

There was an article in the ILCA magazine about it I seem to recall. SFBayLaser knows much more about it as he has been using it for some time but given his real world position I would say he is unlikely to comment at this time.
 
Ahhh... that one. Yeah, that and the carbon mast would be good too. But I think that if it ends up that we sail the Torch, that they may be very keen to not make changes for a few years during the introductory phase... I can see it going either way...
 
The carbon mast is just about ready too I understand but is currently on hold until the legal wranglings are sorted out.

I will see what my 'spy' knows when I see them over the weekend.
 
Laser Performance seem to have something to say about the lawsuit. They seem to have a website in development. Google shows hints on it content but click the link and you have to login.

FAQ | Laser Chronicles
dev.laserperformance.com.php53-5.dfw1-2.websitetestlink.com/faq/

FAQ Concerning the Lawsuit initiated by Bruce Kirby. Why did LaserPerformance cease paying royalties to GLobal Sailing Ltd.? LaserPerformance ceased ..
 

Back
Top