Timebase Pty Ltd v. Thomson Corporation, The

Filing 108

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Jeanne J. Graham: Motion Hearing held on 11/25/2009 re 100 MOTION for Leave to File A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT filed by Timebase Pty Ltd. Order to be issued. (akl)

Timebase Pty Ltd v. Thomson Corporation, The

Doc. 108 Att. 3

April 9,2005

Mr. John Burke, CEO Trek l3ic)cle Corpuia!ion SO1 West Madison St. Waterloo, WI 53594-1370
lie. Damage io the 'TrekiLemond Brand bq Greg Leinond Dear Mr. B w k c
1 don't generally make &e tiahit ot'spending my time writing a letter and stating an opinion re; a business matter which has nothing to do with me. IIowever, 1 felt so sli.ongly about your eimr in judgment re; Mr. Lcixond disagreement that I felt coinpcllcd io do so.

I Iutve read througJi yoiu website bod1 Trek's complaint and Ab-. Lemond's complaint re; your dispute. As cyclist and fnn of cycling I cntdisagree with your positioii more. As a reasonably intelligent a' business man I understand your motivcs in chastising Mr. Lcmond. AAer zII, Trek dots potentially stand to snffer financial harm (in the short tenu) if the doping controversy wound Mr. Armslrong proves to have "teeth" siuce you hnve so whole heartedly backed him. Even though 1 understand the potential risks I must ask ihe,qiiestion: Why not get out in fiont of this? No matter whether you believe M .Armstrong doped or r not why not position Ihe Trek and Lemond Brand on higher ground.
a avid 3

There is 110 doubting Mr. Lemond's commitment to clean cycling and based 011 his very public anri-doping stance why doesn't Trek siipport that? Cycling is a wonderful sport and has so many values to the person riding and society in general. As the most recognized brand in the llnited States, why wouldn't Trek waiit to support Mr. Lemond in his anti-doping stance; Isn't it better in !he long-term for Trek to stand out as a ' committed pnmier in clcan cycling? I assumc that you ~ mTrek to be around long after Mr. Armseong t and Mr. temond we memories. "hy wouldri't you want to soppofl riders all over the World who believe in a heallily and eilucal endeavor'! Woulcitl'r this bring Trek and Lemond brands innre business?

,

can%* on indefinitely. Takhig the right stand no\v ami reversing your previous stance will do more to keep Trek successfill in the long term !ban your cnrrcnt shoi-tsighiednesscould ever do or is that not your Liltention? Sincerely,

I hope this leller gives }WJ some "food for &ou&t". For your information I know no one at ikek or Lemondnor do I have any relationship with iMr. kinstrong or Mr. Lemond. I am just a person who loves cycling hut wouid not considm buying a Trek made braud mtil you miry stand behind your companies' stated vnlucs and support bikes and cycliifg. Rig names come and go but an ethical and well-nin company

$#i + '

Jeff Jones Avid Cyclist, Bakersfieid, (:A

'TI? EK009594

Dockets.Justia.com

Subject: TrekBikes.com FAQ combating doping Date: Wednesday, April 9, 2008 7 : 2 6 PM From: Phi I i p Tay I or <j o- p h i1@xt ra .co .n z Reply-To: <jo-phi1 Oxtra .co. nz> To: "Consumer-, Trek" <[e-mail]> Conversation: TrekBikes.com FAQ - combating doping

-

Thu, Apr 10,2008 2:21 PM

From: Philip Taylor <[e-mail],nz>

SHAME ON TREK. Greg LeMond stands solidly against doping, as anyone who truly loves the bike, loves racing the bike should. What, if anything at all, is Trek doing in that regard?

Page 1 of 1

I

Reply-To: <rcpugh@kanepugh,com> To: "Consumer, Trek" <[e-mail]> Conversation: TrekBikes.com FAQ - Lemond

Subject: +rekBikes.com FAQ Lemond Date: Wednesday, April 9, 2008 9:51 PM From: Bob Pug h Crcpugh@ kanepug h. corn >

-

Thu, Apt` 10,2008 2:20 PM

The following question/comment was submitted from your knowledgebase From: Bob Pugh <[e-mail]> The complaint filed makes lots of sense. W h a t is Treks position regarding all of your former riders who have tested positive? Including Armstrong?

I
Page 1 of 1

Thu, Apr IO, 2008 2:19 PM

Subject: TrekBikes.com FAQ Att: John Burke--LeMond action is a disgrace Date: Wednesday, April 9, 2008 9:59 PM
From: Greg McQuaid <[e-mail]> Reply-To: <[e-mail]> To: "Consumer, Trek" <[e-mail]> Conversation: TrekBikes.com FAQ - A&: John Burke--LeMond action is a disgrace

-

From: Greg McQuaid <[e-mail]> Atten tion John Burke :

How petty and chitdish you are for discontinuing your business relationship with Greg LeMond. Once again, Lance Armstrong 's lies have damaged the reputation and livelihood of an honest cyclist because they dared to speak the truth. Cheats ride on all brands of bicycles but Trek wilt forever be associated with the greatest fraud of all, and I for one would never dream of buying one of your bikes.
Greg McQuaid San Francisco, CA

Page 1 of 1

Thu, Apr 10,2008 219 PM

Subject: TrekBikes.com FAQ - Cycling in General Date: Wednesday, April 9, 2008 10:30 PM From: Jeff Haye [e-mail] Reply-To: i [e-mail]> To : Consumer, Trek eTrek-Consu mer @t re k bi kes. co m > Conversation: TrekBikes.com FAQ - Cycling in General
'I

"

From: JeffHaye <[e-mail]> Hey there ... read an article in the 04/09/2008 Minneapolis Star Tribune with regards to your legal matters and Greg LeMond ... Give me a break Trek why t h e hell should you care what is happening between two of the best cyclist the USA has ever produced ...even though Armstrong got there illegally. .. The fact of the matter is that you have moved away froin what your company's founder stood for and are "in it for t h e money"... It is sad that you have to push your weight around in t h e name of cycling w h e n it really is aft about the $$$ for you. Prime reason why I would never own a mass produced piece of "commenality" that you continue to produce day in and out.

A t least t h e LeMond line had some style and appeal.
Sincere I y,

Jeff Haye

Page 1 of I

!

TREK009588

Thu, Apr 10,2008 29.8 PM

Subject: Trek5ikes.com FAQ Support for Lemond Date: Thursday, April 10, 2008 12:07 AM From: Ted Young <[e-mail]> Reply-To: <ted@rapattoni .corn> To: "Consumer, Trek" <[e-mail]> Conversation: TrekBikes.com FAQ Support: for Lemond

-

-

From: Ted Young <[e-mail]>
Dear Trek Management,

your refusal to support: him. Lemond has consistently and a t great risk to his own popularity spoken out about doping in cycling since 2001. Time is on his side and history has shown his comments have merit. A t a time when the integrity of competition should count more than the number of wins Trek bas taken the moral low ground. The Lemond name splashed across the down tube now carries more class than ever before. Sincerely,
Ted Young

I was sad to learn of the pending dissolution of your relationship with Greg Lemond, While his comments have certainly not helped the images of cyclists such as Floyd Landis and Lance Armstrong they have not damaged the Trek label nearly as much as

i

Thu, Apr 1 , 0 2008 2 5 9

PM

Subject: TrekBikes.com FAQ - LeMond v Armstrong Date: Wednesday, April 9, 2008 9:59 PM
To: "Consumer, Trek " <Trek-Cons umer@t rekb i kes .corn> Conversation: TrekBikes.com FAQ - LeMond v Armstrong

Repi y- To: < pdbeckr a n@ ya h oo .com> n

From: Peter D Beckman <pdbeckman&yahoo.com>

From: Peter D Beckman [e-mail]>
Hello,

I just finished reading the article in the Minneapolis StarTribune. Well, count me out as a future Trek bike customer after reading this:
According to its suit, one customer wrote to Trek in an e-mail: "Has Greg always been a snivellng, insecure jerk who needs to denigrate others' accomplishments in order to boost his own self-esteem?" Give me a break, one stupid emailer! What a hatchet job on one of America's true sports heroes who did it the right way. While most insiders know Lance was a doper, I would have never held Trek responsible for that: fact. But this was very sad. I'll buy my LeMond bike after it is not: part of Trek.

-Peter Beckman

Blooinington MN

Page f of 1

Reply-To: <[e-mail]> To: "Consumer, Trek" <Trek_Consumer@trekbikes,com> Conversation: TrekBikes.com FAQ - Greg t e m o n d

Subject: TrekBikes.com FAQ Greg Lemond Date: Thursday, April 10, 2008 12:51 AM From: S t e v e Hansen [e-mail]>

-

Thu, Apr IO, 2008 2 5 7 PM

From: S t e v e Hansen <[e-mail]> Greg did it first.Greg w a s always about cyciing,Greg is about t h e truth. Lance on the other hand is about Lance,Lance is living a k t a n c e was a doper,Ditch Lance!

Page I of 1

2

John Burke's tirade on Greg Lemond Date: Thursday, April 10, 2008 5 : 3 6 AM From: L A <lancear@austin360,com> Reply-To: <Iancea rOaustin360, coin > To: "Consu mer, Trek " <Trek- Consu mer@tre k bikes.corn > Conversation: TrekBikes.com FAQ - John Burke's tirade on Greg Lemond
Subject: TrekBikes.com FAQ

-

Thu, Apr 10,2008 2%

PM

From: L A ~[e-mail]> John Burke may be a good business man, but his speech is full of lies. His use of the word "family" over and over was suggestive of the Mafia, and Trek's continued relationships with the worst cheaters in t h e history of cycling is shameful. The evidence has been clear from the very beginning, and Trek has chosen to look the other way at every junction. I knew Lance Armstrong BEFORE h e was a cyclist, and he was a steroid abuser even then, Chan McRae can vouch for this. 3ohan Bruyneel is just as bad, and his associations with doping extend to the deepest levels of cycling. If you want the truth about doping in t h e TdF, ask Victor Hugo Peha, he was "in the room". Johan will b e lucky to ever g e t invited to the TdF again, they know about him. You've ruined your own reputation by associating with bad people for the past decades, and now you're punishing Greg Lemond for "speaking t h e truth". Shame again. No one should ever be punished for speaking the truth ever, and your company'!
s loyalty to profit over truth, and cheaters over champions, will be a stain that Trek wilt never be abie to cast off. john Burke, took in t h e mirror, you are defending Lance Armstrong in the name of your own personal profit. SHAME.

i
Page L of 1
1

I

From: Derek Emanuel <[e-mail]> Reply-To: <djema nuel @g mail. corn > To: "ConsumeT, Trek'' <[e-mail]> Conversation: Trek8ikes.com FAQ - LeMonde

Subject: TrekBikes.com FAQ LeMonde Date: Wednesday, April 9, 2008 5 : 3 5 PM

-

Thu, Apt 10,2008 2:22 PM

From: Derek Ernanuel <[e-mail]> Lance did a lot o f drugs. It's time for you guys to come to grips with t h a t .
Greg is only telling t h e truth.

i
Page 1 of 1.
I

i

Thu, Apr 10, 2008 2:22 PM

To: "Consumer, Trek" <[e-mail]> Conversation: TrekBikes.com FAQ - Greg Lemond

Subject: Trek6ikes.com FAQ - G r e g Lemond Date: Wednesday, April 9, 2008 6:04 PM From: Bill Beauchamp <[e-mail]> RepI y-To: <wfb ccoastsys, co m >

From: Bill B e a u c h a m p <[e-mail]> Greg speaking up about doping and Lace's possible involvrnent is GOOD for cycling. ? think MORE of Lemond for acting like a normal human being who speaks his mind and LESS of Trek for feeling this is bad for business. Lance is a great champion with an asterisk next to h i s pafmares that anyone with a bit of vision can clearly see.

Thu, A p t IO, 2008 2:24 PM

Reply-To: <[e-mail]> To: "Consumer, Trek" ~Trek~[e-mail]~ Conversation: TrekBikes,com FAQ Lemond Sponsorship

Subject: TrekBikes.com FAQ Lemond Sponsorship Date: Wednesday, April 3, 2008 2: 17 PM From: William 3 , Horvath <[e-mail]>

-

-

From: William 3 . Horvath <wjhorvath@gmail,com> Trek Cycles:

I am greatly distressed to see that you are dropping the Lemond brand because Greg is so outspoken about doping. As a lifelong cyclist I can GUARANTEE you that I will never buy another Trek Bicycle or Trek Product again. Your company is compfetely on the wrong side of the doping issue and is only interested in PROFITS. I will look for the built in Syringe Compartments i n t h e future Trek frames you manufacture. I am sure they will be valued by t h e clientele you serve. The Trek brand is FOREVER in my mind associated pro-doping and I will be sure to spread this point of view in my local racing club. As you have said Sayonara to Greg Lernond I say Sayonara to Trek Cycling products. I hope your sales continue to falter as they deserve to. What you have done is absolutely DISGUSTING and DISPICABLE.
Without Regards, William 3. Horvath

Thu, Apr 10,2008 2:26 PM

Date: Wednesday, April 9, 2008 12:19 PM From: Reid Neureiter < [e-mail]> Reply-To: <[e-mail] > To: "Consumer, Trek" <[e-mail] Conversation: TrekBikes.com FAQ - TrekfLeMond Dispute

Subject: TrekE3ikes.com FAQ TrekjLeMond Dispute

-

publicly about the scourge of doping in cycling has been an inspiration. By contrast, Trek's continued involvement with the US Postal squad, t h e Discovery team, Mr. Armstrong, and its continuing involvement with Johann Bruneel and the disgraced Astana team, has been a tremendous disappointment. Why on earth would Trek continue t o support an athlete who, in his role a "patron" of the Tour, chased down and publicly punished one of the few active cyclists to speak publicly about Michele Ferrari and doping in sport? The answer, of course, is money--money generated by Armstrong tremendous popularity, Tour victories, and his inspirational cancer recovery. But that does not make it right. Trek has made its choice -- Armstrong over LeMond; staying quiet rather than taking a public stance against doping in !

From: Reid Neureiter <[e-mail]> I am extraordinarily disappointed at Trek's decision to terminate its relationship with Greg Lehlond. Mr. LeMond is a hero of mine and many others, His willingness to speak

for damaging the Trek brand by speaking the truth, perhaps Trek should look at itself and its decision to continue its association with Mr. Armstrong, Postal/Discovery/Astana,
as the original source of problem.

cycling. But rather than fabricating the notion that somehow LeMond i responsibile s

I trust that this e-mail, like the others you included in your legal Complaint, will be produced to Mr. Lemond's counsel in discovery.
Reid Neureiter 1901 Leyden Street Denver, Colorado 3 03892-4438

Page I of S

TR EKO09569