Keysight Scary Letter

[RoGeorge]

Did anybody contacted Keysight using official channels other than the link or phone suggested in that strange letter?

[Mr. Scram]

Did anybody contacted Keysight using official channels other than the link or phone suggested in that strange letter?

Yes, that's standard protocol with these kinds of things. I'd also ask Outback about what they know about it.

[gnavigator1007]

Daniel had replied saying the guy was legit tho he was unaware of the situation. Wish he'd comment further here

[joeqsmith]

  I wish the rest of you would take your car discussions elsewhere, these items are not a car and you don't have to licensed to own or operate this equipment and it is not required to be titled with any government agency.  And there may be security aspects to these cases, again unlike owning an unregistered car, so nothing that you've brought up regarding car ownership is applicable here.

I wish a lot of things as well but it's a public site.    Again, I brought it up as an example of buying stolen property and loss of payment. 

[Mr. Scram]

Daniel had replied saying the guy was legit tho he was unaware of the situation. Wish he'd comment further here

Daniel confirmed the name was an actual colleague, but did they ever confirm the letter was actually sent by him?

[openloop]

You're overlooking the fact that at least one person here has already contacted HP regarding this over a month ago and that HP has failed to respond.  I would call that very odd since all the letters have demanded the return of the items within mere days of the time that the letter was sent. My case they demanded the returned within one day of the time that the letter was received.

Actually no, they do not demand items immediately returned. They ask for "withdrawal of the equipment from the market" by that date.

My understanding is that currently they are in the tracking phase. Considering substantial amount of equipment involved it's too early for them to decide on how to proceed with transactions.

Of course, a conspiracy theorist in me says that it might be some kind of ITAR related bullshit. 

[Stray Electron]

Of course, a conspiracy theorist in me says that it might be some kind of ITAR related bullshit.

   I thought about that too but I don't think so in this case, they're still continuing to sell the same models on E-bay (AFIK with no export restrictions) and I THINK all of the buyers on this forum that have received a letter are located in the US. We all seem to be end users and not resellers so there's little chance that we're going to export the items that we have.  Someone can go look but I think HP as been selling the same models world wide since they introduced them.

[gnavigator1007]

Daniel confirmed the name was an actual colleague, but did they ever confirm the letter was actually sent by him?

Not that I've seen. The OP has been in contact now with Keysight, but they did not say if it was thru the contact info in the letter or thru some other avenue. I'm looking forward to reading about the resolution of this issue, provided they are able to talk about it.

[openloop]

I just sent a message to Outback via eBay for them to confirm legitimacy of The Letter. I assume that Outback is still in control of that particular line of communication.

[gnavigator1007]

Just realised that in the OP's letter no actual Keysight contact info is given for Marc Mayer. Contact is c/o Vincent Harrington, Durie Tangri LLP. The phone number and email address at least match the firm's website info.
 https://durietangri.com/staff/vincent-harrington

[Keysight DanielBogdanoff]

Hi everyone, sorry for going silent for a while.

I still can't really talk about details and don't know the entire situation. I spoke with Marc, who I've worked closely with on many projects, and he confirmed this was all legit.

As soon as I can say more, I will post it here!

Essentially, though, this gear was never supposed to be available or sold for various reasons. If you have some of it and received a letter/correspondence, please respond. We're not going to do anything crazy or insane.

Thanks for your patience!

[Brumby]

Thank you Daniel.  Now we are very clear on this as a legitimate exercise.

We will certainly be very interested in any details that can be disclosed - but I suspect the circumstances are going to include some rather immutable restrictions on just how much can be divulged.  Personally, I'm not expecting that we will be given much more then we could surmise.

While we may not get to know any details about what went wrong, there has been some curiosity and interest already expressed about the recovery process, in particular the "made whole" phrase.  Some explanation on what that might look like would be welcome, I'm sure.

[CatInTheHatKnowsAboutThat]

I have seen these letters and I consider them to be highly illegal. These letters are really an attempt at "restraint of trade" disguised as "intellectual property" rights. The letter i saw was talking about and old HP 8349B (1991) instrument obsoleted in 2003 by Keysight; the predecessor to the HP 8349B was the HP 8349A (1984) - so we are talking about 28 to 35 year old equipment. Keysight alleges "intellectual property" rights as the reason for dictating that anyone who has the equipment cannot sell it "because Keysight did not give its permission" and that the basis for this request is that Keysight is "protecting its intellectual property rights". This is an utterly an insane argument. The letter is signed by a paralegal of the Durie Tangri LLP law firm in San Francisco; a paralegal rather than an attorney ! If Keysight was worried about their "intellectual property rights" then why even sell the units to begin with; why wait till now ? The letter asserts that Keysight didn't give its permission for resale...what the hell !? That position is the same as saying that GM or Ford or Toyota has to give its permission before you can re-sell your car because of "intellectual property rights"; that is utterly nuts ! My belief is that Keysight is attempting to force old equipment out of the market so they can sell new equipment. The car manufacturers have a similar problem - the main competition for "new" cars are "old" cars. If this Keysight legal bluff stands then you can bet you won't be able to sell "old model year" cars in the future. My advice is to report your letters to the California Attorney General's office using their on-line complaint form. I suspect there will be a class-action lawsuit against Keysight in the near future. Use this link to get to the Calif. State Attorney General's on-line complaint form : https://oag.ca.gov/contact/consumer-complaint-against-business-or-company

[CatInTheHatKnowsAboutThat]

My advice is to contact the Calif. State Attorney's office (https://oag.ca.gov/contact/consumer-complaint-against-business-or-company) and let's just see whether this is a legitimate request; I highly suspect that it is not a legitimate request and that meek compliance is absolutely NOT the answer here. The right to operate without restraint of trade from powerful, competitive bullies and freedom is at stake.

[bd139]

A valid complaint for sure.

I'd like to see the full nature of the issue out in the open rather than this somewhat opaque wall in front of it and some vague assurances.

[Brumby]

I'd like to see the full nature of the issue out in the open rather than this somewhat opaque wall in front of it and some vague assurances.

We'd all like to see that - but if there are confidentiality clauses encased in a contract, then no matter how much one party might want to disclose, they will be bound to silence.

This is something that we must expect and that we must respect - no matter how much some won't like it.

[bd139]

They can expand on the nature of the complaint without breaking confidentiality. The mechanism is rarely bound by confidentially but the parties are.

[CJay]

I could imagine and understand Keysight getting its collective pants in a bunch if someone sold a bunch of development or otherwise embargoed gear, I hold the opinion that they're a decent company* to deal with and will make things right so it'll be interesting to watch and see how this unfolds, if the reasons come out in public

*despite them not wanting to sell me a stand for my LCR meter for a reasonable price but that's another matter entirely 

[Jwalling]

If you have some of it and received a letter/correspondence, please respond. We're not going to do anything crazy or insane.

Thanks for your patience!

I have, and yet I received no response at all from Mr. Harrington.
Looking through my sent emails, there were two; On 12/20/18 and 12/26/2018. I only got read receipts from his email client (which I saved just in case.)

I'm going to send a third email to him this morning.

[OwO]

Might be better to just ignore the email, mark it as unread (if you haven't read it yet, don't click it), and pretend you never saw it.

[Gandalf_Sr]

Ohhh, this is exciting; maybe the used Keysight test gear I just bought may have been used to test the zero point energy power system for an alien reproduction vehicle but Daniel can't tell us about it until there's official disclosure that we are not alone, and the fossil fuel industry is all a scam because energy is essentially free.

Why is there a black helicopter hovering over my house?

[glarsson]

Might be better to just ignore the email, mark it as unread (if you haven't read it yet, don't click it), and pretend you never saw it.

And then everyone who replied got brand new instruments while the non repliers had their instruments taken away by men in black helicopters...

[eKretz]

I have seen these letters and I consider them to be highly illegal. These letters are really an attempt at "restraint of trade" disguised as "intellectual property" rights. The letter i saw was talking about and old HP 8349B (1991) instrument obsoleted in 2003 by Keysight; the predecessor to the HP 8349B was the HP 8349A (1984) - so we are talking about 28 to 35 year old equipment. Keysight alleges "intellectual property" rights as the reason for dictating that anyone who has the equipment cannot sell it "because Keysight did not give its permission" and that the basis for this request is that Keysight is "protecting its intellectual property rights". This is an utterly an insane argument. The letter is signed by a paralegal of the Durie Tangri LLP law firm in San Francisco; a paralegal rather than an attorney ! If Keysight was worried about their "intellectual property rights" then why even sell the units to begin with; why wait till now ? The letter asserts that Keysight didn't give its permission for resale...what the hell !? That position is the same as saying that GM or Ford or Toyota has to give its permission before you can re-sell your car because of "intellectual property rights"; that is utterly nuts ! My belief is that Keysight is attempting to force old equipment out of the market so they can sell new equipment. The car manufacturers have a similar problem - the main competition for "new" cars are "old" cars. If this Keysight legal bluff stands then you can bet you won't be able to sell "old model year" cars in the future. My advice is to report your letters to the California Attorney General's office using their on-line complaint form. I suspect there will be a class-action lawsuit against Keysight in the near future. Use this link to get to the Calif. State Attorney General's on-line complaint form : https://oag.ca.gov/contact/consumer-complaint-against-business-or-company

You don't seem to understand the way the law works very well with respect to sensitive items and contracts, might want to take off that tinfoil hat a minute...

If this is indeed a national security or other similar issue, there will have been a SIGNED LEGAL CONTRACT specifying the way the equipment MUST be disposed of. Signatories to such a contract are BOUND BY LAW to do as the contract says as long as there are no illegal terms... This is nowhere near akin to buying and selling a car or other benign piece of property.

[MadTux]

You don't seem to understand the way the law works very well with respect to sensitive items and contracts, might want to take off that tinfoil hat a minute...

If this is indeed a national security or other similar issue, there will have been a SIGNED LEGAL CONTRACT specifying the way the equipment MUST be disposed of. Signatories to such a contract are BOUND BY LAW to do as the contract says as long as there are no illegal terms... This is nowhere near akin to buying and selling a car or other benign piece of property.

Good luck getting it back, if the buyer lives in a country that isn't in bed with the US of A. Such as China, Russia, Serbia, Sweden, Switzerland, Austria etc.
Here in Switzerland, I would tell them to fuck off. USA has nothing to say over here.

[bd139]

You don't seem to understand the way the law works very well with respect to sensitive items and contracts, might want to take off that tinfoil hat a minute...

If this is indeed a national security or other similar issue, there will have been a SIGNED LEGAL CONTRACT specifying the way the equipment MUST be disposed of. Signatories to such a contract are BOUND BY LAW to do as the contract says as long as there are no illegal terms... This is nowhere near akin to buying and selling a car or other benign piece of property.

Not necessarily the case. Formal government issued requisition order would be required otherwise it is just standard property. The issue is likely between the contract parties unless the goods are stolen which they are not but this is likely a hole in the party's contracts. I did a bit of work in this space in the past when dealing with the politics of moving defence kit from US to UK. We had to get the UK home office and DoD senior staff involved in it to give you an idea how high it had to be escalated before anyone gave a fuck.