If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Brewmeister)   Lawsuit trolls aren't just for technology apparently. Some poor little brewery in Kentucky is being attacked... help 'em out   (westsixth.com) divider line 220
    More: Sad, Magic Hat, irreparable injury  
•       •       •

11750 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 May 2013 at 1:47 PM (48 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



220 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-05-22 11:58:37 AM
encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com

Note that the logo is inverted.
 
2013-05-22 12:03:35 PM
if they weren't making beer i would be more inclined to agree with them.  however....
 
2013-05-22 12:06:52 PM
Wow.  That's definitely one of the most frivolous lawsuits I've heard of in quite awhile.
 
2013-05-22 12:24:16 PM
When you're pouring it, it becomes Magic Hat #9.
 
2013-05-22 12:45:33 PM
Why would you object to somebody copying your logo with a lower number?  They'll just think Magic Hat is 3 better and be more likely to buy it.
 
2013-05-22 01:02:09 PM
Meh. Create another logo and move on.

Gene Simmons sued some friends of mine out of Sweden who's name was Crown of Thorns. They were signed, had records, doing international (through Europe) tours, etc. But since Gene Simmons decided years later to produce a small band in the States with the same name he sued them.

Rather than go through the hoopla over it, considering the cost of it which they didn't have, they just changed their name to The Crown.

Guess which band is worldwide popular?
 
2013-05-22 01:28:20 PM
I just saw this on Magic Hat's facebook feed today: http://new.pitchengine.com/pitches/0ab90552-225c-4a77-bf2e-79ecdcd09c 1 5

Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.  Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.
 
2013-05-22 01:39:53 PM

factoryconnection: I just saw this on Magic Hat's facebook feed today: http://new.pitchengine.com/pitches/0ab90552-225c-4a77-bf2e-79ecdcd09c 1 5

Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.  Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.


It's all bullshiat. "Their brewing company logo has a number, a circle and a star, which looks a lot like one of our beer's logos which also has a number, a circle and a star!"

Fark off, Magic Hat.
 
2013-05-22 01:47:30 PM
They look similar to me.

Of course, I'm not a law talking dude.
 
2013-05-22 01:47:35 PM

factoryconnection: I just saw this on Magic Hat's facebook feed today: http://new.pitchengine.com/pitches/0ab90552-225c-4a77-bf2e-79ecdcd09c 1 5

Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.  Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.


Definitely worth a read, but I think there was no need to blow it out of proportion in the first place.  Can you really trademark the concept of a number enclosed in a circle?  And furthermore the question of intent comes up.  Was it the brewery's intention to confuse buyers into buying their beer by making them think it's another brand?  I SERIOUSLY doubt that.  Was Magic Hat actually harmed by this in any way?  I rather doubt that as well.
 
2013-05-22 01:49:12 PM

I_Am_Weasel: They look similar to me.

Of course, I'm not a law talking dude.


They looked similar to the distributors, too.

I have to wonder if Magic Hat's "amicable resolution" discussions actually happened and then fell apart, or they just jumped into the cease-and-desist and pay-me-royalties route.
 
2013-05-22 01:50:22 PM

factoryconnection: I just saw this on Magic Hat's facebook feed today: http://new.pitchengine.com/pitches/0ab90552-225c-4a77-bf2e-79ecdcd09c 1 5

Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.  Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.


More likely the new owner's son-in-law is an unemployed lawyer.
 
2013-05-22 01:52:49 PM
Mega douchebagery there.
 
2013-05-22 01:55:44 PM

factoryconnection: but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.


Yeah, but one most have a trademark infringed before they can defend it.
 
2013-05-22 01:55:56 PM

factoryconnection: I just saw this on Magic Hat's facebook feed today: http://new.pitchengine.com/pitches/0ab90552-225c-4a77-bf2e-79ecdcd09c 1 5

Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.  Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.


+1.  This case seems to be fundamentally different than the patent troll cases reported in other threads.  Magic Hat is a real brand with a real trademark that they developed themselves -- not an entity that buys IP rights and sues on them for profit.  If they let other people encroach on their mark, they could lose it.  While getting sued isn't fun, and while I'll reserve judgment on the ultimate trademark claim merits, putting "troll" in this headline is very misleading.
 
2013-05-22 01:56:19 PM
most = must.

I keep farking that up lately.
 
2013-05-22 01:57:31 PM
I can't stand magic hat #9 - apricots in beer really- but the first thing I saw when the page came up was the #9 logo.  It took a second to realize it was a six.  Yes you have to defend your trademarks
 
2013-05-22 01:58:01 PM

factoryconnection: I just saw this on Magic Hat's facebook feed today: http://new.pitchengine.com/pitches/0ab90552-225c-4a77-bf2e-79ecdcd09c 1 5

Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.  Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.


That's kind of the problem that everyone has with this lawsuit.  It starts with the presumption that the trademark is being infringed when it absolutely is not, and then claims that Magic Hat must defend it.
 
2013-05-22 01:58:10 PM
Touch one here.

I loves my some Magic Hat #9
 
2013-05-22 01:58:56 PM

Cheron: I can't stand magic hat #9 - apricots in beer really- but the first thing I saw when the page came up was the #9 logo.  It took a second to realize it was a six.  Yes you have to defend your trademarks


Really? First thing you saw was a #9? Are you Australian?
 
2013-05-22 01:59:12 PM

CapeFearCadaver: Guess which band is worldwide popular?



KISS?
 
2013-05-22 01:59:43 PM

impaler: [encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com image 327x154]

Note that the logo is inverted.


If I'm sitting at a bar or table and see those on coasters, I would likely presume it was some variation on the same company.
 
2013-05-22 02:00:23 PM
I'm not drinking no Magic beer. That's exactly what Satan would like you to do.
a4.ec-images.myspacecdn.com
 
2013-05-22 02:01:36 PM
Actually just tried one of west sixth's beers last night. It was pretty farking amazing, better than magic hat IMO
 
2013-05-22 02:02:07 PM

EdNortonsTwin: If I'm sitting at a bar or table and see those on coasters, I would likely presume it was some variation on the same company.


Because they use the same font?
 
2013-05-22 02:02:13 PM
As soon as the image of the logo popped up on my browser I knew what the problem was.  They do look similar and if I saw that logo I would assume it was from Magic Hat.  Change the logo or fight it out in court.
 
2013-05-22 02:02:14 PM

factoryconnection: I just saw this on Magic Hat's facebook feed today: http://new.pitchengine.com/pitches/0ab90552-225c-4a77-bf2e-79ecdcd09c 1 5

Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.  Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.


Assuming Magic Hat is correct, the West Sixth was lying in their little sob story about "no one ever talked to us" since Magic Hat claims they've been working with them.  It seems all Magic Hat wanted was the next generation of the design to be amended.  That way Magic Hat has proof they defended their trade mark, but they didn't make West Sixth flush a whole batch of promo material, they just wanted West Sixth to order different promo material next time around.

Beyond that I'm not sure why West Sixth is going with #6 for their branding.  If it was Warehouse Number Six or something, I could get that, but who writes out West Sixth [Street, Ave, Ward, Etc] as #6?  Questionable quality of design even if it isn't meant to infringe.  If Magic Hat really has distributors who expressed concern to them, it doesn't seem unreasonable to ask West Sixth to play up "West Sixth" instead of "#6" in their next batch of packaging and promo material.

/perhaps West Sixth's beer also sucks which is why distributors won't carry them, so the company is going for a support the little guy viral marketing campaign
 
2013-05-22 02:02:53 PM
The first thing I thought when I opened the page, before I even saw the words "Magic Hat" was "boy that logo looks a lot like the Magic Hat #9 logo".
 
2013-05-22 02:02:57 PM

factoryconnection: Worth a read, what with two sides to every story. Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.


This is a good point.  I'm only a Law GED, but my understanding is that companies must defend their IP from the get-go or it gets harder to defend it later (i.e. you can't just wait for something to become profitable and then suddenly sue someone).  I don't know if that's how it happens in practice but that's at least the intent behind the law.

Although, to counter myself, if it really was just about defending the IP, Magic Hat could've handled it much better, and taken a cue from Jack Daniels: http://news.yahoo.com/jack-daniels-sends-most-polite-cease-desist-let t er-194518912.html
 
2013-05-22 02:03:15 PM

Mayostard: When you're pouring it, it becomes Magic Hat #9.



(chortle)
 
2013-05-22 02:03:29 PM
The logos do look similar and there are two sides to every story.

I have had #9 and was not a fan. If i saw a similar looking 6* label on a shelf  I might get confused and think they were related and move on.

Magic Hat beer blows. If I were a craft brewer I would not want my label to be confused with a bottle of suck ass beer. Quit biatching and change your logo
 
2013-05-22 02:03:30 PM

impaler: [encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com image 327x154]

Note that the logo is inverted.


First thing I see is teh logo when I click, then the words magic hat.
As a Vermonter, and a beer drinker, and having a GED in law from an online university, I'd say they have a case.
/you can still get 24 in a case, right?
 
2013-05-22 02:03:45 PM
Also, Subby's being a troll for using the word troll in the headline.
 
2013-05-22 02:04:20 PM

Cryoteck: Actually just tried one of west sixth's beers last night. It was pretty farking amazing, better than magic hat IMO


This.

Magic Hat sucks.
 
Bf+
2013-05-22 02:05:26 PM
"Your 6 on the side of the green label with a star looks too much like our 9 in the middle of our red label with a pound sign and squiggles... change your logo or we sue"?
Yeah, Fark Magic Hat on this one.
 
2013-05-22 02:05:33 PM

Lando Lincoln: factoryconnection: I just saw this on Magic Hat's facebook feed today: http://new.pitchengine.com/pitches/0ab90552-225c-4a77-bf2e-79ecdcd09c 1 5

Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.  Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.

It's all bullshiat. "Their brewing company logo has a number, a circle and a star, which looks a lot like one of our beer's logos which also has a number, a circle and a star!"

Fark off, Magic Hat.


That is pretty on-target for reasonable confusion. If you put them side by side, I wouldn't immediately think they were from a different company, I'd actually have to study the packaging. If you replaced one completely with another on the shelf where I normally pick up my beer, I might reasonably think that the packaging had been updated or that this was simply a new variation of what it was previously.

The starburst is particularly blatant.

There needs to be a LO
 
2013-05-22 02:05:38 PM
Whoops, *6 in my above, not #6.

/so well yeah, it managed to confuse me
//circle with number seals aren't unique, but when you have heavy font similarities and your colors look like they're from the same line of paint, tell your designer to try harder
 
2013-05-22 02:07:43 PM

nekom: factoryconnection: I just saw this on Magic Hat's facebook feed today: http://new.pitchengine.com/pitches/0ab90552-225c-4a77-bf2e-79ecdcd09c 1 5

Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.  Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.

Definitely worth a read, but I think there was no need to blow it out of proportion in the first place.  Can you really trademark the concept of a number enclosed in a circle?  And furthermore the question of intent comes up.  Was it the brewery's intention to confuse buyers into buying their beer by making them think it's another brand?  I SERIOUSLY doubt that.  Was Magic Hat actually harmed by this in any way?  I rather doubt that as well.


Strangely enough, West 6th was hurt by it, given that at least one store refused to sell their products over it.
 
2013-05-22 02:07:51 PM

evilmrsock: not posting the damn image


HURR I'M A DURR

fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net
 
2013-05-22 02:08:07 PM
glancing at that logo, it does look like a magic hat... they have a point. not sure why the west sixth folk thought that design was going to be ok
 
2013-05-22 02:08:38 PM
I'm thinking West Sixth Brewing Company is just trying to turn a bad situation into a little free publicity. NTTAWWT.

This is a job for lawyers to work out, unfortunately. WSBC needs to hire one, pronto.
 
2013-05-22 02:08:42 PM
It's not an actual "star", either - it's a very commonly-utilized symbol used by cartographers for centuries to indicate compass directions - as in "the 6 is to the west".   I am, or was, a big fan of Magic Hat, and if their trademark were being infringed-upon, I'd agree with their complaint.  But it's not.

The silver lining is that I had no idea Magic Hat was owned by a foreign corportation, and I usually try to keep up with facts like that one.  Thanks to this frivolous lawsuit, they've blown up their own carefully-constructed "Vermont craft-brewery" mythology.   Way to go, guys.
 
2013-05-22 02:09:19 PM
i1.sndcdn.com

Number 9. Number 9.
 
2013-05-22 02:11:26 PM

nekom: Can you really trademark the concept of a number enclosed in a circle?


yes. fun fact, batman originally had just a black bat on his chest. the yellow circle was added after dc found out you can't trademark just a bat drawing.
 
2013-05-22 02:12:23 PM
I'd like to see them sue ABInBev over "33."

OMG! There's a number on your beer!

Or even better, every small brewery needs to come out with a numbered beer.  By #247, I think Magic Hat would get over it.
 
2013-05-22 02:13:17 PM

rwfan: As soon as the image of the logo popped up on my browser I knew what the problem was.


I didn't... because first I thought "gosh, Magic Hat is getting sued?"
 
2013-05-22 02:13:44 PM
The scuttlebutt around Lexington is that another local brewery is ultimately behind all of this.
 
2013-05-22 02:13:53 PM
I wonder what PepsiCo thinks about Magic Hat's logo for their cucumber hibiscus ale?

www.mustlovebeer.com
 
2013-05-22 02:15:31 PM
I wouldn't think it was the same outlet I would assume it was an affiliate or another brew that is indorsed by the other since the logos are very similar.
 
2013-05-22 02:16:38 PM
TTo me it appears the artist combined some of the color scheme of the Magic Hat logo and the #9 logo  (can't you resize images?)
 
2013-05-22 02:16:47 PM

TNel: I wouldn't think it was the same outlet I would assume it was an affiliate or another brew that is indorsed by the other since the logos are very similar.


And *THAT* is exactly the type of confusion people with well developed brand images sue over.
 
2013-05-22 02:17:21 PM
They could just change the font.  Probably just a coincidence that they chose the same font, though.
 
2013-05-22 02:18:16 PM
Of course, screw all this, because in a couple months I'll be drinking:
i42.tinypic.com
brewed by the guy next door to me
 
2013-05-22 02:18:38 PM
Sounds like they should just change the damned logo and be done with it.
 
2013-05-22 02:19:08 PM
Seriously, Dorothy, STFU and give it up.
Hire another design team, preferably one who actually goes into beer stores and maybe surfs the internet to see what kinds of logos are taken.
They gonna get raped in court.
 
2013-05-22 02:19:32 PM
Wahhh you are using a similar font and you also have a number on your logo (that, when inverted, happens to look like our number on our logo!!)

Since when can you trademark a number?  I call dibs on 7...
 
2013-05-22 02:20:03 PM

nekom: factoryconnection: I just saw this on Magic Hat's facebook feed today: http://new.pitchengine.com/pitches/0ab90552-225c-4a77-bf2e-79ecdcd09c 1 5

Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.  Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.

Definitely worth a read, but I think there was no need to blow it out of proportion in the first place.  Can you really trademark the concept of a number enclosed in a circle?


Yes and no: any word, mark, symbol, design, logo, or other feature that is distinctive and recognizable as being associated with a manufacturer can be a trademark, like a 9 in a circle for Magic Hat. Can you trademark a  concept? No. But really, I think you're only asking that because you're confusing trademarks with patents.

And furthermore the question of intent comes up.  Was it the brewery's intention to confuse buyers into buying their beer by making them think it's another brand?  I SERIOUSLY doubt that.

The question of intent doesn't come up at all. The question is merely whether there's a likelihood of confusion between the two.

Was Magic Hat actually harmed by this in any way?  I rather doubt that as well.

They had distributors reporting confusion.
 
2013-05-22 02:21:18 PM

HunterGTS: The scuttlebutt around Lexington is that another local brewery is ultimately behind all of this.


That would be a dick move to pull but I wouldn't be surprised...
 
2013-05-22 02:22:21 PM
Looking at the cans and the logos, I'm convinced that the problem lies neither with Magic Hat nor with West Sixth... it clearly lies with uneducated consumers.  I can't blame either Magic Hat or West Sixth if people can't read and don't know the difference between basic colors and numbers.
 
2013-05-22 02:22:34 PM

mjones73: HunterGTS: The scuttlebutt around Lexington is that another local brewery is ultimately behind all of this.

That would be a dick move to pull but I wouldn't be surprised...


Is it Kentucky Ale?
 
2013-05-22 02:22:45 PM
They look a lot more similar to me than the Fark headline led me to believe.  Damn you, Fark headlines!

There's a lot of beer cans in the world though, some of them are bound to look pretty similar.
 
2013-05-22 02:24:13 PM

TNel: I wouldn't think it was the same outlet I would assume it was an affiliate or another brew that is indorsed by the other since the logos are very similar.


Really? Are you blind?

fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net
 
2013-05-22 02:24:15 PM

ha-ha-guy: Assuming Magic Hat is correct, the West Sixth was lying in their little sob story about "no one ever talked to us" since Magic Hat claims they've been working with them.


The letters back and forth are here.
 
2013-05-22 02:24:48 PM
How much  money can it take to lay out these defenses?
 
2013-05-22 02:26:10 PM

kobrakai: mjones73: HunterGTS: The scuttlebutt around Lexington is that another local brewery is ultimately behind all of this.

That would be a dick move to pull but I wouldn't be surprised...

Is it Kentucky Ale?


Their parent company. Which, interestingly enough, just released their own IPA. Who also use the same distribution companies.
 
2013-05-22 02:26:21 PM
How does one generate millions of dollars of publicity for your start up, for $10,000 or less in legal fees?

You make a tactical decision to be sued, claim you are the little man being picked on by a bully.  Even if the court rules against you the only fall out is you have to change your logo and possibly give the other party all the profits you generated while using the same.  Of course the article noted that as a start up their brand hasn't generated any profit yet. FTA: (little do they know that well, as a startup company, there wasn't any [profits], oops!).

So do you....

1. Agree to change your logo

OR

2. Spend less than $10,00 in legal fees and benefit from the nation-wide publicity surrounding the suit.  Knowing all the while that you haven't made any profits so the most the court can do is order you to change your logo, and if you are allowed to keep it than you generate more publicity as the small start-up that stood up to a big corporate owned brewery.

/Who the fark every heard of West Six Brewing outside of Kentucky before this?
//There is no such thing as bad publicity
///Abercrombie and Fitch stock is up 30%
 
2013-05-22 02:26:29 PM

kobrakai: I wonder what PepsiCo thinks about Magic Hat's logo for their cucumber hibiscus ale?

[www.mustlovebeer.com image 528x529]


DO THE DEW!

Hibiscus Cucumber? Oh cool, girls are coming over.


Magic Hat sucks IMO. All too sweet.
 
2013-05-22 02:27:11 PM
Identical!

i436.photobucket.com
 
2013-05-22 02:27:23 PM

impaler: TNel: I wouldn't think it was the same outlet I would assume it was an affiliate or another brew that is indorsed by the other since the logos are very similar.

Really? Are you blind?

[fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net image 626x834]


Look at the boobies in this thread.  I can't see how you can't tell that the logos are similar.
 
2013-05-22 02:29:09 PM
The 6th SBC looks alot like the tap handle for number 9.

/number 9 is good stuff.
 
2013-05-22 02:29:21 PM

oruacat2: It's not an actual "star", either - it's a very commonly-utilized symbol used by cartographers for centuries to indicate compass directions - as in "the 6 is to the west".   I am, or was, a big fan of Magic Hat, and if their trademark were being infringed-upon, I'd agree with their complaint.  But it's not.

The silver lining is that I had no idea Magic Hat was owned by a foreign corportation, and I usually try to keep up with facts like that one.  Thanks to this frivolous lawsuit, they've blown up their own carefully-constructed "Vermont craft-brewery" mythology.   Way to go, guys.



Magic Hat says they've been in contact with them trying to propose an amicable solution in order to avoid a law suit.  West Sixth argues that they tried to reach out to Magic Hat and received no response.  I'm inclined to support the one that's telling the truth and in my experience anyone who says "fancy legal counsel out of New York" is usually a dirtbag.
 
2013-05-22 02:29:28 PM
With this numbers on beer lawsuit, I guess Oskar Blues may be dropping... wait for it...

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-05-22 02:30:24 PM

CrazyCracka420: Wahhh you are using a similar font and you also have a number on your logo (that, when inverted, happens to look like our number on our logo!!)

Since when can you trademark a number?  I call dibs on 7...


i.pgcdn.com
 
2013-05-22 02:30:30 PM

BarkingUnicorn: How much  money can it take to lay out these defenses?


Depends on what lawyer or law firm you retain and how hard-fought the litigation is.  mid five figures to low seven figures is the range.
 
2013-05-22 02:33:31 PM

factoryconnection: Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.


Seems as if W 6th Street offered to get rid of the compass dingbat and then may have either reneged or shuffled their feet about it.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/142860493/Magic-Hat-Brewing-and-West-Sixth -B rewing
 
2013-05-22 02:33:42 PM

nekom: Definitely worth a read, but I think there was no need to blow it out of proportion in the first place.  Can you really trademark the concept of a number enclosed in a circle?


Doesn't matter.  If you can show that someone, somewhere, was legitimately confused, you have standing.
 
2013-05-22 02:34:59 PM

nekom: factoryconnection: I just saw this on Magic Hat's facebook feed today: http://new.pitchengine.com/pitches/0ab90552-225c-4a77-bf2e-79ecdcd09c 1 5

Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.  Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.

Definitely worth a read, but I think there was no need to blow it out of proportion in the first place.  Can you really trademark the concept of a number enclosed in a circle?  And furthermore the question of intent comes up.  Was it the brewery's intention to confuse buyers into buying their beer by making them think it's another brand?  I SERIOUSLY doubt that.  Was Magic Hat actually harmed by this in any way?  I rather doubt that as well.


You can trademark just a color, or a shape, so I'd guess a number in a circle might pass the test

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-conventional_trademark

Not sure how relevant intent is in trademark cases, though...either you're infringing or not, maybe?
 
2013-05-22 02:35:01 PM
The correspondence between lawyers suggests that West Sixth can go fark itself.
 
2013-05-22 02:35:25 PM

zobear: factoryconnection: Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.

Seems as if W 6th Street offered to get rid of the compass dingbat and then may have either reneged or shuffled their feet about it.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/142860493/Magic-Hat-Brewing-and-West-Sixth -B rewing


They claim it's too expensive to change the compass. Which is a little tough to believe.
 
2013-05-22 02:35:34 PM
Old Milwaukee is a Pabst product; Milwaukee's Best is from Miller. Both beers have the world "Milwaukee" in them. Let the lawsuits begin!!
 
2013-05-22 02:35:57 PM

CapeFearCadaver: Meh. Create another logo and move on.

Gene Simmons sued some friends of mine out of Sweden who's name was Crown of Thorns. They were signed, had records, doing international (through Europe) tours, etc. But since Gene Simmons decided years later to produce a small band in the States with the same name he sued them.

Rather than go through the hoopla over it, considering the cost of it which they didn't have, they just changed their name to The Crown.

Guess which band is worldwide popular?


Makes you wonder how Gene Simmons was able to play a shyster lawyer to a T in Mike Judge's Extract.

I like Magic Hat, been to the brewery even, but they lost their way after being sold a few years ago. They've been skating on by playing the "Vermont hippie" card, not unlike another formerly independent in-state ice cream vendor.
 
2013-05-22 02:36:12 PM
I always liked this bit of laziness. Apparently, this "G" got treated like clip-art.

i.chzbgr.com
 
2013-05-22 02:36:58 PM

ko_kyi: nekom: Definitely worth a read, but I think there was no need to blow it out of proportion in the first place.  Can you really trademark the concept of a number enclosed in a circle?

Doesn't matter.  If you can show that someone, somewhere, was legitimately confused, you have standing.


Even if that someone is a total idiot?  I enjoy a good Dogfish head 60 minute IPA, but if I saw a green case in the store with a catfish logo and it read "Catfish head 60 IPA" I would notice the damned difference.  You have to be pretty simple to think that a green 6 is the same as an orange 9.
 
2013-05-22 02:39:30 PM
And then there are these...
machoarts.com
 
2013-05-22 02:39:32 PM
I used to think Magic Hat was reasonably tasty, but I won't buy it anymore based on this story.

Fark bully beers, drink local.

/Of course that's easy for me to say, living in Beer City USA.
 
2013-05-22 02:39:34 PM
A number alone is probably not trademarkable.

A combination of some number plus a specific typographical design plus a specific shape is probably trademarkable.

West Sixth should lose the starburst, change the font, and STFU.
 
2013-05-22 02:39:43 PM

nunyadang: I have had #9 and was not a fan. If i saw a similar looking 6* label on a shelf  I might get confused and think they were related and move on.

Magic Hat beer blows. If I were a craft brewer I would not want my label to be confused with a bottle of suck ass beer. Quit biatching and change your logo


We should settle this with a beer tasting. 10 craft beer drinkers in a blind taste test that have not drank either product before. Whoever has the worse beer has to change their logo.
 
2013-05-22 02:39:54 PM
I drink lots of mass market cheap swill so I am really getting a kick out of these replies...
 
2013-05-22 02:41:28 PM

CapeFearCadaver: Meh. Create another logo and move on.

Gene Simmons sued some friends of mine out of Sweden who's name was Crown of Thorns. They were signed, had records, doing international (through Europe) tours, etc. But since Gene Simmons decided years later to produce a small band in the States with the same name he sued them.

Rather than go through the hoopla over it, considering the cost of it which they didn't have, they just changed their name to The Crown.

Guess which band is worldwide popular?


There was a nice family owned restaurant in Paterson NJ named Ci Ci's for longer than most folks can remember. Guess what corporate Mexican Foods chain lawyer sued the pants off of them for infirngement? Scumbags galore, lawyers like this and those who pay them for bullshiat lawsuits. And Fark the Judges too when they rule in favor of Johnny Come Lately over a long established concern.
 
2013-05-22 02:42:15 PM

nekom: I enjoy a good Dogfish head 60 minute IPA, but if I saw a green case in the store with a catfish logo and it read "Catfish head 60 IPA" I would notice the damned difference.


Yeah, and you'd either think, "Oh, Dogfish Head has spun off a new brand," or "These f**ers are trying to cash in on Dogfish Head's popularity," and the trademark needs to be defended against both of those.
 
2013-05-22 02:43:30 PM

PunGent: Not sure how relevant intent is in trademark cases, though...either you're infringing or not, maybe?


Intent is in fact considered, but it is not at the heart of the matter.

The important thing in trademark is to remember that out of all IP it is the nice one (if we ignore rarer bullshiat like dillution and post-sale confusion).  It exists specifically to prevent consumers from being confused and taken advantage of, and that is basically the legal test.  Looking at two marks, would a consumer be confused as to the source of the goods.

Now, note, i said source of the goods, not confuse the goods themselves.  Thus if a consumer saw two logos side by side and was likely to think they were not the same product but made by the same guys, that can be actionable.

Additionally, as the system is built such that the "owner" of a mark is also the one who polices it, we make them actually have to do their job and police EVERYTHING.  We don't want companies only suing the easy guys or the deepest pockets and letting lots of consumers get hosed by operators with less cash or harder claims, so we require that they enforce against everyone or risk losing the mark.  This also makes sense from a confusion perspective, as if a mark is loosely enforced, it is likely that it will end up standing for lots of different producers, consumers will stop trusting it and it will be useless as a source signifier.

All of this is to say: Stop throwing around the word troll, subby, you obviously have no idea what it means.
 
2013-05-22 02:46:26 PM

nekom: Even if that someone is a total idiot? I enjoy a good Dogfish head 60 minute IPA, but if I saw a green case in the store with a catfish logo and it read "Catfish head 60 IPA" I would notice the damned difference. You have to be pretty simple to think that a green 6 is the same as an orange 9.


turns out caveat emptor is not really the legal standard.  However, the sophistication of the consumer and the cost of the product are considered.  Given the level of beer snobbery, it is actually quite possible that a court could find that the consumer sophistication was so high that there was no likelihood of confusion.  On the other hand, given the diversification of brands, and the trend of beer producres to have a theme, it seems just as likely that many consumers would think catfishhead was made by the same guys but a totally different style of beer.  That is actionable, because we are not talking about confusing products, but confusing the source of products
 
2013-05-22 02:46:28 PM
Doesn't anyone have the patent on groundlessly suing people over copyright infringement?  I think I'll go get it.. as long as I have enough backing to tie these folks up in court, the fact that the patent was made afterwards, won't even matter... They'll settle, or go out of business, because I'm not good for the kind of money they'd try to counter-sue for.
 
2013-05-22 02:46:37 PM
Different background color, different foreground color, different background pattern, different number, different symbols used, similar but not identical font, text and symbols located in different parts of the logo and in a different relationship = Trademark Infringement, apparently.
 
2013-05-22 02:49:27 PM
I don't think that Magic Hat is saying that people won't notice that it's a different color or different number.  They're saying that it is so similar to their #9 that some people might think it's made by the same brewer.  This is a pretty standard practice.  Dogfishhead has a similar logo on all their beers.  If someone came out with a slightly different dogfishhead, it could lead to confusion, even it it was a different color or number.
Same with Sam Adams.  I came out with Ben Franklin (or insert your favorite US revolutionary here) beer.  The dude on mine is only minimally different, you might think that it's a different beer by Sam Adams.  Therefore I am trading on the Sam Adams marketing that's been done for years.

Also, the fact that Magic Hat tells the truth on their site and West 6th lied about 'no one ever called us back', makes me believe that they know they're wrong but they're going to try for advertising or sympathy here. I agree they should put an actual compass on the label (I didn't get that the six was on the West side of the compass at first because I didn't realize it was a compass), and they should probably change the font of the 6 a little bit.  Agreeing with MH that they're going to do that, and then come back and say, it's too expensive, and we don't really agree with you anymore is disingenuous.
 
2013-05-22 02:49:42 PM

Dead-Guy: Doesn't anyone have the patent on groundlessly suing people over copyright infringement?  I think I'll go get it.. as long as I have enough backing to tie these folks up in court, the fact that the patent was made afterwards, won't even matter... They'll settle, or go out of business, because I'm not good for the kind of money they'd try to counter-sue for.


Haliburton tried to get a patent on patent trolling.  But then the law on business method patents changed.
 
2013-05-22 02:50:55 PM

Dead-Guy: Doesn't anyone have the patent on groundlessly suing people over copyright infringement? I think I'll go get it.. as long as I have enough backing to tie these folks up in court, the fact that the patent was made afterwards, won't even matter... They'll settle, or go out of business, because I'm not good for the kind of money they'd try to counter-sue for.


wow, this reaches new heights: mixing (1) the classic, always original (in every single IP thread) "I'm gonna patent suing people" with (2) confusing copyright and trademark.  It's kinda beautiful.

A laws winner is you!
 
2013-05-22 02:54:52 PM
Laws yes, M-O-O-N, that spells laws
 
2013-05-22 02:55:40 PM
Let's settle this with a taste test.
 
2013-05-22 02:57:36 PM
This is my favorite.
encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com

i.annihil.us
 
2013-05-22 02:57:46 PM

BarkingUnicorn: How much  money can it take to lay out these defenses?


Don't know trademark law, but I'd guess $100,000 easy for federal litigation, especially where you get experts and big firms involved.

Patent guys get BIG bucks, not sure about trademark.
 
2013-05-22 02:59:48 PM
www.wisdomportal.com
Among the rain
and lights
I saw the figure 5
in gold
on a red
fire truck
moving
tense
unheeded
to gong clangs
siren howls
and wheels rumbling
through the dark city


Charles Demuth's painting
The Figure 5 in Gold
inspired by
William Carlos Williams'
poem: The Great Figure
 
2013-05-22 03:00:38 PM

Quickmatch: I used to think Magic Hat was reasonably tasty, but I won't buy it anymore based on this story.

Fark bully beers, drink local.

/Of course that's easy for me to say, living in Beer City USA.


Is that near Stripperville?
 
2013-05-22 03:02:35 PM
i128.photobucket.com
 
2013-05-22 03:02:39 PM

Dead-Guy: Doesn't anyone have the patent on groundlessly suing people over copyright infringement?  I think I'll go get it.. as long as I have enough backing to tie these folks up in court, the fact that the patent was made afterwards, won't even matter... They'll settle, or go out of business, because I'm not good for the kind of money they'd try to counter-sue for.


I have a patent on getting patents, so I'm going to need a small percentage here...
 
2013-05-22 03:03:33 PM
As a unprofitable company, can you agree to pay them -$X....then sue when they don't pay?
 
2013-05-22 03:05:51 PM

Teiritzamna: PunGent: Not sure how relevant intent is in trademark cases, though...either you're infringing or not, maybe?

Intent is in fact considered, but it is not at the heart of the matter.

The important thing in trademark is to remember that out of all IP it is the nice one (if we ignore rarer bullshiat like dillution and post-sale confusion).  It exists specifically to prevent consumers from being confused and taken advantage of, and that is basically the legal test.  Looking at two marks, would a consumer be confused as to the source of the goods.

Now, note, i said source of the goods, not confuse the goods themselves.  Thus if a consumer saw two logos side by side and was likely to think they were not the same product but made by the same guys, that can be actionable.

Additionally, as the system is built such that the "owner" of a mark is also the one who polices it, we make them actually have to do their job and police EVERYTHING.  We don't want companies only suing the easy guys or the deepest pockets and letting lots of consumers get hosed by operators with less cash or harder claims, so we require that they enforce against everyone or risk losing the mark.  This also makes sense from a confusion perspective, as if a mark is loosely enforced, it is likely that it will end up standing for lots of different producers, consumers will stop trusting it and it will be useless as a source signifier.

All of this is to say: Stop throwing around the word troll, subby, you obviously have no idea what it means.


Well put.  I'd ask if you do trademark law for a living, but your explanation is suspiciously clear, concise and devoid of legalese...
 
2013-05-22 03:05:57 PM

JK47: Magic Hat says they've been in contact with them trying to propose an amicable solution in order to avoid a law suit. West Sixth argues that they tried to reach out to Magic Hat and received no response. I'm inclined to support the one that's telling the truth and in my experience anyone who says "fancy legal counsel out of New York" is usually a dirtbag.


I'm all about pulling for the little guy, but if the evidence presented in the form of the letters between the two companies is legit, Magic Hat did the reasonable route first and ended up getting the cold shoulder.  Going past that, they have to defend their trademark.  The W6BC logo looks like it is a spin-off of Magic Hat, and the distributors, the ones that live and die by understanding how Joe Schmoe reacts to product display, sees confusion in that.

nunyadang: Magic Hat beer blows. If I were a craft brewer I would not want my label to be confused with a bottle of suck ass beer. Quit biatching and change your logo


Exactly; even if you hate Magic Hat's product they have a legitimate business and what appears to be a legit complaint.  Personally, I like Magic Hat when they're "on" but their consistency batch-to-batch leaves something to be desired.
 
2013-05-22 03:06:46 PM

Warthog: Dead-Guy: Doesn't anyone have the patent on groundlessly suing people over copyright infringement?  I think I'll go get it.. as long as I have enough backing to tie these folks up in court, the fact that the patent was made afterwards, won't even matter... They'll settle, or go out of business, because I'm not good for the kind of money they'd try to counter-sue for.

Haliburton tried to get a patent on patent trolling.  But then the law on business method patents changed.


"Tried"? I'm pretty sure that one's still pending. As of March, it was. :)
 
2013-05-22 03:06:50 PM

derpy: Of course, screw all this, because in a couple months I'll be drinking:
[i42.tinypic.com image 850x428]
brewed by the guy next door to me


No way!  I live within walking distance of North Country Brewery.  Good Beer, and food.
 
2013-05-22 03:08:22 PM

you have pee hands: This is my favorite.
[encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com image 512x98]

[i.annihil.us image 608x229]


Given the amount of product placement in the latest Ironman movie I would not be surprised if Lockhead Martin paid for that.
 
2013-05-22 03:09:05 PM

CapeFearCadaver: Guess which band is worldwide popular?


Neither to any meaningful degree?

/where do I go to claim my prize?
 
2013-05-22 03:11:17 PM
The similar typeface and the compass star are way too similar. It would be way too easy to see that 6 with the star and move on to better beer because it looked like more crap from Magic Hat.
 
2013-05-22 03:13:20 PM
trademarks have to be  vigorously protected

just the nature of the beast

also, i was more convinced that this was a coincidence until evilmrsock posted the picture of the toucans
 
2013-05-22 03:13:59 PM

factoryconnection: I just saw this on Magic Hat's facebook feed today: http://new.pitchengine.com/pitches/0ab90552-225c-4a77-bf2e-79ecdcd09c 1 5

Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.  Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.


www.hiloop.com

/ Sure hope neither company runs across 69.....
 
2013-05-22 03:15:02 PM

Jument: CapeFearCadaver: Guess which band is worldwide popular?

Neither to any meaningful degree?

/where do I go to claim my prize?


DAMN!  "Neither" was my answer too.

/I missed the prize by 5 minutes...
 
2013-05-22 03:15:27 PM
Being that they're both beers and the 'font' of the numbers are identical (and a 6 and 9 and basically the same shape) they have some standing.  They should sue the design company to recover any losses.
 
2013-05-22 03:16:21 PM

PunGent: Teiritzamna: PunGent: Not sure how relevant intent is in trademark cases, though...either you're infringing or not, maybe?

Intent is in fact considered, but it is not at the heart of the matter.

The important thing in trademark is to remember that out of all IP it is the nice one (if we ignore rarer bullshiat like dillution and post-sale confusion).  It exists specifically to prevent consumers from being confused and taken advantage of, and that is basically the legal test.  Looking at two marks, would a consumer be confused as to the source of the goods.

Now, note, i said source of the goods, not confuse the goods themselves.  Thus if a consumer saw two logos side by side and was likely to think they were not the same product but made by the same guys, that can be actionable.

Additionally, as the system is built such that the "owner" of a mark is also the one who polices it, we make them actually have to do their job and police EVERYTHING.  We don't want companies only suing the easy guys or the deepest pockets and letting lots of consumers get hosed by operators with less cash or harder claims, so we require that they enforce against everyone or risk losing the mark.  This also makes sense from a confusion perspective, as if a mark is loosely enforced, it is likely that it will end up standing for lots of different producers, consumers will stop trusting it and it will be useless as a source signifier.

All of this is to say: Stop throwing around the word troll, subby, you obviously have no idea what it means.

Well put.  I'd ask if you do trademark law for a living, but your explanation is suspiciously clear, concise and devoid of legalese...


I am young yet.
 
2013-05-22 03:19:45 PM

Theaetetus: ha-ha-guy: Assuming Magic Hat is correct, the West Sixth was lying in their little sob story about "no one ever talked to us" since Magic Hat claims they've been working with them.

The letters back and forth are here.


And my ain't those letters funny.  Especially the parts in which the Magic Hat attorney keeps on trying ot refer to the number 6 as "an inverted 9", and the response from the 6th attorney stating the obvious "consumers are not likely to be confused between "6" and "#9", particularly in light of the number of third party uses of numerals on or in connection with beer".

The further communication shows a strong desire by 6th to make some alterations to its designs (including its pending trademark application) to actually differentiate itself from the Magic Hat 9 without completely giving over creative control of their image to Magic Hat, and Magic Hat's total ass-hattery.  The manner in which Magic Hat approaches this issue certainly makes it seem like they are going above and beyond mere "defense of trademark" and are just trying to push 6th around.
 
2013-05-22 03:25:39 PM

medius: trademarks have to be  vigorously protected

just the nature of the beast

also, i was more convinced that this was a coincidence until evilmrsock posted the picture of the toucans


and you are a legal beagle, too, FTR.
 
2013-05-22 03:30:49 PM

factoryconnection: 'm all about pulling for the little guy, but if the evidence presented in the form of the letters between the two companies is legit, Magic Hat did the reasonable route first and ended up getting the cold shoulder. Going past that, they have to defend their trademark.


I agree with this stuff, however the trademark is for "#9."  The beer they claim is infringing does not have a # sign, nor does it have a 9.  It seems to me their defense is a bit overzealous.

factoryconnection: Magic Hat did the reasonable route first and ended up getting the cold shoulder.


The very end of the first letter, West Sixth Brewing says "in an effort to resolve the matter, we will agree to remove the stylized compass design..."

Magic Hat asked amongst other things that West Sixth pull their application to trademark the "6" with "West Sixth Brewing" wrapped around it.  http://www.trademarkia.com/west-sixth-brewing-6-85739821.html

I still think Magic Hat are the douchebags, though West Sixth probably didn't need to lie about how things went down.
 
2013-05-22 03:30:51 PM

kobrakai: I wonder what PepsiCo thinks about Magic Hat's logo for their cucumber hibiscus ale?


That no right thinking beer drinker would go near it, so there's no need to worry?

Blearrgh.
 
2013-05-22 03:31:10 PM
Aaaaand now Magic Hat realizes that they've stepped in it big time. From their Facebook page:

We'd like to thank our fans out there who have offered their support over the last day or so. It is great to see that because of your support West Sixth is now willing to revisit the areas they previously agreed to in an effort to find a resolution. We will be reaching out to them to discuss directly rather than engage in any more back-and-forth on social sites. Thanks again for your support.
 
2013-05-22 03:31:47 PM

exparrot: kobrakai: I wonder what PepsiCo thinks about Magic Hat's logo for their cucumber hibiscus ale?

That no right thinking beer drinker would go near it, so there's no need to worry?

Blearrgh.


There's that aspect of it too.
 
2013-05-22 03:32:15 PM
Blah blah blah way beyond defense of trademark.....

This isn't like Monster going after someone.
 
2013-05-22 03:32:20 PM
What happened to American businesses that every time there is legal trouble it becomes a blog, petition, fund raising whine fest?
 
2013-05-22 03:33:04 PM
Magic Hat has a point. Same specialized font, and exact same 8-pointed star design. West Sixth needs to come up with a new logo.
 
2013-05-22 03:33:06 PM

Arthur Jumbles: factoryconnection: I just saw this on Magic Hat's facebook feed today: http://new.pitchengine.com/pitches/0ab90552-225c-4a77-bf2e-79ecdcd09c 1 5

Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.  Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.

[www.hiloop.com image 610x403]

/ Sure hope neither company runs across 69.....


Erm . . . there are some blurry shenanigans happening in the background of that picture.
 
2013-05-22 03:33:30 PM

CapeFearCadaver: Meh. Create another logo and move on.

Gene Simmons sued some friends of mine out of Sweden who's name was Crown of Thorns. They were signed, had records, doing international (through Europe) tours, etc. But since Gene Simmons decided years later to produce a small band in the States with the same name he sued them.

Rather than go through the hoopla over it, considering the cost of it which they didn't have, they just changed their name to The Crown.

Guess which band is worldwide popular?

No, no, no! The whole idea is not to cave and not to back down. Otherwise you just encourage the lawsuit trolls.
 
2013-05-22 03:34:07 PM

kobrakai: Aaaaand now Magic Hat realizes that they've stepped in it big time. From their Facebook page:

We'd like to thank our fans out there who have offered their support over the last day or so. It is great to see that because of your support West Sixth is now willing to revisit the areas they previously agreed to in an effort to find a resolution. We will be reaching out to them to discuss directly rather than engage in any more back-and-forth on social sites. Thanks again for your support.


Are you reading the same post as we are?
 
2013-05-22 03:39:03 PM

cefm: And my ain't those letters funny.  Especially the parts in which the Magic Hat attorney keeps on trying ot refer to the number 6 as "an inverted 9", and the response from the 6th attorney stating the obvious "consumers are not likely to be confused between "6" and "#9", particularly in light of the number of third party uses of numerals on or in connection with beer".


They are pretty funny, considering that that's not the test for infringement either, yet 6th's attorney says it right after accusing Hat's attorney of not using the proper test.
 
2013-05-22 03:39:09 PM

Dahnkster: [i1.sndcdn.com image 397x400]

Number 9. Number 9.


No, no, noooooooooooooooo!
 
2013-05-22 03:43:24 PM

impaler: Really? Are you blind?


Are you sure your outfit is a socially-conscious craft brewery ? because making fun of blind people and impaling  people seems , I dunno, somewhat anti social..
 
2013-05-22 03:43:53 PM
I'll let the Fark lawyers work this out, but on principle I feel like Magic Hat's going a bit beyond what's necessary here.

It's difficult for me to try and look at this as an outsider as I go to West 6th frequently and very much enjoy their IPA. Perhaps because I'm so familiar with West 6th it never has occurred to me that the logos might look similar and I can't imagine being confused when at the liquor store or looking at the taps. I kind of see some of the similarities, but I find it insulting as a consumer that Magic Hat doesn't think I can tell the difference. I've never really drunk much Magic Hat because there are better, cheaper beers (like West 6th), but it would take a lot for them to win me over after this.
 
2013-05-22 03:54:43 PM

oruacat2: The silver lining is that I had no idea Magic Hat was owned by a foreign corportation, and I usually try to keep up with facts like that one.  Thanks to this frivolous lawsuit, they've blown up their own carefully-constructed "Vermont craft-brewery" mythology.   Way to go, guys.


They used to be a craft brewery out of Vermont, then they sold out to a conglomerate who uses the name and branding that became associated with craft beer and promotes a craft beer image, but just pisses out cheap macrobrew.
 
2013-05-22 03:59:04 PM

mikaloyd: impaler: Really? Are you blind?

Are you sure your outfit is a socially-conscious craft brewery ? because making fun of blind people and impaling  people seems , I dunno, somewhat anti social..


What are you going on about?
 
2013-05-22 04:02:00 PM
The #9 is not in a circle.

fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net
 
2013-05-22 04:02:28 PM
My proposed solution to the whole problem:
ancientscrossroads.com
/ Spent all of 30 minutes to create.
 
2013-05-22 04:03:03 PM
I will admit to being a fan of West Sixth and not ever really finding anything I liked from Magic Hat. If I set that aside for a moment and consider the branding, and the letters sent back and forth with responses and alleged lack thereof from MH on the final letter from West Sixth. I have to say that I think Cerveceria Costa Rica (owner of Magic Hat) is playing a typical legal bullying game based very much manufactured notions of infringement and damage.

Part of the problem is one of the evolution of style in marketing design, an example being the popularity of certain typefaces and shapes tending to get focused and develop into practically a cultural trend. Seeing certain numerals in a given typeface and slogans in another typeface set around a circular design seems  to me like more of a trend in minimalist branding than it is intellectual property. The emphasis on the numeral, and the extreme sizing variation between the numeral and the rest of the design implies whimsy and it also seems to be a popular approach.  I think what we have here is a case of a minimalist design which incorporates some trendy elements, the star which is intended to imply a map compass device, a 6 in a circle and some other commonplace features like the other typefaces in use in the logo/label and I would have to guess that the genuine intention was to create a place-based brand for a brewery on West Sixth. I found that you could GIS for various permutations of numeral logo circular "brewing company" etc and find more than a dozen cases where stars numbers and circles were used in similar ways.

So yeah Magic Hat can go fark themselves.
 
2013-05-22 04:05:37 PM
Nobody, not even Bud Light drinkers, wants to think the guys running their beer companies are a bunch of corporate suits who go around getting all litigious with other brewers.
 
2013-05-22 04:08:34 PM

Lost Thought 00: Magic Hat has a point. Same specialized font, and exact same 8-pointed star design. West Sixth needs to come up with a new logo.


Actually no. The fonts are similar but not the same, no way specialized, and the the compass rose (it's not a star) are different.
 
2013-05-22 04:08:46 PM

Mayostard: When you're pouring it, it becomes Magic Hat #9.


^^^^^
 
2013-05-22 04:09:57 PM

CapeFearCadaver: Meh. Create another logo and move on.

Gene Simmons sued some friends of mine out of Sweden who's name was Crown of Thorns. They were signed, had records, doing international (through Europe) tours, etc. But since Gene Simmons decided years later to produce a small band in the States with the same name he sued them.

Rather than go through the hoopla over it, considering the cost of it which they didn't have, they just changed their name to The Crown.

Guess which band is worldwide popular?


Foo Fighters?
 
2013-05-22 04:17:01 PM

ha-ha-guy: factoryconnection: I just saw this on Magic Hat's facebook feed today: http://new.pitchengine.com/pitches/0ab90552-225c-4a77-bf2e-79ecdcd09c 1 5

Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.  Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.

Assuming Magic Hat is correct, the West Sixth was lying in their little sob story about "no one ever talked to us" since Magic Hat claims they've been working with them.  It seems all Magic Hat wanted was the next generation of the design to be amended.  That way Magic Hat has proof they defended their trade mark, but they didn't make West Sixth flush a whole batch of promo material, they just wanted West Sixth to order different promo material next time around.

Beyond that I'm not sure why West Sixth is going with #6 for their branding.  If it was Warehouse Number Six or something, I could get that, but who writes out West Sixth [Street, Ave, Ward, Etc] as #6?  Questionable quality of design even if it isn't meant to infringe.  If Magic Hat really has distributors who expressed concern to them, it doesn't seem unreasonable to ask West Sixth to play up "West Sixth" instead of "#6" in their next batch of packaging and promo material.

/perhaps West Sixth's beer also sucks which is why distributors won't carry them, so the company is going for a support the little guy viral marketing campaign


I read the letter Magic Hat sent from the link above.  It's far more "cease, desist, and send us royalties" than "hey guys, let's work this out."

I think it's close enough to be an infringement and West 6th should change their logo.  The best thing that could happen out of this is a design company steps up with some gratis work and they all move on.
 
2013-05-22 04:19:21 PM

Lost Thought 00: Magic Hat has a point. Same specialized font, and exact same 8-pointed star design. West Sixth needs to come up with a new logo.


Maybe they'd have a point if they had trademarked the font, or the 8-pointed star design.  As it is, they only trademarked the name "#9."
 
2013-05-22 04:20:53 PM

Tumunga: Mayostard: When you're pouring it, it becomes Magic Hat #9.

^^^^^


...... and when you've digested it, it becomes Coors Light.
 
2013-05-22 04:22:20 PM
Magic Hat can kiss their business in Kentucky goodbye, not that it means much to a foreign-owned multi-national conglomerate.

There is no confusion "on the ground". West Sixth (located on West Sixth Street in a converted former Rainbo Bread Factory in Downtown Lexington, KY) started in Spring 2012. From the get-go, before there was any distribution, folks flocked to the brewery, which has become a vibrant community center in what was a depressed area. West Sixth's success is tied to excellent beer, a close bond with the community, and a lot of word-of-mouth. The logo could be anything, really--not that important. People here drink West Sixth because it is an awesome beer made by very cool people, who are tending bar and manning the brewery everyday. Magic Hat (Ass Hat) and their logo have absolutely nothing to do with the success of West Sixth locally.

I was never a fan of Magic Hat before (the worst beer I ever tasted was some version of Magic Hat at a craft beer festival). Going forward, I'll never even consider giving them a nickel's worth of business, after this steaming crock of corporate bully lawsuit.
 
2013-05-22 04:22:37 PM

lennavan: Lost Thought 00: Magic Hat has a point. Same specialized font, and exact same 8-pointed star design. West Sixth needs to come up with a new logo.

Maybe they'd have a point if they had trademarked the font, or the 8-pointed star design.  As it is, they only trademarked the name "#9."


Yeah, if they didn't bother to trademark any of the design elements they claim are infringing, how can they say those elements are infringing on trademarks?
 
2013-05-22 04:23:37 PM

rmcooper4: It's difficult for me to try and look at this as an outsider as I go to West 6th frequently and very much enjoy their IPA. Perhaps because I'm so familiar with West 6th it never has occurred to me that the logos might look similar and I can't imagine being confused when at the liquor store or looking at the taps. I kind of see some of the similarities, but I find it insulting as a consumer that Magic Hat doesn't think I can tell the difference. I've never really drunk much Magic Hat because there are better, cheaper beers (like West 6th), but it would take a lot for them to win me over after this.


Put it a different way: Lawyers use the term "colorable" (which should actually mean "correct") basically to mean an argument that may not be 100% right, or even 75% right, but that can be argued with a straight face.  This term drives much of the confusion between lawyers and non-lawyers, as when a lawyer makes or gauges an argument, they are usually looking for whether it is a 100% winner (although those are great when you get 'em) but whether the argument has any colorable merit at all.

So in regards to this dispute:  I would say that you are probably right. But!  to determine if a mark is infringing, the following factors are used (they actually differ slightly per circuit, but are still pretty much the same):

1. the similarity of the two marks (including the marks' look, phonetic similarities, and underlying meanings);
Teir says: this is the big up in the air issue, but i would say personally that the logos are only somewhat similar, which likely plays well for 6th.

2. the similarities of the goods and services involved (including an examination of the marketing channels for the goods);
Teir says: this goes for Magic Hat, as the goods are pretty similar in that they are both craft beers

3. the "strength" of the plaintiff's mark (i.e. how likely is the mark to be viewed as a signifier of source);
Teir says:  Strength is often a tricky concept but corresponds basically to the idea of "how likely would someone accidentally make the mark at issue." Here it's not so bad an analysis.  If we were dealing with just the numbers, Magic Hat's mark it would likely be a rather weak , but logos are generally considered to be very strong as they are hard to accidentally replicate.  So this one goes for MH as well.

4. Any evidence of actual confusion by consumers;
Teir says:  This would be based on surveys and actual evidence - so at this point who knows.

5. The intent of the defendant in adopting its mark;
Teir says:  generally, intent is irrelevant with one caveat: if a defendant actually went out and tried to copy another's mark, especially if it can be shown that their intent was to make money by confusing people, they tend to lose right away.  Otherwise, this factor is pretty much ignored in the analysis.  Here, there seems to be no evidence of actual dickery, so it is likely moot.

6. The physical proximity of the goods in the retail marketplace;
Teir says:  This means "do the two companies basically sell to the same consumers?"  Sometimes this means geographic separation (a California local brand is much less likely to be confused for a NY local brand), but can also be market segmentation.  An average consumer is not likley to confuse the maker of a cheap ass item as the maker of a high end luxury item ("really, a 2 dollar 'ROLLLEX'?  I bet . . . ."  Here, the markets somewhat overlap, and they sell to basically the same kind of consumer at similar price points, so once again, MH gets a point.

7. the degree of care likely to be exercised by the consumer; and
Teir says:  this takes into account sophistication (i.e. the standard knowledgeable beer snob), cost (you are likely to really REALLY make sure of what you are buying if it costs a lot) and other factors that go into how much a given consumer will actually pay attention.  It is thus easier to find infringement when the products are likely to be impulse buys.  Here i would say this favors 6th, as craft beer is somewhat expensive for what it is, and the consumers tend to be pretty knowledgeable, but of course evidence of masses buying "whatever beer has that 6/9 on it" could turn this around.

8. the likelihood of expansion of the product lines.
Teir says:  another red headed stepchild, this factor is usually used when the products are converging, either because a local brand is going national and thus more people are likely to be in the "zone of confusion" or because one of the players is changing their market (cheap beer is going high end, or vice versa)  From what i know so far, this likely favors neither.

The point is, even though, based on these factors. I think 6th has a good case, MH still has a colorable claim, at least one colorable enough that they will need to enforce their mark with a cease & desist and perhaps colorable enough that they will roll the dice with litigation.  Big, multifactor tests often mean that there is no way to say "oh this is a bullshiat suit" at the outset.
 
2013-05-22 04:24:32 PM

fiddle-faddle: I always liked this bit of laziness. Apparently, this "G" got treated like clip-art.

[i.chzbgr.com image 401x271]


Grambling's logo also.

I believe they all received permission from the Packers.
 
2013-05-22 04:24:57 PM
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2013-05-22 04:25:32 PM

Teiritzamna: they are usually NOT looking for whether it is a 100% winner (although those are great when you get 'em) but whether the argument has any colorable merit at al

l.

way to reverse the meaning of my intended sentence you farking fingers.
 
2013-05-22 04:32:12 PM

Silverstaff: lennavan: Lost Thought 00: Magic Hat has a point. Same specialized font, and exact same 8-pointed star design. West Sixth needs to come up with a new logo.

Maybe they'd have a point if they had trademarked the font, or the 8-pointed star design.  As it is, they only trademarked the name "#9."

Yeah, if they didn't bother to trademark any of the design elements they claim are infringing, how can they say those elements are infringing on trademarks?


Lanham Act, sec. 43, covers infringement of  unregistered marks.
 
2013-05-22 04:32:31 PM
My advice to West Sixth Brewing Company would be to change your logo. Magic Hat has deeper pockets. Some fights are just not worth it.

It may be possible to get back at them at some point though.

Change the logo and come out with a beer that contains the word "Magic" or "Hat" .

May I suggest West Sixth Wizard Hat Ale. With a new logo of course. Maybe a "6" next to an upraised finger.
 
2013-05-22 04:33:12 PM
blogs-images.forbes.com
+
si0.twimg.com
=
www.mustlovebeer.com
 
2013-05-22 04:42:10 PM

MugzyBrown: Being that they're both beers and the 'font' of the numbers are identical (and a 6 and 9 and basically the same shape) they have some standing.  They should sue the design company to recover any losses.


I don't think you're right.  Any similarities between the typefaces is only in that they are numerals. From a typographical perspective they aren't even remotely similar. ( WARNING I am not a typographer, just a wannabe font fan so I'm probably not using all the terms correctly here )

In the font people's world, that's like saying that Ariel is the same as Comic Sans because they both have the same alphabet.

The 9 has a disconnected loop, had a vertical  stem with a deep bowed curve and a sharp thinning to a bulbous terminal.
 The 6 has a a connected loop which is more uniform (at points half as thick as the 9 ), and a different axis of stress of the loop, the stem is rounded at all times ( and is formed by the backbone of the circle surrounding it ) and the thinning point to the terminal is far less dramatic.


Similar with the star. Different length and width of the points,   one has an outline, the other doesn't, entirely different positioning etc...

Probably won't make a huge difference but how the trademark is being used is slightly different too... one is the logo for the beer company (6)  and the other (#9) is the logo for a specific beer.

I'm just not buying it. This looks like bullying to me.
 
2013-05-22 04:44:10 PM

rwfan: As soon as the image of the logo popped up on my browser I knew what the problem was.  They do look similar and if I saw that logo I would assume it was from Magic Hat.  Change the logo or fight it out in court.


Yes, after seeing the logos side-by-side (West 6th crybaby page didn't show the MH logo they're infringing), I bet I would be *very* likely to confuse them while sauntering down the beer aisles.
 
2013-05-22 04:46:49 PM

Teiritzamna: rmcooper4: It's difficult for me to try and look at this as an outsider as I go to West 6th frequently and very much enjoy their IPA. Perhaps because I'm so familiar with West 6th it never has occurred to me that the logos might look similar and I can't imagine being confused when at the liquor store or looking at the taps. I kind of see some of the similarities, but I find it insulting as a consumer that Magic Hat doesn't think I can tell the difference. I've never really drunk much Magic Hat because there are better, cheaper beers (like West 6th), but it would take a lot for them to win me over after this.

Put it a different way: Lawyers use the term "colorable" (which should actually mean "correct") ...


Wow, thanks for parsing this out. I'm trying not to be too much of a homer on this so I appreciate you taking the time break the case down. It does seem MH has a legit case. I just wonder if it's a good business decision. Places in Lexington are taking #9 off their taps in solidarity with West 6th. The social media firestorm also seems pretty bad. Nonetheless, being so close to the center of the action it's hard to tell if this will just be a short term PR road bump for MH or if they are alienating their customers. I'm afraid it's probably the latter.

Honestly, I'd like to see West 6th change the logo as it's a bit busy for my liking. Loreweaver's up-thread would be a good starting point. Still, I don't want them to be forced to change because of a legal battle.
 
2013-05-22 04:47:28 PM

Theaetetus: Silverstaff: lennavan: Lost Thought 00: Magic Hat has a point. Same specialized font, and exact same 8-pointed star design. West Sixth needs to come up with a new logo.

Maybe they'd have a point if they had trademarked the font, or the 8-pointed star design.  As it is, they only trademarked the name "#9."

Yeah, if they didn't bother to trademark any of the design elements they claim are infringing, how can they say those elements are infringing on trademarks?

Lanham Act, sec. 43, covers infringement of  unregistered marks.


Well, first, it seems according to the letters linked previously in the thread, they are claiming this infringes their trademark.  A case for unregistered marks is very different.  According to the PDF I found http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/law/tmlaw.pdf  that would require proving the design is "famous" which means amongst other things "widely recognized by the general consuming public of the United States."  I can't imagine that fits here.
 
2013-05-22 04:56:17 PM

huntercr: MugzyBrown: Being that they're both beers and the 'font' of the numbers are identical (and a 6 and 9 and basically the same shape) they have some standing.  They should sue the design company to recover any losses.

I don't think you're right.  Any similarities between the typefaces is only in that they are numerals. From a typographical perspective they aren't even remotely similar. ( WARNING I am not a typographer, just a wannabe font fan so I'm probably not using all the terms correctly here )

In the font people's world, that's like saying that Ariel is the same as Comic Sans because they both have the same alphabet.

The 9 has a disconnected loop, had a vertical  stem with a deep bowed curve and a sharp thinning to a bulbous terminal.
 The 6 has a a connected loop which is more uniform (at points half as thick as the 9 ), and a different axis of stress of the loop, the stem is rounded at all times ( and is formed by the backbone of the circle surrounding it ) and the thinning point to the terminal is far less dramatic.


Similar with the star. Different length and width of the points,   one has an outline, the other doesn't, entirely different positioning etc...

Probably won't make a huge difference but how the trademark is being used is slightly different too... one is the logo for the beer company (6)  and the other (#9) is the logo for a specific beer.

I'm just not buying it. This looks like bullying to me.


The test is not whether there's  any discernible difference between the mark and the accused infringing mark, but whether an ordinary observer would likely be confused between them or falsely believe they were both associated with the same manufacturer. Sure, if you take a ruler and measure the length of the points, you can tell they're different... but if you saw one on one shelf in a store, and the other on a different shelf? Or if you're familiar with the Magic Hat logo, and you see this new one, would you think it was another beer by the same manufacturer?
 
2013-05-22 04:57:05 PM
I just can't bring myself to care about any beer that comes in a can.
 
2013-05-22 04:58:19 PM

rmcooper4: I just wonder if it's a good business decision. Places in Lexington are taking #9 off their taps in solidarity with West 6th.


Yes, it may hurt MH's market share in Kentucky, but if it protects their mark in the rest of the country (not to mention the world), then it may be worth it.
 
2013-05-22 04:59:34 PM

missmez: I just can't bring myself to care about any beer that comes in a can.


beerstreetjournal.com
 
2013-05-22 05:00:30 PM
You've got the magic hat.

Put a curse on them
 
2013-05-22 05:02:43 PM

lennavan: Lost Thought 00: Magic Hat has a point. Same specialized font, and exact same 8-pointed star design. West Sixth needs to come up with a new logo.

Maybe they'd have a point if they had trademarked the font, or the 8-pointed star design.  As it is, they only trademarked the name "#9."


I haven't read all the trademarks, so I only know is that that is what West 6th is claiming. I'm not even saying that Magic Hat would win in court. All I'm saying is that the suit isn't frivolous - there is sufficient concern over the designs that it deserves to be sorted out by the courts
 
2013-05-22 05:04:05 PM

Theaetetus: missmez: I just can't bring myself to care about any beer that comes in a can.

[beerstreetjournal.com image 570x427]


I'm glad they made it in cans, but why on god's green earth is it $16.50 + dep for a damn 12-pack in Massachusetts?  I can get much better beers for $4-5 cheaper.
 
2013-05-22 05:07:51 PM

missmez: I just can't bring myself to care about any beer that comes in a can.


Then you are missing out.
 
2013-05-22 05:07:59 PM

Theaetetus: missmez: I just can't bring myself to care about any beer that comes in a can.

[beerstreetjournal.com image 570x427]


Okay, Sam Adams Boston is a pretty good beer. . .but I'll still drink it out of a bottle and not a can :-)
 
2013-05-22 05:09:27 PM

Lost Thought 00: lennavan: Lost Thought 00: Magic Hat has a point. Same specialized font, and exact same 8-pointed star design. West Sixth needs to come up with a new logo.

Maybe they'd have a point if they had trademarked the font, or the 8-pointed star design.  As it is, they only trademarked the name "#9."

I haven't read all the trademarks, so I only know is that that is what West 6th is claiming. I'm not even saying that Magic Hat would win in court. All I'm saying is that the suit isn't frivolous - there is sufficient concern over the designs that it deserves to be sorted out by the courts


I agree there is sufficient concern over the designs.  The design was not trademarked.  "#9" was trademarked.  I'm going off the link from previously in the thread:

zobear: http://www.scribd.com/doc/142860493/Magic-Hat-Brewing-and-West-Sixth- B rewing


The lawsuit is frivolous.
 
2013-05-22 05:25:50 PM

Teiritzamna: PunGent: Teiritzamna: PunGent: Not sure how relevant intent is in trademark cases, though...either you're infringing or not, maybe?

Intent is in fact considered, but it is not at the heart of the matter.

The important thing in trademark is to remember that out of all IP it is the nice one (if we ignore rarer bullshiat like dillution and post-sale confusion).  It exists specifically to prevent consumers from being confused and taken advantage of, and that is basically the legal test.  Looking at two marks, would a consumer be confused as to the source of the goods.

Now, note, i said source of the goods, not confuse the goods themselves.  Thus if a consumer saw two logos side by side and was likely to think they were not the same product but made by the same guys, that can be actionable.

Additionally, as the system is built such that the "owner" of a mark is also the one who polices it, we make them actually have to do their job and police EVERYTHING.  We don't want companies only suing the easy guys or the deepest pockets and letting lots of consumers get hosed by operators with less cash or harder claims, so we require that they enforce against everyone or risk losing the mark.  This also makes sense from a confusion perspective, as if a mark is loosely enforced, it is likely that it will end up standing for lots of different producers, consumers will stop trusting it and it will be useless as a source signifier.

All of this is to say: Stop throwing around the word troll, subby, you obviously have no idea what it means.

Well put.  I'd ask if you do trademark law for a living, but your explanation is suspiciously clear, concise and devoid of legalese...

I am young yet.


Ah, that explains it.  Like a young whale without barnacles, you have yet to acquire the mighty encrustations of legalese of the pod elders...

/you'll never get your billable hours up if you persist in being clear and concise, young man
 
2013-05-22 05:26:44 PM

impaler: Note that the logo is inverted.


In my opinion: definite infringement. This looks like a case where they should have to change their logo. And if they made up their sob story to smear Magic Hat, I hope those "fancy NYC attorneys" get every penny they seek.
 
2013-05-22 05:27:45 PM

lennavan: I agree there is sufficient concern over the designs.  The design was not trademarked.  "#9" was trademarked.  I'm going off the link from previously in the thread:


As previously mentioned, the design was most certainly trademarked. It was not  registered under the Lanham Act, but trademark rights can arise  automatically. See section 43 of the Lanham Act, discussing rights in  unregistered marks and trade dress.

Since you agree there is sufficient concern over the designs, then any lawsuit over them would not be frivolous.
 
2013-05-22 05:28:10 PM

RatOmeter: Yes, after seeing the logos side-by-side (West 6th crybaby page didn't show the MH logo they're infringing), I bet I would be *very* likely to confuse them while sauntering down the beer aisles.


They're practically identical:
media.tumblr.comres.cloudinary.com
 
2013-05-22 05:29:54 PM

impaler: RatOmeter: Yes, after seeing the logos side-by-side (West 6th crybaby page didn't show the MH logo they're infringing), I bet I would be *very* likely to confuse them while sauntering down the beer aisles.

They're practically identical:
[media.tumblr.com image 300x357][res.cloudinary.com image 250x488]


I think a better version was posted by this wise person early on in the thread:
impaler:
encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com

Note that the logo is inverted.
 
2013-05-22 05:34:31 PM

factoryconnection: I just saw this on Magic Hat's facebook feed today: http://new.pitchengine.com/pitches/0ab90552-225c-4a77-bf2e-79ecdcd09c 1 5

Worth a read, what with two sides to every story.  Maybe Magic Hat is being the bad guy, but one must defend trademarks or risk losing their legal standing.


I like how his "working with them" was basically a cease and desist with nicer wording so they look reasonable.  Letter chain abruptly ends when they clarify that they are not willing to do exactly as Magic Hat wants.
 
2013-05-22 05:35:34 PM

Dead-Guy: Doesn't anyone have the patent on groundlessly suing people over copyright infringement?  I think I'll go get it.. as long as I have enough backing to tie these folks up in court, the fact that the patent was made afterwards, won't even matter... They'll settle, or go out of business, because I'm not good for the kind of money they'd try to counter-sue for.


The problem here is that this isn't copyright, nor is it groundless. So you're maybe getting into STFU territory.
 
2013-05-22 05:36:57 PM

missmez: I just can't bring myself to care about any beer that comes in a can.


Typical woman, knows nothing about beer.

ironhops.com


www.selectism.com

3.bp.blogspot.com

www.ohbeautifulbeer.com
 
2013-05-22 05:38:50 PM

derpy: I'd like to see them sue ABInBev over "33."

OMG! There's a number on your beer!

Or even better, every small brewery needs to come out with a numbered beer.  By #247, I think Magic Hat would get over it.


A competing distributer a line of beer contract brewed beer in order to directly compete against the brewery I work for.

They named their IPA "Old Richmond #9"

It was a dick move by the distributor to come up with the idea, it was adick move by the other brewery to take the contract. We just kinda let it slide because we found that the beer sucked. Retailers saw through it, customers were educated, and Magic hat came down on all parties involved like ticks on a hound dog for even DAREING to use "#9" in a name for anything.

the fail was eexquisite!


Yes, the logo is too similar to magic hats logo.
 
2013-05-22 05:42:38 PM

missmez: I just can't bring myself to care about any beer that comes in a can.


There's some decent micro brews coming out in cans now, don't knock it til you try it.
 
2013-05-22 05:42:49 PM

Maud Dib: missmez: I just can't bring myself to care about any beer that comes in a can.

Typical woman, knows nothing about beer.

[ironhops.com image 228x300]


[www.selectism.com image 540x363]


[3.bp.blogspot.com image 650x488]

[www.ohbeautifulbeer.com image 450x367]


No, I am a woman who drinks local.  If it doesn't come out of a tap or a growler, I won't touch it.
 
2013-05-22 05:44:32 PM

Maud Dib: missmez: I just can't bring myself to care about any beer that comes in a can.

Typical woman, knows nothing about beer.

[ironhops.com image 228x300]



Modus Hoperandi is currently my favorite beer. I am gonna mow the lawn tonight and then have a couple.
 
2013-05-22 05:50:26 PM

impaler: RatOmeter: Yes, after seeing the logos side-by-side (West 6th crybaby page didn't show the MH logo they're infringing), I bet I would be *very* likely to confuse them while sauntering down the beer aisles.

They're practically identical:
[media.tumblr.com image 300x357][res.cloudinary.com image 250x488]


Yea, if you have any problem figuring out those are not the same beer you don't need anymore beer because you're retarded drunk.

Theaetetus: impaler: RatOmeter: Yes, after seeing the logos side-by-side (West 6th crybaby page didn't show the MH logo they're infringing), I bet I would be *very* likely to confuse them while sauntering down the beer aisles.

They're practically identical:
[media.tumblr.com image 300x357][res.cloudinary.com image 250x488]

I think a better version was posted by this wise person early on in the thread:
impaler:
[encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com image 327x154]
Note that the logo is inverted.


That little "Note" part is important because it's completely unnecessary, it's completely obvious that it is inverted because of the wording.

Even W6th pretty much agreed the logo without wording should be changed.  So that's not the issue at hand.
 
2013-05-22 05:51:34 PM

missmez: Maud Dib: missmez: I just can't bring myself to care about any beer that comes in a can.

Typical woman, knows nothing about beer.

[ironhops.com image 228x300]


[www.selectism.com image 540x363]


[3.bp.blogspot.com image 650x488]

[www.ohbeautifulbeer.com image 450x367]

No, I am a woman who drinks local.  If it doesn't come out of a tap or a growler, I won't touch it.


Choosing to miss out. Interesting.
 
2013-05-22 06:00:24 PM

IRQ12: Even W6th pretty much agreed the logo without wording should be changed.  So that's not the issue at hand.


That is the issue, though - apparently W6th had "pretty much agreed"* and then withdrew that and said they weren't going to change.

*they wouldn't characterize it that way, I'm sure
 
2013-05-22 06:00:36 PM
If I was just going off of the "style" of the packaging, I would have guessed 6 IPA was an Odells product. With it's 2/3 color palettes and handwrittenish serif font.

FYI, if 90 shilling was upside down, it would be 06 in a circle and 06 = 6...

res.cloudinary.comwww.refinedguy.com
 
2013-05-22 06:12:19 PM
This is even more shocking

growlersoftware.com
 
2013-05-22 06:27:53 PM

impaler: If I was just going off of the "style" of the packaging, I would have guessed 6 IPA was an Odells product. With it's 2/3 color palettes and handwrittenish serif font.


impaler: This is even more shocking


Looks like Odells should consider a C&D them . . .
 
2013-05-22 06:34:05 PM
Also, the brewery I work for is located at 321 west 7th street in Richmond Virginia

do y'all think if we came out with a line of beers named west 7th, west sixth would go apey on us?

in any case, we are turning 20 years old this year, and the anniversery logo is a truncated version oflogo unicorn logo with the roman numeral for 20 behind it.

ive warned people about a certain brand being represented by a Certain very interesting man.
I was rebuffed with something along the lines of "what? They are going to sue us over the roman numeral 20?"

"yes... why wouldnt they? Its a beer company that uses XX in thier logo... I WOULD send a C&D if I were them., change it to a 20 at least"

but im just a lowley beer miner......
 
2013-05-22 06:42:55 PM

Theaetetus: IRQ12: Even W6th pretty much agreed the logo without wording should be changed.  So that's not the issue at hand.

That is the issue, though - apparently W6th had "pretty much agreed"* and then withdrew that and said they weren't going to change.

*they wouldn't characterize it that way, I'm sure


No, from what I am reading they weren't going to change exactly as their attorney expected.  They agreed that the 6 by itself in a logo (without wording) could be misconstrued as a 9.  The MH attorney wanted them to phase out the logo (with lettering) altogether.  Like I said before you're retarded drunk if you see the full logo/label and think it resembles MH's at all.

I'll agree that W6th is hamming up the scenario but it certainly looks like they were willing to work with MH and MH took their ball and went home as soon as W6th made it clear that they weren't going to bend over and do as instructed.

I also highly doubt a distributor was the person who initiated it because of possible confusion. TONs of brands look "alike" at a glance. At least as similar as these two if not a whole lot more. Look at Bud Light/Miller Lite.  At a glance they look very similar (depending on the version of label at the time).
 
2013-05-22 07:36:16 PM

fiddle-faddle: And then there are these...
[machoarts.com image 476x723]


Most of those businesses do not overlap in their markets. At most one sent a letter to the other to acknowledge the trademarks as similar to show that it was "defended" These similar trademarks are not as big a deal. However, these are both breweries. In the same line of business, trademark infringement is a big deal.
 
2013-05-22 08:11:45 PM
W6th is quite tasty.  and their bar is really cool and hip, and yes, FULL of hipsters in a newly emerging hipster Utopia in Lexington.  But I dont care, tasty beer is tasty beer and i dont froth at the mouth with hipster hate anyway.  There is also another good spot to hang out in over at Country Boy Brewery.  There is some quite tasty new beer happenings in Lex-ville.

/signed it
 
2013-05-22 08:51:20 PM
Get rid of all copyright laws.  All of them.
 
2013-05-22 08:53:16 PM

Cerebral Knievel: Also, the brewery I work for is located at 321 west 7th street in Richmond Virginia

do y'all think if we came out with a line of beers named west 7th, west sixth would go apey on us?

in any case, we are turning 20 years old this year, and the anniversery logo is a truncated version oflogo unicorn logo with the roman numeral for 20 behind it.

ive warned people about a certain brand being represented by a Certain very interesting man.
I was rebuffed with something along the lines of "what? They are going to sue us over the roman numeral 20?"

"yes... why wouldnt they? Its a beer company that uses XX in thier logo... I WOULD send a C&D if I were them., change it to a 20 at least"

but im just a lowley beer miner......



Hey man, I live on the other side of town and I have kids so I don't get down there very often - it's months between visits - but should I look you up the next time I'm in?  Are you there days or nights?  Do I ask for Cerebral Knievel?
 
2013-05-22 09:31:57 PM

downstairs: fiddle-faddle: I always liked this bit of laziness. Apparently, this "G" got treated like clip-art.

[i.chzbgr.com image 401x271]

Grambling's logo also.

I believe they all received permission from the Packers.


could be vice versa. I know my college owned the rights to the St Louis cardinals logo for a long time (we pre-dated them by more than a bit.) they ended up buying the logo for a one time fee and a guarantee that the college would always be allowed to use it
 
2013-05-22 09:57:35 PM

CapeFearCadaver: Meh. Create another logo and move on.

Gene Simmons sued some friends of mine out of Sweden who's name was Crown of Thorns. They were signed, had records, doing international (through Europe) tours, etc. But since Gene Simmons decided years later to produce a small band in the States with the same name he sued them.

Rather than go through the hoopla over it, considering the cost of it which they didn't have, they just changed their name to The Crown.

Guess which band is worldwide popular?


as someone who has been a fan of The Crown for years -  I did not know this! heh, learn something new every day.
 
2013-05-22 10:19:25 PM

tlchwi02: downstairs: fiddle-faddle: I always liked this bit of laziness. Apparently, this "G" got treated like clip-art.

[i.chzbgr.com image 401x271]

Grambling's logo also.

I believe they all received permission from the Packers.

could be vice versa. I know my college owned the rights to the St Louis cardinals logo for a long time (we pre-dated them by more than a bit.) they ended up buying the logo for a one time fee and a guarantee that the college would always be allowed to use it



The Packers trademarked the design in 1961 and granted limited permission to the later-designed Georgia and Grambling people.

/Cheeseheads all know this--surprised everyone doesn't.
 
2013-05-22 11:22:37 PM
I think these logos are indeed similar enough to cause confusion in the marketplace, and that West Sixth Brewing Company did this on purpose to get free publicity. Sometimes, the little guy is not the good guy. This is trademark infringement. I am usually against stifling free speech by locking up ideas as property, but this is different than bogus copyright and patent claims.

West Sixth, you've been caught trying to pull a fast one. Knock it off! It would be simple common decency, which should not be too much to ask for.
 
2013-05-23 12:17:45 AM

uncoveror: I think these logos are indeed similar enough to cause confusion in the marketplace,


res.cloudinary.commedia.tumblr.com
People probably can't tell, but I reversed the order of those pics from my previous post.
 
2013-05-23 02:13:19 AM

Begoggle: Get rid of all copyright laws.  All of them.


Go away.
 
2013-05-23 03:07:23 AM
Screw these guys. Magic Hat tried to work with them.
 
2013-05-23 04:54:26 AM

flucto: Screw these guys. Magic Hat tried to work with them.


Screw this guy, West Sixth tried to work with them, but Cerveceria Costa Rica's idea of "work with" was "do everything we say exactly as we say with no room for negotiation."

I was unaware that counted as "working with".
 
2013-05-23 05:40:20 AM
No reasonable person would ever be confused by these logos.  That said, the courts don't use any sort of reasonable or objective criteria.  Unless one is a blatant ripoff, or they're absolutely undeniably different (like #9 vs a lighthouse that in no way suggests '1'), it depends on a bunch of arcane, impenetrable rules, the quality of lawyers each side, and the whims of the judge.  But it all could have been avoided if they just changed the 6 logo slightly.

As cynical as I am about lawyers and the courts, the most ridiculous part of that whole back and forth was that it would be too expensive to redesign the logo.  But that was said by a lawyer, so it's not completely out of character.
 
2013-05-23 06:12:52 AM

Silverstaff: Screw this guy, West Sixth tried to work with them, but Cerveceria Costa Rica's idea of "work with" was "do everything we say exactly as we say with no room for negotiation."

I was unaware that counted as "working with".


I guess that's why there are courts. Magic Hat will probably win.
 
2013-05-23 06:40:42 AM

CourtroomWolf: it depends on a bunch of arcane, impenetrable rules,


or 8 pretty straightforward factors i went through the trouble of explaining in this very thread
 
2013-05-23 08:21:04 AM

Teiritzamna: CourtroomWolf: it depends on a bunch of arcane, impenetrable rules,

or 8 pretty straightforward fact-


theelephantgun.files.wordpress.com
IMPENETRABLE!
 
2013-05-23 08:38:46 AM
Magic Hat... all their stuff is too sweet with little floral notes.  In short, chick beer.

Real men, on the other hand...

farm8.staticflickr.com

More bitter than republican tears.
 
2013-05-23 08:40:07 AM

Loreweaver: My proposed solution to the whole problem:
[ancientscrossroads.com image 720x720]
/ Spent all of 30 minutes to create.


You should send that to West Sixth. It looks great.


On another note:
I signed the petition but I'm not happy about the whole "They wouldn't even talk to us" story West 6th put out vs the the fact that there had been back and forth communication the whole time. The way that story was presented by West 6th was disingenuous at best and really unnecessary. I feel like I was misled on that particular topic. Maybe W6th did try to call MH and got no response but MH isn't in charge of MH, the corporate owners are and they are the ones making decisions. W6th shoulda known this. Either way, W6th was in contact with MH and that isn't what they told us.

I don't think MH has much to complain about and the terms of their lawsuit are bullying. (They want all the profits. That's more than just a little overboard)
MH is way overreaching in their demands via the letters and overall acting like a bully.

GIVEN all that, I think 6th should change their logo.

Change is organic and natural. It always happens and all brand logos change over time. They should consider this market research for their logo design. They could get customers to submit designs.. make a big PR spectacle out of it. Hell the design presented up the page is awesome (Though the detail in the compass might be hard to replicate at the scale required on beer cans and coasters).

At a minimum they should change the font of the 6. I'd like it to look a little bolder and more machine made (less hand written).
They may also want to change the style of the compass symbol. Maybe just encircle it too.
 
2013-05-23 09:07:22 AM
Dudes! WTF? Came here for a clever Hendrix reference; leaving unsatisfied....
 
2013-05-23 09:27:51 AM
http://www.magicasshat.com/

which of you farkers made this?
 
2013-05-23 09:57:31 AM

vudukungfu: medius: trademarks have to be  vigorously protected

just the nature of the beast

also, i was more convinced that this was a coincidence until evilmrsock posted the picture of the toucans

and you are a legal beagle, too, FTR.


just followed my nose
 
2013-05-23 11:25:40 AM

derpy: http://www.magicasshat.com/

which of you farkers made this?


Appears to be owned by AutoBeef, LLC... another VT company.
 
2013-05-23 11:36:14 AM

Theaetetus: kobrakai: Aaaaand now Magic Hat realizes that they've stepped in it big time. From their Facebook page:

We'd like to thank our fans out there who have offered their support over the last day or so. It is great to see that because of your support West Sixth is now willing to revisit the areas they previously agreed to in an effort to find a resolution. We will be reaching out to them to discuss directly rather than engage in any more back-and-forth on social sites. Thanks again for your support.

Are you reading the same post as we are?


You're not very good at subtleties are you? That's PR speak for "We're getting the holy hell beaten out of us in the court of public opinion so we're going to make sure this all goes away."
 
2013-05-23 01:12:29 PM

Theaetetus: missmez: I just can't bring myself to care about any beer that comes in a can.

[beerstreetjournal.com image 570x427]


Yeah, he's missing out...

bythepint.com
 
2013-05-23 01:54:56 PM
 ibankcoin.com
BEER NERDS!!!!
 
2013-05-23 03:05:08 PM

Theaetetus: As previously mentioned, the design was most certainly trademarked. It was not registered under the Lanham Act, but trademark rights can arise automatically. See section 43 of the Lanham Act, discussing rights in unregistered marks and trade dress.



You missed the comment where I discussed section 43 of the Lanham act.  Here it is:

lennavan: Well, first, it seems according to the letters linked previously in the thread, they are claiming this infringes their trademark. A case for unregistered marks is very different. According to the PDF I found http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/law/tmlaw.pdf that would require proving the design is "famous" which means amongst other things "widely recognized by the general consuming public of the United States." I can't imagine that fits here.

 
2013-05-23 05:07:36 PM

CrazyCracka420: Theaetetus: missmez: I just can't bring myself to care about any beer that comes in a can.

[beerstreetjournal.com image 570x427]

Yeah, he's missing out...

[bythepint.com image 680x510]


this is my favorite can.  the beer is good but the can is just awesome.  if only i had a coozy that fit it.

24.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-05-23 05:48:51 PM

The Flexecutioner: if only i had a coozy that fit it.


with a little patience and proper stretching and lubrication, you could fit your coozie around almost anything
 
2013-05-23 07:18:11 PM

medius: The Flexecutioner: if only i had a coozy that fit it.

with a little patience and proper stretching and lubrication, you could fit your coozie around almost anything


i'm tempted to buy and save many of the cans and build a coffee beer table.
 
2013-05-24 01:40:20 AM
 
2013-05-24 02:24:22 AM

CheddarPants: Tell the world you support West Sixth.


First off I'm from the Kentuckiana area.  I don't support those douchenozzles and you shouldn't either.  They had a bog standard legal dispute, and they had a good offer which they reneged on.  Now they have bombarded everyone in the area's facebook with their petition spam which contained blatant lies. 

It's amazing how many retards are knee-jerk supporting them just because they're the smaller party to the dispute.  Again, they monster-spammed everyone in the area with big-azzed whopper lies.  I say let'em go under.  Their beer isn't anything special anyway.
 
Displayed 220 of 220 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report