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  
•       •       •

11759 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 May 2013 at 1:47 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
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.
 
Displayed 50 of 220 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report