Battle over the "strange" name

While true that the HBS holds the trademark, how defensible it is remains to be seen.

I would think their bigger worry is that they keep making a stink about it, and at some point a lawyer at MGM sees a small blurb about it somewhere.

What happens when MGM steps in with massive legal firepower to reclaim the trademark? MGM could do it just in case they ever want to revive the long dead sequel to Strange Brew!! After all, their claim on the name goes back 19 years.

cval said:

awesome, let me go get some pop corn, this is gonna be an awesome thread from now on

Click to expand...

Keep me posted...need to run out for more popcorn


Kidding aside, they have the trademark for beer. It looks pretty bad for the Colorado Brewery.

Now, for the HBS to use or not use Strange Brew as the name for the beers they begin to produce. I don't think it will have a huge affect on their sales. They still need to successfully produce a high quality product and market it to consumers. They reputation they have made as a HBS is only good for the select homebrewers who have had good experiences at their store.

Lets put it this way - Jamil Z is doing a great job growing Heretic Brewing. His brand (in this case his name) and reputation as a homebrew gave him credit, but he still had to produce and get non-homebrewers to appreciate is beers. If the HBS has a good reputation, and produces good beer, there will be successfully synergy, regardless of name.

Yeah this is frustrating. Also, Marble Brewing in NM made TN's Marble City Brewing change to Sawworks brewing.

How is offering up what things of value that you have insulting? A brewery has value in its recipes and pretty much nothing else. To offer you the opportunity to sell these kits (based on award winning beers) is a sign of collaboration. Something you want nothing to do with. So feel free to win your legal battles and start making beer or whatever you plan to do. As for strange brewing company, I think they can and will survive under a different name. I doubt they would want people to confuse them with this legalistic person.

kaconga said:

How is offering up what things of value that you have insulting? A brewery has value in its recipes and pretty much nothing else. To offer you the opportunity to sell these kits (based on award winning beers) is a sign of collaboration. Something you want nothing to do with. So feel free to win your legal battles and start making beer or whatever you plan to do. As for strange brewing company, I think they can and will survive under a different name. I doubt they would want people to confuse them with this legalistic person.

Click to expand...

The value is so little, being that barely anyone knows of them, so why would any random homebrewer want to brew one of their beers? In the end, a recipe kit is just a list of ingredients too. Not only that, but they're asking the homebrew shop to advertise for them, it's kind of silly. That's not really collaboration, collaboration would be them actually working together on a recipe.

Regardless, any sort of collaboration fails to fix the issue that their names are the same.

As for the brewery, I too hope they survive under a different name. I don't really have any ill will towards them, I think their response was a bit rude but the name of a business is a sensitive and personal issue to a small business. It's unfortunate, but the brewery did know about the homebrew shop when they chose that name so they kinda dug their own grave.

"As you may have recently heard, Strange Brew is in the midst of a trademark dispute with a small two year old start-up microbrewery in Colorado that “coincidentally” has decided to call itself “Strange Brewing Company.” Simply put, they are trying to profit from the valuable reputation and the good will that we have built up over the last 16 years in our brand.

Am I the only one that finds the above quote from Mr Powers hilarious? First off insinuating it is not a coincidence, then leading readers to believe that anyone outside of Podunk, MA has ever heard of his HBS, therefore, "trying to profit from the valuable reputation and the good will that we have built up". I wonder how he even wrote that without laughing?

Whatever happens with the legal aspect of this I really don't care, but there is a reason our friends from The Bay State are referred to as massholes.

after reading through this whole thread I can't help but agree with this. Plenty of other strange brews out there. At least they were called Strange Brewing.

davefleck said:

there is a big difference between being legally correct and morally right.

are they going after these guys too?
http://www.strangebrewaustin.com/
http://strangebrewcoffeehouse.myshopify.com/
http://www.strangebrewtavern.net/
http://www.strangebrew.ca/
http://www.strangebrewband.net/home.cfm
http://brewnk.com/
http://www.gocomics.com/strangebrew
http://www.thecauldron.com/ocean/host.php?page=0
http://www.strangebrew.org/
http://www.strangebrewfestpt.com/

I'm sure there are plenty more.

Click to expand...

dawgmatic said:

after reading through this whole thread I can't help but agree with this. Plenty of other strange brews out there. At least they were called Strange Brewing.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Whether or not they have the right to peruse this in court doesn't make them look any better. I, for one, found the post from the HBS to be condescending and childish. He mentioned the brewery posting rants on social media which is essentially what they are doing here.

Also, with a list that long of other "strange brew" named folks, much of which is beer related, I don't know how well his will go in court. Seems to me that, even though it rips off the movie, mr. Powers never attempted to go after the brewing software company, even though he sells a product to homebrewers, and likely at least "several dozen" here in mass.

As I see it, the ill will from this will sink him. Even if he wins, this series of events will follow his business around for quite a while, and certainly won't help sales.

bovineblitz said:

The value is so little, being that barely anyone knows of them, so why would any random homebrewer want to brew one of their beers? In the end, a recipe kit is just a list of ingredients too. Not only that, but they're asking the homebrew shop to advertise for them, it's kind of silly. That's not really collaboration, collaboration would be them actually working together on a recipe.

Regardless, any sort of collaboration fails to fix the issue that their names are the same.

As for the brewery, I too hope they survive under a different name. I don't really have any ill will towards them, I think their response was a bit rude but the name of a business is a sensitive and personal issue to a small business. It's unfortunate, but the brewery did know about the homebrew shop when they chose that name so they kinda dug their own grave.

Click to expand...

To counter your point, the brewery was willing to advertise for them in the brewery if I have my facts straight. How could such a small brewery that no one has heard of get confused with an equally small brewing supply that no one has heard of? If the dozens of customers in Colorado are so important to the hbs then a couple dozen more from advertising kits at the brewery would be of value.

Strange brewing company is different enough from strange brew homebrewing supplies when neither are in direct competition with each other. As I have said before the issue only arises if the hbs has aims of being a brewery. In which case a judge will get to decide who gets to use the name. But to say the hbs is only doing good and that the brewery is basically stealing their great reputation is pretty much bull from what I have seen. Just cause its legal to take this action doesn't mean you need to be a jerk about it.

Personally, if I were a startup brewery and found a place that had trademarked a similar name for beer, I would try my best to not use that name. (even though both are lame for using the name Strange Brew, as I've said before.)

But seeing as the name WAS already trademarked, for beer, then either the person who researched the name was negligent, or the decision maker was ignorant or willing to take the chance.

Who was being more of a jerk hardly matters at all in the court system.

And I doubt this case will get enough attention to negatively affect the lhbs's sales. It might give enough exposure to get some people to try their services.

To me, it sounds like the brewery is just trying whatever he can to not spend the money to change his name.

Interesting read. IMHO, the brewery is in the wrong here and should have sought legal counsel before naming themselves "Strange Brewing." At least they should have spent a few minutes looking to see who has trademarked a similar name. Heck, it's easy to check these things for yourself (for free). Just go to the US Patent and Trademark Office website and check for yourself. I am sure the brewery did this. I wonder what they did with the results.

I work for a big company and have received a C&D letter for a product we named. End result was that we changed our product's name because we were too close in the name we chose. Different name, different letters, too close. I learned a few things during that unpleasant time.

Basically, you can name your product with an existing word/name/phrase as long as the exisitng mark is not in your market space. For example, take McDonalds. You can have a plumbing supply store, kite company, sign manufacturer. No problem: different market space. However, if you try and name a restaurant McDonalds you may be in violation of of Mickeydee's mark. They may or may not defend their mark but no good attorney that you consult as you are beginning the process of opening your doors would advise you say that that name is a good one.

Why do people care? The argument is that a company can spend a lot of money establishing brand equity. McDonalds is a bad example (because their food sucks) but if you take the name 'iPhone' a lot of people equate that with a quality product. So, if you happen to be in the electronics business and you name something close to that, Apple may contend that you are using 'their good name' and brand equity to equate quality with your product. I'm not saying that is the case here but that is why companies spend money defending their mark(s).

I used big company examples to make my points and some may think these are just examples of large, greedy, soul-less companies. Fact is, trademark law doesn't care about the size of a company. Same rules apply, company size doesn't matter - a mark is a mark.

Strange Brew was the name of a (good) movie and the HB shop used the name. My guess is that the HB shop was granted the mark because the makers of the movie let the mark expire, or didn't care enough, or were unaware of the small shop and/or it was in a different market. I dunno. Regarding the HB shop using the GD's dancing bear, GD Enterprises also probably doesn't care for the same reasons (except expiration). However, if an up-n-coming band (vs a garage GD-cover band) tried to use the dancing bear or Steal Your Face logo, I bet they'd respond. The decision to defend (or not defend) a mark depends upon how valuable the holder of the mark feels their trademark (name) is to their company and livelhood.

As stated previously, the C&D letter is standard practice. The hope in writing this letter is to avoid expensive litigation while at the same time implying (because it is written in 'legal-ease') that you should take this seriously - kinda like a little dog growling at a big dog.

Regarding the C&D BTW, the Brewery did something that was not cool: they tried to use their response as a marketing/advertising activity. They should not have done that. If they consulted an attorney in crafting their reply, he/she would have certainly told them to leave out the fact that they have won medals. What does that have to do with replying to a C&D letter for trademark violation?

This is unfortunate but I feel that the Brewery unwisely or unwittingly chose that name. The HB shop is under no obligation to help the brewery. The downside to all of this is that both parties will likely spend a lot of $$ and that is tough in this economy. I know a lot people think the HB shop owner is being a DB. Fair enough. However, it's gotta be tough to be in his shoes but I'm guessing the HB shop and its name are his sole livelihood.

Safe harbor statement: I live in MA but I am not a Strange Brew customer - that shop is too far away and I frequent more local shops. This all just struck a chord with me because my company lived through this a bunch of years ago.

Well, again, the lhbs has trademarked the name, but what I don't think most people realize is that the trademark means virtually nothing. There seems to be an idea that because they have a Trademark, that they own the name and that they will win the court case. Nothing could be further from the truth - the Trademark has to be protected in court, and court is really the only real test of it's validity. Any single entity in the long list of places that have used strange brew before it was trademarked can invalidate the Trademark. I bet the lhbs loses this one.

Cromwell said:

Well, again, the lhbs has trademarked the name, but what I don't think most people realize is that the trademark means virtually nothing. There seems to be an idea that because they have a Trademark, that they own the name and that they will win the court case. Nothing could be further from the truth - the Trademark has to be protected in court, and court is really the only real test of it's validity. Any single entity in the long list of places that have used strange brew before it was trademarked can invalidate the Trademark. I bet the lhbs loses this one.

Click to expand...

You are 100% correct in that a Trademark means nothing unless you are willing to defend it and the court agrees/disagrees.

That said, I'm not a betting man but if I was, I'd accept your wager. Why? That HB store is the sole owner of that registered Trademark (it took me 30 seconds to confirm this). You've a new company in a similar (beer) market space combined with a Trademark owner that wants to defend his mark. I've not a dog in this fight but if I had one, it'd be the HB store. Either way, you gotta admit, it's interesting.

FWIW Strange Brew has been my preferred LHBS since I started brewing and they don't deserve all the vitriol aimed at them for this. As far as I can tell as an outside observer they've acted in a reasonable manner to a business dispute.

Sub'd. Can't wait to hear how this turns out. And, not that my opinion or predictions matter, but (1) the LHBS sounds a little *****ey, particularly that propaganda posted on the thread; (2) I bet the brewery will end up changing its name; and (3) my guess is that the negative backlash won't affect the LHBS very much iin the long run. All the locals, who frequent the physical shop, are likely to side with the LHBS, and most online customers probably won't even notice, or won't care enough to change their habits.

OK--fight!

I just checked the records in the USPTO (Patent and Trademark Office) and the HBS trademark is for "retail stores" and "beer". No mention of brewing. This could be interesting. I also didn't find a listing for the brewery, but my search may not have been good. It sounds like the HBS has the trademark, I'm surprised that the License folks didn't check the brewers trademark status when they were doing their applications.
Having been involved in tons of patent disputes, the only ones that will make out in the end of this is the lawyers, the two little guys will get eaten up by expenses (our patent attorney charged $550 per hour for preparing filings and stuff like this). They need to try to figure out some sort of a settlement.

Camping57 said:

I just checked the records in the USPTO (Patent and Trademark Office) and the HBS trademark is for "retail stores" and "beer". No mention of brewing. This could be interesting. I also didn't find a listing for the brewery, but my search may not have been good. It sounds like the HBS has the trademark, I'm surprised that the License folks didn't check the brewers trademark status when they were doing their applications.
Having been involved in tons of patent disputes, the only ones that will make out in the end of this is the lawyers, the two little guys will get eaten up by expenses (our patent attorney charged $550 per hour for preparing filings and stuff like this). They need to try to figure out some sort of a settlement.

Click to expand...

Beer and beer brewing are too close, IMHO. Above, I stated the same comment that you did: it is hard to imagine that the brewery's attorneys, at the time the owners were looking for a name, did not advise the owners that there is a very-similar, trademarked name in that market space. You're right: this oversight is going to cost both parties a lot of money.

jerrodm said:

Sub'd. Can't wait to hear how this turns out. And, not that my opinion or predictions matter, but (1) the LHBS sounds a little *****ey, particularly that propaganda posted on the thread; (2) I bet the brewery will end up changing its name; and (3) my guess is that the negative backlash won't affect the LHBS very much iin the long run. All the locals, who frequent the physical shop, are likely to side with the LHBS, and most online customers probably won't even notice, or won't care enough to change their habits.

OK--fight!

Click to expand...

I agree with your 2nd and 3rd points. I kinda disagree with your first point, however. Here's why I think (and this is just my dumb opinion) people don't like the LHBS defending its mark: folks like me think of home brewing as a hobby - something to do in my spare time that I enjoy. It's not my livelihood, not a matter of life and death, but fun. Also, we all love craft brew and brew pubs. I know I do. So, since we all love beer and brew pubs, and home brewing is just a hobby that we do for fun, why can't the LHBS just let the brewery keep their similar (albeit likely infringing) name?

The difference here is that the LHBS is probably the sole livelihood of the Strange Brew guy (I don't know for sure). It's probably not just a hobby, or something he does just for giggles - it may be how he makes his money in life. Applying for that mark probably cost him some serious coin. So, someone then opens up a brewery with a name that is eerily close to his trademarked name. He should just allow that? Love of brew pubs and hop-bursted APAs aside, walk in his shoes for a minute.

I think a lot of people misunderstand what it means to have a trademark. It doesn't cost "some serious coin", and neither is it any kind of proof that they legitimately own the name. Google "trademark" and you'll find lawyers willing to do it for you for $150. All it really amounts to is a dated claim to the name, which can be challenged in court. I could trademark the name "mccabedoug" tomorrow, and start making beer with it. As long as nobody argues the point with me, I own the trademark. Better, if mccabedoug actually challenges me over it, and I threaten to go to court over it and wage a long and costly trademark battle, he'll probably back down and give up.

None of that means that my claim to the name is actually defensible. There's a pretty good chance mccabedoug could prove prior use related to beer, and that would nullify my trademark, IF he decided to pay the money and go to court.

I'm a little surprised that so many people seem to think having a trademark somehow means that the trademark is defensible.

In most cases I would fall on the side of the LHBS, but the fact that they chose "Strange Brew" and then try to assert their "rights" to it, the name doesn't work to me.

They didn't think of it to begin with, and if they're not careful the production company could squash them like a bug.

I could open "Star Wars Brew Supply" and if Lucas legal allowed me to survive (not), I would be foolish to try and C&D a place called "Star Wars Brewery".

I'm interested in how this turns out. While I don't disagree that the LHBS needs to protect their 'mark' I do feel they're a bit in the 'pot calling the kettle black' situation. After all their name could be construed as a direct infringement on the movie Strange Brew. I also find it interesting that the LHBS felt it was ok to use a Grateful Dead Mark, in a commercial application. The fact that they've since removed it from their Facebook page, lends one to believe it wasn't properly licensed and they themselves were worried about infringing.

The further fact that they aren't actively pursuing any other people using a similar mark, and that they've waited until now, when they intend to open a brewery of their own will likely come into consideration should it go to court. In the end if they can't settle it out of court the lawyers will be the ones to benefit, and should one side win a judgement for court costs it could very feasibly bankrupt the losing party.

I'm curious to see if the lawyer is pushing the case more than the shop owner.

Some really good discussion on the legal issues in the thread on the AHA board on this.

Something I read, I think on that thread but maybe it was here, was that they had already received a few emails from internet customers in Colorado who thought the brewery was the same place. There's a brewery/homebrew shop combo in Aurora not too far from Denver so it's not an unusual thought for that area. So it seems like there already is some customer confusion.

Something else I read, again I think it was a link in the other thread, was that the brewery admitted to knowing about the homebrew shop and decided to proceed with the name anyway. Sounds like they decided to roll the dice on the legal ownership of the name and are going to lose.

I guess considering the laws the LHBS has to defend it's name.

It is too bad that the public is so stupid it confuses Strange Brewing Co. in Colorado with Strange Brew Beer and Wine Making Supplies in Massachusetts.

Strange Brew's website = home-brew.com. It seems it would be difficult to confuse that with a craft brewery.

I am conflicted on this one. I feel for the Brewery because this is not an original name, the names seem to be enough different and there should not be much confusion over the companies. I also feel for the LHBS since they have apparently marketed beer in the past and plan to again. This could cause some confusion. I also feel their frustration when mistakes are made regarding shipping and credit. But I also wonder about how much of this happen with the other similarly named companies. Actually, was the credit problem with the brewery or some other similarly named company.

It is too bad this went public. I think the LHBS assumption that the brewery is the instigator might be far-fetched.

It is also too bad that the language used by the LHBS and their lawyer is so harsh. It does not put them in a good light.

And the reference to dozens of customers in Colorado just makes me laugh!

kh54s10 said:

I guess considering the laws the LHBS has to defend it's name.

It is too bad that the public is so stupid it confuses Strange Brewing Co. in Colorado with Strange Brew Beer and Wine Making Supplies in Massachusetts.

Strange Brew's website = home-brew.com. It seems it would be difficult to confuse that with a craft brewery.

I am conflicted on this one. I feel for the Brewery because this is not an original name, the names seem to be enough different and there should not be much confusion over the companies. I also feel for the LHBS since they have apparently marketed beer in the past and plan to again. This could cause some confusion. I also feel their frustration when mistakes are made regarding shipping and credit. But I also wonder about how much of this happen with the other similarly named companies. Actually, was the credit problem with the brewery or some other similarly named company.

It is too bad this went public. I think the LHBS assumption that the brewery is the instigator might be far-fetched.

It is also too bad that the language used by the LHBS and their lawyer is so harsh. It does not put them in a good light.

And the reference to dozens of customers in Colorado just makes me laugh!

Click to expand...

Please elaborate.

Jukas said:

The further fact that they aren't actively pursuing any other people using a similar mark,

Click to expand...

Who said they're not?

kh54s10 said:

It is too bad that the public is so stupid it confuses Strange Brewing Co. in Colorado with Strange Brew Beer and Wine Making Supplies in Massachusetts.

Click to expand...

On the Internet, everybody is next door neighbors.

kh54s10 said:

Strange Brew's website = home-brew.com. It seems it would be difficult to confuse that with a craft brewery.

Click to expand...

I disagree. I don't see it as too much of a stretch to mistakenly believe that a small craft brewery might also have a retail presence dedicated to selling homebrew supplies. I've long felt that a combination brewery-restaurant-homebrew retail business would be a great idea. A brewery that has its own appetite for malt and hops could negotiate even better wholesale pricing than a straight-up homebrew shop, resulting in better margins when retailing the ingredients to homebrewers. And the restaurant presence would lure in a new audience who might not otherwise have ever tasted your beer.

The simple fact is, the Strange Brew HBS had the name first, and while they might not currently brew any beer, they have to defend their name in case they ever did decide to enter that market space. As the legal owners of the name, that's their perogative. If they didn't defend the name, and allowed another brewery to establish a brewing operation under that name, then they'd effectively lose the option to ever use that name for brewing themselves.

Any fault here lies with the brewery. They should have done their homework.

Cromwell said:

Any single entity in the long list of places that have used strange brew before it was trademarked can invalidate the Trademark.

Click to expand...

Only if they used it in the same market space (home brew shop), BEFORE the home brew store (15+ years ago?). Having a coffee shop, halloween costume store, or concert promotion company doesn't count.

Camping57 said:

I just checked the records in the USPTO (Patent and Trademark Office) and the HBS trademark is for "retail stores" and "beer". No mention of brewing.

Click to expand...

Uhm.... how do you get "beer" without "brewing?" 'Cause if you know how, you could save me A TON of time.

I think it's a no-brainer that the general public associates beer and a homebrew shop. It's clearly the same market space. The brewery doesn't have a leg to stand on here, this is an open-and-shut case. I feel bad for the brewery, because all the money they've spent establishing their brand is going to go waste as they start from scratch with a new name, but honestly, it's their own fault. It sounds like they have broad support in their community, from both their customers and even fellow breweries. I'm sure they'll be fine.

Put yourself in the shoes of the LHBS owner. He's spent a decade and a half building his business - why shouldn't he protect the name? To be a nice guy?

I disagree kombat. To me (and I'm clearly not the "decider" here, just my POV) home brew supplies and commercial beer production are two completely different things. It's not like I'm thirsty for a cold one on the way home so I swing by the LHBS and pick up 10lbs of barley and some hops. Conversely, I can't go to the brewery to get my homebrewing fix. To my mind they're different market niches.

Here's what I see: the LHBS certainly has a claim to having maintained its trademark in the homebrew supplies market space, but as far as I can tell it's never sold beer commercially, which makes it unclear to me whether or not its trademark in that space is valid. I could see a judge going either way on this, but I think it's open to interpretation. In reality, it seems pretty clear that the company didn't bother to enforce its trademark on the commercial production of beer (differentiated from the selling of homebrew supplies) until it decided (relatively recently, apparently) to enter the commercial brewing market space, at which point the LHBS was the latecomer, not the Colorado brewery.

However, that's my POV, I could easily see a judge finding that the two market spaces are essentially overlapping enough that maintaining its trademark in homebrew supplies provides protection within the commercial beer production space as well. I'm certainly no trademark lawyer or judge, so I have no expertise on that.

All that being said, I stand by my points listed above--1) the LHBS's tone in this whole thing seems pretty *****ey. Yes, the C&D letter is fine as a method of undertaking the defense of their IP, but the tone of the letter (particularly the second letter, IMO) is pretty rude and unprofessional. Being "insulted" by an offer is something little kids do, not business professionals. And it's pretty clear to me from their posting on this thread that the company feels threatened by the HB community's response to the event, and is trying to do damage control. But I've got a strong distaste for propaganda, and would have seen them in a better light if they had not jumped on the discussion board to trash the other guys and insist on their innocence. Again, it's not the act itself, it's the tone of the message that comes across as *****ey.
and 2), at the end of the day, the brewery is likely to just find it more cost-effective to change its name. Happens all the time, and it's actually not that big of a deal.

Just to be clear, I'm not really siding with either of these firms here. I think they both could have come up with more creative names than Strange Brew, so in that sense they're both at fault. And legally I think it could go either way. But the brewery's response to the issue is something I could see myself doing, while the LHBS's response makes them seem, true or not, like a bag full of ********.

I have been reading this thread for some time now and did a little research.

It appears that the revenue of the LHBS for last year was only $86,000. Is it really worth it to put up such a big stink and risk going bankrupt on all the legal costs for a 1 man shop that doesn't bring it that much revenue? I am sure his revenue is enough to keep him going and he may be fine with that, but IMHO, I wouldn't want to risk going up against a brewery that potentially has much more cash to throw at all the legal issues that they may face ahead.

If it was me, I would have tried to find a more amicable resolution. Especially since I only bring in $86,000 per year of revenue.

Found this information on Manta:

Strange Brew
41 Boston Post Road E
Marlborough, MA 01752-3501 map

Phone: (508) 460-5050
About:
Strange Brew in Marlborough, MA is a private company which is listed under groceries and related products, nec. Current estimates show this company has an annual revenue of $86,000 and employs a staff of 1.

Yeah, I don't think there's any way of knowing whether that $86k has any basis in fact or not, since they aren't a public company (obviously) and since none of their tax records or anything would be publicly available. Seems to me that that number might as well be pulled out of your ass.

What I did find interesting was about 26 companies with some version of "Strange Brew" in their name.

And, I'm definitely in the camp that believed "homebrew shop" <> "microbrewery". Unless the MA company was in the business of selling BEER prior to a the Colorado company, I don't see their infringement claim as legit. Ragu sells pizza sauce; that doesn't make them a pizzeria.

the_bird said:

Yeah, I don't think there's any way of knowing whether that $86k has any basis in fact or not, since they aren't a public company (obviously) and since none of their tax records or anything would be publicly available. Seems to me that that number might as well be pulled out of your ass.

Click to expand...

Easy there Bird... No need to get hostile.

I am just pointing out the information I found online. It may be a revenue ESTIMATE, but still. Would you go through all that trouble and make it sound like you are running a multi-million dollar business and risk the legal fees?

Sounds like he "typically" serves the MA area with "dozens" of patrons outside of MAssachusetts. My ASSumption would be that this is just that, a local shop and nothing more.

I didn't mean it to come across as hostile, I just don't think it's meaningful information because the data that they would need to make that estimate meaningful at all isn't there. There's only so much you can do without any specifics - it's like when Zillow "values" every house in a neighborhood basically the same, without any knowledge of which places have brand-new kitchens and which places are a half-step removed from being a crack den.

The broader point, I acknowledge; for a small business, picking this fight is probably dumb since I have a hard time imagining the actual cost to the homebrew shop is meaningful and lawyers ain't cheap. I just object to putting out a revenue estimate in support of that argument that, to my mind, is worthless.

FuzzeWuzze said:

Reading the letters from the lawyer, it seems like a decent request. He has the trademark for a pretty specific set of terms and the brewery is infringing on them.

You cant go open a Stone Brew supplies shop for similar reasons probably.

Yes its dickish and unnecessary, but it is the law. Also the fact that he has proof his company has been confused with the brewery by his vendors, he will win in court if he really does own the trademark.

Click to expand...

In many ways it is necessary. Trademark dilution is an actual problem, but in this circumstance, most people won't see the problem because the companies are physically distant.

No one wants to build a brand only to have another individual utilize the same name while not necessarily promoting the same value, product, and services. One might argue that they aren't doing business in the same state, but every brewery is trying to build a brand and a name. Growth is usually inevitable, if the beer is good

The real question will be whether or not homebrew shops and breweries are doing business in the same field or not. That is to say, the relative degree that they overlap in a commercial setting.

jerrodm said:

I disagree kombat. To me (and I'm clearly not the "decider" here, just my POV) home brew supplies and commercial beer production are two completely different things. It's not like I'm thirsty for a cold one on the way home so I swing by the LHBS and pick up 10lbs of barley and some hops. Conversely, I can't go to the brewery to get my homebrewing fix. To my mind they're different market niches.

Here's what I see: the LHBS certainly has a claim to having maintained its trademark in the homebrew supplies market space, but as far as I can tell it's never sold beer commercially, which makes it unclear to me whether or not its trademark in that space is valid. I could see a judge going either way on this, but I think it's open to interpretation. In reality, it seems pretty clear that the company didn't bother to enforce its trademark on the commercial production of beer (differentiated from the selling of homebrew supplies) until it decided (relatively recently, apparently) to enter the commercial brewing market space, at which point the LHBS was the latecomer, not the Colorado brewery.

However, that's my POV, I could easily see a judge finding that the two market spaces are essentially overlapping enough that maintaining its trademark in homebrew supplies provides protection within the commercial beer production space as well. I'm certainly no trademark lawyer or judge, so I have no expertise on that.

All that being said, I stand by my points listed above--1) the LHBS's tone in this whole thing seems pretty *****ey. Yes, the C&D letter is fine as a method of undertaking the defense of their IP, but the tone of the letter (particularly the second letter, IMO) is pretty rude and unprofessional. Being "insulted" by an offer is something little kids do, not business professionals. And it's pretty clear to me from their posting on this thread that the company feels threatened by the HB community's response to the event, and is trying to do damage control. But I've got a strong distaste for propaganda, and would have seen them in a better light if they had not jumped on the discussion board to trash the other guys and insist on their innocence. Again, it's not the act itself, it's the tone of the message that comes across as *****ey.
and 2), at the end of the day, the brewery is likely to just find it more cost-effective to change its name. Happens all the time, and it's actually not that big of a deal.

Just to be clear, I'm not really siding with either of these firms here. I think they both could have come up with more creative names than Strange Brew, so in that sense they're both at fault. And legally I think it could go either way. But the brewery's response to the issue is something I could see myself doing, while the LHBS's response makes them seem, true or not, like a bag full of ********.

Click to expand...

Not saying this whole case is justified or unjustified but I have heard of microbrewery/breweries that sell some homebrew supplies out of them. And on the other hand have heard of homebrew shops that sell beer (probably not stuff they brewed). So the lines do sometimes get blurred however I agree that in general people probably don't confuse the two businesses with each other.

jtejedor said:

Not saying this whole case is justified or unjustified but I have heard of microbrewery/breweries that sell some homebrew supplies out of them. And on the other hand have heard of homebrew shops that sell beer (probably not stuff they brewed). So the lines do sometimes get blurred however I agree that in general people probably don't confuse the two businesses with each other.

Click to expand...

Certainly this COULD happen, and I'm certain it does. In this case, however, there doesn't seem to be any of this kind of overlap, which is what I was pointing out. Whether that is relevant to the eventual disposition of the case is another story--as I said, I ain't no lawyer.

I simply cannot believe that there is any real confusion between the homebrew shop and the microbrewery. We're talking two minuscule companies in highly fragmented industries, both of which are using a name that is not even close to unique. We're not talking about a homebrew shop opening up as "Dogfish Head Homebrew Supplies," or a microbrewery selling "MoreBeer! Pale Ale".

I mean, hell... if you can't tell the difference between "Strange Brew" selling hops and grain in Massachusetts and "Strange Brewing" selling beer out in Colorado... you've got problems. I can imagine a distributor potentially making a mistake and sending a shipment to the wrong location (if I was guessing, that's what triggered this whole thing), but something like that would be the fault of a distributor with inadequate systems.

the_bird said:

I can imagine a distributor potentially making a mistake and sending a shipment to the wrong location (if I was guessing, that's what triggered this whole thing), but something like that would be the fault of a distributor with inadequate systems.

Click to expand...

I think that's probably exactly what happened bird. This is the reason I think many people on this thread are inclining toward support for the brewery--seems like the kind of thing that could be solved with a phone call to the supplier to straighten out their crossed wires, rather than a huffy C&D letter. Right or wrong (on legal grounds), the LHBS comes across to me as the aggressor here, while the brewery seems to be trying to de-escalate.

As I said before, the legality of the issue is a matter which I'm not qualified to judge, but the optics of it don't look great for the LHBS.