Battle over the "strange" name

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
If the HBS does have the trademark then they have the right to proceed as they are. However, they really should be handling this better. It's a bit disappointing that they waited until more than a year after the brewery got a medal at the GABF to pursue this. You'd think since they were a HBS that someone would be paying attention to who the GABF winners are. Unfortunately, the brewery has already started getting recognized (I have a few friends who like their stuff) and has made a name for themselves, ideally the HBS would have said something way before now. Either way, this whole thing is turning into a nightmare for the HBS, and giving PR to the brewery.
 
OK how about we think about this differently.
Lets say the homebrew shop finds starnge brewing company and say "hey, you know they are all the way over there, what harm can it be to just let them be and not defend our trademark. Meh, too much work and I might look like a dick"
So then five years later strang brewery opens up 2 doors down from the homebrew store. Owner goes "ok now that is rediculas, you can't be that balntant in disregarding my trademark." He sends him a C&D, this new brewery turns around and says "piss off you can't pick and choose who you stop using your name, strange brewing company has been doing so for 5 years."
So they go to court and court says, "if you were so concerned about your trademark then why didn't you defend it 5 years ago?", "well I thought it was to much work and I was being a dick", "So why is it any different now?" "because he is in my town" "5 years ago he was in the same country as you?" "well.... well... ****!"
I don't think it would go down like that exactly but it would give others more legs to stand on later down the track if the owner did not actively defend his trademark.
I do not see this as clear cut the brewery is in the wrong, he did do research and has reason for choosing the name (specifically brewing company) so the homebrew store could still walk away red faced. The original reply from the brewery should have been not as nice though, this left them kind of admitting they were in the wrong but wanted to brush it under the carpet. He should have sent a simple explaination why he regarded himself as being not infringing on the trademark and left it at that (and got a lawyer to look over the response as one would not let that letter go out).
 
If the HBS does have the trademark then they have the right to proceed as they are. However, they really should be handling this better. It's a bit disappointing that they waited until more than a year after the brewery got a medal at the GABF to pursue this. You'd think since they were a HBS that someone would be paying attention to who the GABF winners are. Unfortunately, the brewery has already started getting recognized (I have a few friends who like their stuff) and has made a name for themselves, ideally the HBS would have said something way before now. Either way, this whole thing is turning into a nightmare for the HBS, and giving PR to the brewery.

All good things for the brewery to defend with.
 
I believe trademark names have to be in the same market for there to be an infringement. Since we are discussing this at length I feel it is worth pointing out that the hbs has very little market in competition with the brewery. If strange brew were to be the exclusive carrier of strange brewing company recipe kits then the could effectively cash in on whatever market the brewery has established. A collaborative work around would easily be achieved unless the owner of strange brew has dreams of opening up his own brewery.
 
I believe trademark names have to be in the same market for there to be an infringement. Since we are discussing this at length I feel it is worth pointing out that the hbs has very little market in competition with the brewery...

Again another point that backs up the brewery. Basically the way I see C&Ds going is a bully tactic, people send a C&D and hope the other person does not challange the correctness of it and just folds.
There are some flaws to the C&D:
No direct compitition - one sells brewery supplies the other beer, they as sort of similar but you would not be able to buy each others type of product from the other by mistake... ever!
Time to issue C&D - could be argued they only just found out, could be argued that they didn't care until they preceived a threat. They sent the C&D 2 years after the brewery open and 3 years after they registered the domain name. I would consider activly defending your tademark as meaning at least going on google twice a year to see what hits you get with searches similar to your trademark!
Confusion of inwards orders - this is an issue with their suppliers, not a trademark issue.
There is negetive impact on the homebrew store - basically how it is written it sounds like customers are saying hey have you opened up a brewery or something, can I buy some beer? The bad credit rating - again that is an issue with the vendors - and that is why they should have a vendor/account number so you don't get confused between 2 accounts!
 
I don't know much about the situation but I do know a little less than a year ago strange brew actually moved locations to a bigger place. They were also working on getting permits and all that other fun stuff to open ip a brewery at the same location. All that being said, I believe this is where being a direct competitor comes into play. Again, I'm not 100% sure as I do not know them personally, I just shop there every now me then and talk to some of the employees.
 
glavini said:
I don't know much about the situation but I do know a little less than a year ago strange brew actually moved locations to a bigger place. They were also working on getting permits and all that other fun stuff to open ip a brewery at the same location. All that being said, I believe this is where being a direct competitor comes into play. Again, I'm not 100% sure as I do not know them personally, I just shop there every now me then and talk to some of the employees.

This is where I could see the issue. And I suppose a judge will get to decide who gets to operate a brewery under the strange name.
 
I don't know much about the situation but I do know a little less than a year ago strange brew actually moved locations to a bigger place. They were also working on getting permits and all that other fun stuff to open ip a brewery at the same location. All that being said, I believe this is where being a direct competitor comes into play. Again, I'm not 100% sure as I do not know them personally, I just shop there every now me then and talk to some of the employees.

I am in there almost every week and can confirm all that. They are beginning to reconfigure the building space to meet the plethora of regulations covering both a brewery operation and a serving operation separate from the supplies side.

As for the whole C&D thing, it's a simple legal thing that has to be dealt with, imo. Whatever the outcome, bidness is bidness...

Cheers!
 
I am in there almost every week and can confirm all that. They are beginning to reconfigure the building space to meet the plethora of regulations covering both a brewery operation and a serving operation separate from the supplies side.

As for the whole C&D thing, it's a simple legal thing that has to be dealt with, imo. Whatever the outcome, bidness is bidness...

Cheers!

This puts the whole C&D in a new light. They are now in a direct compitition and if the name was trademarked for anything relating to beer there is an issue. Biggest problem for the HBS I see is the fact they did nothing about it until they wanted to start brewing. The brewery should have a bit of a chance if they argue that they have been existing for 3 years with national recognition and it is only now that the TM owner wants to encroach into their business type it is unfair for them to inforce their TM now.

If it was me (as the brewery) I would have replied with a simple letter explaining that we are not in the same business catagory and therefore no confussion could occur that would lead to loss of business, the business name is different enough to distiguish between the two, we have been overtly operating for the past 3 years with no indication that we were infringing on the TM and we would be happen to meet if this matter needs further discussion.
Realisitcally, I would have applied to TM my brewery at the very begining! That would mean that the HBS would of had to contest the TM then, and I would guessed it would have slipped right under their radar given it is only now when they want to open their own brewery that they have checked what is happening with their name (other examples are the tavern with the same name!).

PSA: TM your brand! I think trademarking individual beers is going to far for a small nano/micro but for god sake at least trademark you company name!
 
It seems a bit malicious on the hbs part to open a brewery under the same name as one that has already gotten medals in a national competition. Would they not be doing the exact thing they claim the brewery did? Even if it is legal it certainly isn't right to attempt to cash in on someone else's reputation.
 
Attention loyal customers, friends of Strange Brew, and others who care to hear the whole story and who care about the truth.


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. They have admitted they knew of us and our name when they started, but apparently they thought they would just slip under the radar. We have demanded that they stop, but instead of facing up to the situation, they have decided to “fight back” by stirring up a social media lynch mob, trashing us and our lawyer for protecting our brand. This has included several media posts that contain a completely inaccurate distortion of the real situation. This is becoming a distraction and it is time to set the record straight. Enough is enough.

Draw any conclusions you want, but please don’t do so until you have all the facts. Please consider the following.

Strange Brew LLC. in Marlborough Massachusetts is a small, family owned business, that has been in existence since 1997. We are a “local business” just like Strange Brewing Company. We sell quality products, just like they do. We have worked hard for years to provide quality home-brewing supplies and brewing advice to the local, national, and international brewing community. We currently hold a federal trademark for both beer, and beer and winemaking supplies. We are, in short, no bigger than the folks in Denver, the only difference is that we have been around for almost two decades, selling quality products and slowly building a valuable brand. We have taken the right steps to protect our brand, like any other well run business, and for that we are now being branded as bullies. We sell supplies through a number of retail, and online outlets, including dozens of current customers in Colorado, a place that has become one of the standout microbrewery capitals of the country, and we’re proud to be a part of it.

We are also currently in the process of opening a small brewery in Massachusetts. Through the years we have also sold beer products, and we are now focused on expanding that division as our business continues to grow.

Strange Brewing Co. has admitted that they were aware of us when they started their own business using our name. They have stated their belief that due to our geographic distance, and the fact that they only sell beer, not beer supplies, there should be no reason to complain. Here is the problem. First, like it or not, their decision to copy our name is causing confusion. We live in a wireless, digital age where geographic factors are more irrelevant each day. The fact that we are on the East Coast is meaningless. We continually do business with our Colorado customers, and have repeatedly had customers, both from Colorado and elsewhere, comment to us that they tried “our beer” in Denver. Some of our vendors and suppliers have also been confused, and in a couple of cases we were unable to purchase supplies on credit because of a negative credit reference that arose after payments were mistakenly applied to the wrong account, due to the similarity in our names. Finally, we have been unfairly portrayed as trying to “steal” their name, as if this is a David and Goliath scenario in which we are some corporate giant, like Starbucks or Coca-Cola, mercilessly picking on the little guy. That’s just not the case. They try to portray us as thieves – but who is the real thief here? The ones who have been around since 1997 or the ones who decided to copy our brand less than two years ago, instead of doing it the old fashioned way and coming with a brand of their own? Who is stealing from whom?

We have to protect our assets, just like any small business trying to make it in today’s world. We have struggled hard to get where we are, not through harassing our competitors with some social media rant, but through selling good products and backing up our brand. We would be disloyal to our customers and our families if we didn’t try to protect what we have earned. To maintain OUR federal trademark rights, we cannot allow another similar business to use our name and hijack the good will we have earned.

We were forced to hire a lawyer and send a cease and desist letter to the infringing company.

Knowing that they have no legal defense here, Strange Brewing Company in Colorado has decided, rather than to face up to the mistake they made, to start a social media war, hoping that they can beat us into submission. Fortunately, the U.S. system of justice is not about popularity contests, or who is better at sending anonymous (but easily traceable) hate mail through web portals. It is based on application of the law to the facts, and in this case, if necessary, a court is going to find that the Strange Brewing Company has infringed our trademark rights. It’s that simple. They claim that they want to avoid a costly legal battle and collaborate, but their only offer has been to allow us to clone their recipe kits. How exactly is that fair? They copy our valuable name, and then “offer” to let us sell their product? Seriously? We too would prefer to spend our time and money doing something besides going to court, but if that is the only offer on the table, then thanks but no thanks. We have to, and will, protect our brand and the 16-year investment we have made, and we are tired of playing games.

I do not personally know the people from Strange Brewing Company. I am sure that they make good beer, and work hard and they obviously have a loyal following, but the issue of integrity and personal responsibility seems somehow to have been lost. I was ready to assume that they were also ‘nice guys’ but I question their approach to dealing with this clear-cut legal matter. They have posted our privileged legal communications in an attempt to paint themselves as the victim here. Not so – if there is a victim here it is us, not them. The local Denver press seems to have picked up on this as well, but so far not one of the journalists has bothered to get our side of the story or even attempt to get their facts straight.

‘Someone’ started a Facebook page called ‘Keep Strange Brewing Strange’ in support of the company that is currently infringing upon our trademark. This campaign is picking up steam, and spreading slanderous, hateful speech, which is causing damage to the brand that we have spent decades building.

We were forced to temporarily suspend our Facebook page while we deal with the barrage of untrue and hateful comments about Strange Brew. The site is back up now, but our Yelp rating is dropping fast. Please don’t let this happen. We also invite you to come sample our products as well, and maybe you will understand the reputation we have worked so hard to earn.

While I am always hesitant to ask for help, I don’t think I can handle this alone.

Any support you can provide would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,
Brian Powers

Strange Brew Beer and Beer and Winemaking Supplies
 
I've been watching this all unfold over the past week, and while I do see that SB in MA have a legal right to the name, I don't think their response to SB in CO has been received very well in the Craft/Home brew circles.

I understand that the HB shop is looking to get into brewing and feels that there could be confusion with two breweries having similar names. See what I did there? Similar. As silly as it may seem, there is a difference between Strange Brew and Strange Brewing. The HB shop really should have taken the offer to collaborate a little more serioulsy. That, I feel, is where they really messed up.

I agree that "offering clone kits at your store" is not a reasonable concession. But to simply refute this as insulting or "not to mention offensive" was a bad move, made painfully obvious by the backlash they have received via social networking. Something could have been, and should have been worked out. But it looks like it's too late for that.

Or is it?

BTW, I didn't even mention the irony of the TM infringement from the band Cream, the Movie by the Mckenzie brothers or the Grateful Dead, which I think is the funniest part of this whole thing...
 
I've been watching this all unfold over the past week, and while I do see that SB in MA have a legal right to the name, I don't think their response to SB in CO has been received very well in the Craft/Home brew circles.

I understand that the HB shop is looking to get into brewing and feels that there could be confusion with two breweries having similar names. See what I did there? Similar. As silly as it may seem, there is a difference between Strange Brew and Strange Brewing. The HB shop really should have taken the offer to collaborate a little more serioulsy. That, I feel, is where they really messed up.

I agree that "offering clone kits at your store" is not a reasonable concession. But to simply refute this as insulting or "not to mention offensive" was a bad move, made painfully obvious by the backlash they have received via social networking. Something could have been, and should have been worked out. But it looks like it's too late for that.

Or is it?

BTW, I didn't even mention the irony of the TM infringement from the band Cream, the Movie by the Mckenzie brothers or the Grateful Dead, which I think is the funniest part of this whole thing...

So, you think I'd get away with starting a new company with the name "Boston Brew Company"? What about "Dogfish Heads"? It's different so it's okay, right?

Still causes confusion. It doesn't have to be exactly the same to be a violation.
 
It sounds like they started craft brewing a few years before you decided to get into that business. There really isn't much potential for confusion when it's a homebrew shop out east and a brewery way out west; if an occasional shipment is misdirected, that's because of a mistake on your suppliers part. But, I'm not going to the brewery to buy homebrew suppliers, or to the homebrew shop to buy a cold pint.

But, now that YOU are deciding to become a craft brewery, there's confusion. Which... forget the technicalities of the trademark laws for a second (which are highly effed up)... the only real confusion is because you're essentially infringing on their territory (beer making, not selling supplies).

And yeah, as I was joking about with my Doug and Bob McKenzie post earlier... it isn't a particularly unique name at all.

EDIT:
We currently hold a federal trademark for both beer, and beer and winemaking supplies.

So, you've been holding the federal trademark for "Strange Brew," as it relates specifically to selling beer, for the better part of two decades? And you haven't done anything with that aspect of it until now (only the sale of supplies, which is a completely tangential business)?

Seems like ™-squatting to me.
 
Objection, you can not split pleas like that. Two bowls of split plea soup to go, eh.

image-3607592782.jpg
 
So, you think I'd get away with starting a new company with the name "Boston Brew Company"? What about "Dogfish Heads"? It's different so it's okay, right?

Still causes confusion. It doesn't have to be exactly the same to be a violation.
you could if you're not in direct competition
 
If I'm not mistaken they've actually brewed and sold beer in the past in a much smaller scale. Now that they have a larger faculty they are trying to grow the business in that direction as well
 
I still think what Strange Brew Shop is doing is right, and its really screwed up that people are slandering his business on facebook/yelp like this is some Call of Duty match and we're all 13 year old boys.

Grow up and stop ruining his business, he LEGALLY has the right to pursue his legally binding federal trademark.
He has ZERO obligation to work with Strange Brewing, ZERO. Just because you think he shouldnt doesnt mean he has too, nor is that a reason to bash him.

End of story.
/Thread
 
But, c'mon... this part...

the ones who decided to copy our brand less than two years ago, instead of doing it the old fashioned way and coming with a brand of their own? Who is stealing from whom

... is HILARIOUS!
 
So, you think I'd get away with starting a new company with the name "Boston Brew Company"? What about "Dogfish Heads"? It's different so it's okay, right?

Still causes confusion. It doesn't have to be exactly the same to be a violation.

I don't think you read my whole post. I certainly wasn't saying that a small bit of wording negates the whole lawsuit. I actually said that the HB shop is right in this case, but really should have gone about it a different way.

So to answer your question, no. I wouldn't get away with starting a company named Boston Brew Company, but have you ever heard of Mother Earth Brewing? There's actually two of them. And this same scenario was played out a couple of years ago with a very amicable outcome.

Edit: For reference....
http://www.motherearthbrewco.com/
http://www.motherearthbrewing.com/

Edit #2:
I guess I remembered it incorrectly, it did go to court. But it does show that there can be a *** Brew and a *** Brewing, legally speaking.
Although it has caused some confusion as stated...
http://beerpulse.com/2011/09/a-clus...rew-co-wins-trademark-ruling-over-nc-brewery/
 
I don't think you read my whole post. I certainly wasn't saying that a small bit of wording negates the whole lawsuit. I actually said that the HB shop is right in this case, but really should have gone about it a different way.

So to answer your question, no. I wouldn't get away with starting a company named Boston Brew Company, but have you ever heard of Mother Earth Brewing? There's actually two of them. And this same scenario was played out a couple of years ago with a very amicable outcome.

Edit: For reference....
http://www.motherearthbrewco.com/
http://www.motherearthbrewing.com/

Yea...this is the definition of not amiable.
[Mother Earth Brew Co.] says it has won a trademark ruling against similarly named Mother Earth Brewing Co. LLC, a North Carolina-baser microbrewery, as craft brewers are also known.

The Tarheel State namesake declined to settle the differences amicably, and sought to invalidate Mother Earth Brew Co.’s trademark, said Daniel Love, who co-founded Mother Earth Brew Co. less than two years ago. Owners include Love and his wife along with business partner Kamron Khannakhjavani.

So with help from an investor, the company successfully defended its trademark [...]


http://beerpulse.com/2011/09/a-clus...rew-co-wins-trademark-ruling-over-nc-brewery/

*edit* You found it too ;) I wouldn't say this is directly related to this case though, for one the trademark has been held for MUCH longer, and two he has documented cases of customer confusion between the two brand names. It sounds like this lawsuit you posted was two new breweries trying to get the same name at nearly the same time and trying to invalidate eachothers claim.
 
I don't know trademark law but would not be surprised if Strange Brewing has a legal problem here. And I get why a well established home brew shop getting into brewing would want to keep using the same name, and would be disapointed to find out that someone is already making beer under a very similar name. Having said that, it's hard not to smile when Mr. Powers writes that "they decided to copy our brand." It is hard to believe that the home brew shop did not lift that title from the McKenzie Brothers film. Probably too late for MGM to come calling about your appropriation of their IP, but it makes the story less compelling when you are complaining about someone "hijacking" something you both ripped off from someone else.

Also, I appreciate that Mr. Powers is a business owner and not a lawyer, but no one "posted his privileged legal communications" -- a letter sent to the other side in a potential law suit is not "privileged" just because a lawyer wrote it. No doubt he did not anticipate the public outcry that resulted. But with 16 years in the business he must be familiar enough with home brew and craft brew culture to know that the side of a dispute firing off hostile-sounding legal correspondence is not going to get good coverage or much public sympathy. Ultimately, being legally entitled to take a course of action does not mean that the public will love you for doing it (ask anyone in the loan foreclosure business). Strange Brew just has to weigh the cost (bad PR and legal fees) against the benefit (despite the focus on "dozens" of customers in Colorado, which presumably matters for the legal claim but just sounds silly to the public, I assume the real concern is the new brewery, which could face legitimate confusion if either brewery becomes successful and they end up distributing in the same markets). It probably doesn't help the legal case, but at least to me, knowing that Strange Brew is planning to make and sell beer make it easier to understand why this whole disagreement is happening.

I'll close with this -- I enjoyed a few pints at Strange Brewing a few weekends ago and they're making some pretty good beers (the Farmhouse in particular). They'd presumably taste just as good under a new name if things work out that way.
 
Yea...this is the definition of not amiable.



http://beerpulse.com/2011/09/a-clus...rew-co-wins-trademark-ruling-over-nc-brewery/

*edit* You found it too ;) I wouldn't say this is directly related to this case though, for one the trademark has been held for MUCH longer, and two he has documented cases of customer confusion between the two brand names. It sounds like this lawsuit you posted was two new breweries trying to get the same name at nearly the same time and trying to invalidate eachothers claim.

Heh, We must have been posting that at the same time. I don't know why I somehow thought they got together in the end. Collaborated or something?

In any case, here we have Mother Earth Brew Co and Mother Earth Brewing and besides some confusion on the BA forums, they seem to be getting along ok with their businesses.
 
I still think what Strange Brew Shop is doing is right, and its really screwed up that people are slandering his business on facebook/yelp like this is some Call of Duty match and we're all 13 year old boys.

Grow up and stop ruining his business, he LEGALLY has the right to pursue his legally binding federal trademark.
He has ZERO obligation to work with Strange Brewing, ZERO. Just because you think he shouldnt doesnt mean he has too, nor is that a reason to bash him.

End of story.
/Thread

Just for accuracy's sake, it's potentially "slander" only if the posts are factually innacurate (as well as defamatory). So if someone was claiming on FaceBook that Strange Brew stole Strange Brewing's recipies and was now suing for control of the "Strange" name as well that would (presumably) be slanderous. But if they're just saying they won't be shopping at Strange Brew and encourage others not to either because they don't like the way this issue is being handled (or disagree that Strange Brew should have a valid legal claim under the circumstances) that's probably not slander.

Doesn't mean you have to agree with the practice of complaining on Facebook when you disagree with a company's behavior (regardless of its legality), just that if these claims were "slander" then Strange Brew would potentially have the option of suing everyone posting negative stuff on Facebook. If they're telling lies it might, but if they're criticizing based on facts then presumably not.
 
I don't think you read my whole post. I certainly wasn't saying that a small bit of wording negates the whole lawsuit. I actually said that the HB shop is right in this case, but really should have gone about it a different way.

So to answer your question, no. I wouldn't get away with starting a company named Boston Brew Company, but have you ever heard of Mother Earth Brewing? There's actually two of them. And this same scenario was played out a couple of years ago with a very amicable outcome.

Edit: For reference....
http://www.motherearthbrewco.com/
http://www.motherearthbrewing.com/

Edit #2:
I guess I remembered it incorrectly, it did go to court. But it does show that there can be a *** Brew and a *** Brewing, legally speaking.
Although it has caused some confusion as stated...
http://beerpulse.com/2011/09/a-clus...rew-co-wins-trademark-ruling-over-nc-brewery/

I read it, I was just countering that one point. I try to focus on the factual aspects and not the opinions on "it would be better if..." etc.

I get what you're saying and there's of course merit to the perspective, but just because someone's done it before doesn't mean it's right for the businesses involved this time around.

I personally would never be okay with having a competitor have the same name as me, and at the same time I'd ideally like to have amicable relationships with competitors... but same name is pretty problematic in a lot of ways. Kudos to the Mother Earths' for being okay with that/working it out, that's great... but is this situation similar? I imagine both those guys were relatively new (didn't look into it so forgive me if I'm mistaken).
 
I personally would never be okay with having a competitor have the same name as me...

Nor would I. But in an attempt to reach out and find a reasonable solution, I wouldn't call their solution insulting and demand immediate action, especially not in a business that is much more of a community than most others. I'm sure that works in most business circles, but this smacks of AB/InBev type tactics, no matter how small the company is and that will result in backlash.
 
Nor would I. But in an attempt to reach out and find a reasonable solution, I wouldn't call their solution insulting and demand immediate action, especially not in a business that is much more of a community than most others. I'm sure that works in most business circles, but this smacks of AB/InBev type tactics, no matter how small the company is and that will result in backlash.

Their "solution" was insulting. Their response was "promote us".

It's kind of a ridiculous thing to say.
 
Their "solution" was insulting. Their response was "promote us".

It's kind of a ridiculous thing to say.

The brewery probably didn't know that the HBS was planning to expand to a brewery, and if I remember correctly didn't they suggest a method that would allow for dual promotion? But regardless, it's not the best of solutions.
 
I'm sure that works in most business circles, but this smacks of AB/InBev type tactics, no matter how small the company is and that will result in backlash.

I'm from a background of small businesses and own one myself. I don't understand how brewing isn't the same as "real" businesses. These companies provide jobs and income to real people - they need to act like real businesses.

While we love this hobby and many people in the beer brewing industry and home brew business are really friendly - they are businesses.

The courts are in place to resolve exactly this kind of conflict. Sending a C+D letter is one of the least emotionally charged ways to approach this situation - and the right choice for the legitimate owner of a Trademark.

Add to that the fact that if they don't police their TM - they lose it. Simple as that. They HAVE to police it now if they want any future protection from it.
 
Calling a response "insulting" isn't the least emotionally charged way to deal with anything. A simple refusal, along with explanation of intent to pursue brewing would have been much more civil. But then that's what lawyers do. They have little to no interest in a quick and easy resolution. That's partly what has gotten the homebrew shop such negative publicity.

But I suspect there's a pretty good case the Trademark is indefensible. I don't believe you can Trademark something that is already in the public domain, and since Bob and Doug put it there, it may not be protected. There's only one real way to find out. And that's how lawyers like it.
 
I'm from a background of small businesses and own one myself. I don't understand how brewing isn't the same as "real" businesses.

How much of your business relies on loyalty, word-of-mouth and a culture of collaboration with direct competitors? I'm not saying that breweries should not act like real business, but look at the top-selling brands in craft brewing. They almost ALL have collaborations with their competition, a lot of them will post recipes of some of their most popular brews, and they are endeared by their customers and fans for that very fact.

By all means, use litigation to protect your business, but I don't imagine you will gain many fans if you do so, and in an industry getting more and more saturated it's going to be real hard to stay in business that way.
 
Those other craft brewers collaborating together don't both have the same NAME. Collaborating on a beer kit would do NOTHING to resolve the situation of the brewery having the same name as the LHBS. If anything, it would probably cause further confusion, as the brewery is too obscure for almost anyone to have heard of them. Their solution almost seems like a bit of free advertising.
 
Here's the info on the actual TM. They have it for both "Beer" and "G & S: Retail stores featuring beer and wine making supplies." Looks pretty applicable and defensible to me.

The reason the response was insulting was that they have good legal right to ask the other guys to stop and we don't know what the conversation was after that. I don't see how anyone is taking the side of the Brewery on this one. Why should the home brew shop give up their name? They had it first and did the smart thing and got it registered.

Word Mark STRANGE BREW
Goods and Services IC 032. US 045 046 048. G & S: Beer. FIRST USE: 19970601. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19970601
IC 035. US 100 101 102. G & S: Retail stores featuring beer and wine making supplies. FIRST USE: 19970601. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19970601

Standard Characters Claimed
Mark Drawing Code (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Serial Number 78907474
Filing Date June 13, 2006
Current Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Published for Opposition January 23, 2007
Registration Number 3227867
Registration Date April 10, 2007
Owner (REGISTRANT) Powers, Brian INDIVIDUAL UNITED STATES 41 Boston Post Rd East Marlborough MASSACHUSETTS 01752
Disclaimer NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "BREW" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN
Type of Mark TRADEMARK. SERVICE MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
 
I can both sides, and I can see the different sides and conclusions of almost all the posts so far. I do think that both sides could have handled it differently. But at the same time I think the HBS is in its rights and should pursue if need be. If the HBS gives enough time for name change, and letting the brewery have time to reach out to all the customers about the change, I dont see much of a problem. Yes it sucks. But they can still display their awards under Strange, and they can still win awards under a new name. A simple change like SB brewing company. The SB used to be Strange Brewing but now just SB. Everyone that used to go there will still know its them. Just different logo. IBM, LG, and KFC are a few business that have done this. Other that KFC, not alot of people know what IBM or LG used to stand for. Many successful business have changed their name and it didnt cost them in the long run.

Heres a website of corporations that have had name changes
http://www.famousnamechanges.net/html/corporate.htm

On another note, Lets just get along and drink :mug:
 
Back
Top