Bell’s Brewery sends cease and desist letter to Northern Brewer

Williams 728
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.
drsocc said:
I can't tell what you're pointing to on Ska's site.

A quick phone call isn't going to give the documentation you need to defend your trademark. It isn't only about NB. It is about defending from future challenges to your trademark.
Click to expand...

Yes, that is exactly correct.
 
I dislike Bells simply because they don't distribute in Oregon. The only way I got some was by trading something to Yooper for a few bottles and she forgot to send me my monthly shipments after the first batch. Shame on her!

Can't see why anyone who home brews would give the slightest thought to this minor legal issue - perfectly normal stuff that goes on all the time.
 
What I am pointing to at Ska's site is their philosophy:
http://www.skabrewing.com/main.html
Follow the link under Share The Love

No kidding - I realize that a phone call won't give the paper trail needed if you plan on defending your trademark in litigation.

The way they should have handled this (at least the way I normally handle it) is to call and say "you know Bell's has a problem with NB calling your clone kit 3HA and modeling it after our 2HA. Please change the name because while we realize that on the one hand you are actually extending our brand recognition by offering a facsimile of our product to homebrewers who will likely buy our product in the open market when presented with the opportunity or choice, if we allow you to do it, then we are in a weakened position when we face true trademark infringement cases such as where someone is brewing and marketing something such as 3HA and selling it at retail or in bars. I will send a letter confirming what we have just discussed and we can all move on. Thanks."

Much bigger players and breweries comparably sized to Bell's have allowed NB to clone their beers and market them without any apparent problem:

Sierra Madre Pale Ale = Sierra Nevada
Phat Tyre Amber Ale = New Belgium Fat Tire
Caribou Slobber Brown = Big Sky Brewing Moose Drool
Karl's Ninety 90 Shiling = Odell's
John Q Adams = Sam Adams
Speckled Heifer = New Glarus Spotted Cow

Surly has actually teamed up with NB to offer clones of their beers, same name and ingredients. Brilliant move. Free advertising, tons of goodwill generated and an opportunity to eventually expand their market when people outside of the Twin Cities have a chance to taste a Surly beer and realize how good it is.
 
Another unrelated but interesting legal tidbit involving Bell's...

Bell's was formerly available in Illinois, but was pulled from the market on October 12, 2006. In accordance with a 1982 Illinois law which protects the interests of beer distributors (the Beer Industry Fair Dealing Act), the Chicago distributor (Union Beverage) attempted to sell its Bell's distribution rights to a competitor, Chicago Beverage Systems (CBS). In meeting with CBS executives, owner Larry Bell became concerned that his full product line would not be adequately represented by CBS. Having no legal ability to prevent Union from selling its distribution rights, Bell chose what he saw as his only recourse—to pull his products from the entire Illinois market, which represented over USD $1.3 million per year for Bell's Brewery. Due to the vagueness of the law, which does not specify a "lapse period," it was thought likely that if Bell's ever attempted to return to Illinois distribution, Union Beverage's parent company (National Wine and Spirits) would have the right to demand substantial compensation from the distributor. However, beginning in late 2007, Bell's Beer began its return to Illinois.[1]
In December 2007, Bell's re-entered the Chicago market via two new distributors by creating two new beer brands, Kalamazoo Royal Amber Ale and Kalamazoo Hopsoulution. This was done for legal reasons: since each beer avoids the use of the "Bell's" name and logo, and uses a different recipe from previous Bell's brands, Larry Bell contends that these are not the same beers that were assigned to his former distributor. Nevertheless, Bell says he "expects to be sued by his former distributor, National Wine & Spirits."[2][3] Initially, only the Royal Amber Ale was made available, in draft only, at about a dozen Chicago-area locations.[4] In August 2008, Bell's was able to return its primary brands to the Chicago area, due to former distributor National Wine & Spirits' exit from Illinois.[5]
 
Montanaandy said:
Another unrelated but interesting legal tidbit involving Bell's...

Bell's was formerly available in Illinois, but was pulled from the market on October 12, 2006. In accordance with a 1982 Illinois law which protects the interests of beer distributors (the Beer Industry Fair Dealing Act), the Chicago distributor (Union Beverage) attempted to sell its Bell's distribution rights to a competitor, Chicago Beverage Systems (CBS). In meeting with CBS executives, owner Larry Bell became concerned that his full product line would not be adequately represented by CBS...
Click to expand...

That's very old news and I believe almost everyone here would support Larry Bell in this fight. CBS is a Miller distributor and although no one but the parties in the room know what was discussed there is reason to believe that they would be limiting the amount of varieties Bell's could sell in Illinois as well as shoving their brands in to an out of sight corner of the shelves. Here's an article about it. It's yet another reason that the distribution system in this country is corrupt as most the people in this thread would agree. For further reading on the joys of trying to sell beer in Chicago search for "pay to play chicago beer distribution." Btw, it's not just Chicago it's going on everywhere to some extent.

Oh, and just so everyone knows, my two hearted last night was delicious.:D
 
rjwhite41 said:
That's very old news and I believe almost everyone here would support Larry Bell in this fight. CBS is a Miller distributor and although no one but the parties in the room know what was discussed there is reason to believe that they would be limiting the amount of varieties Bell's could sell in Illinois as well as shoving their brands in to an out of sight corner of the shelves. Here's an article about it. It's yet another reason that the distribution system in this country is corrupt as most the people in this thread would agree. For further reading on the joys of trying to sell beer in Chicago search for "pay to play chicago beer distribution." Btw, it's not just Chicago it's going on everywhere to some extent.

Oh, and just so everyone knows, my two hearted last night was delicious.:D
Click to expand...

+1

We've discussed it quite a lot when it happened, heck we brought it up in an unrelated topic just last week. It sure as hell ain't ammunition in most of our eyes against Bell's. I was gonna bring it up myself in this thread ONLY because of the irony involved in Bell having to change the name of a product to expand it's business.....Of course for some folks that's just more ammunition that big bad Larry's just as evil as those Bastards and budweiser, for you know, wanting to make money. /sarcasm. ;)

(I so can't wait til I can drink again, two hearted sounds SO good right now.) :mug:
 
Bell's has every right to do what they did and it makes perfect legal sense. On the other hand does it make good business sense? Seeing how homebrewers are a huge part of their market, how does it make them look? We can argue this whether it was right or wrong but they will still get negative backlash for what they did. NB will not. NB will probably get tons of free positive advertising for this, and Bell's will get nothing maybe even lose business.
 
HOW HARD IS IT TO PICK UP THE GODDAMN PHONE!?!?!?!?! I HATE BELLS.




;)
actually, i'm rather fond of bells.
 
Revvy said:
+1

We've discussed it quite a lot when it happened, heck we brought it up in an unrelated topic just last week. It sure as hell ain't ammunition in most of our eyes against Bell's. I was gonna bring it up myself in this thread ONLY because of the irony involved in Bell having to change the name of a product to expand it's business.....Of course for some folks that's just more ammunition that big bad Larry's just as evil as those Bastards and budweiser, for you know, wanting to make money. /sarcasm. ;)


I am well aware of distribution in the Chicago market and how "difficult" it is. The fact of the matter is that you go into that market aware of how things are, like it or not. NB & SN did not have problems with CBS taking over and distributing their brands whereas Bell's did. Since the Chicago market made up such a substantial portion of Bell's business (unlike SN & NB) he figured out a clever way to end around the system and ended up "winning" when the parent co. of the distributor pulled out. Good for Bell's.

I don't know if I would term Larry Bell "evil" - a control freak perhaps and one who is willing to use the same tactics as the big boys when he feels it is necessary as witnessed by the knee jerk reaction to NB and the clone kit.
Click to expand...
 
Did you guys here the interview with Sam C. where a japanese brewery called "Catfishhead" had a slogan similar to Dogfishheads.

Sam said he loved it, was flattered, but of course had to have his lawyers send a C&D...
 
In a different era a phone call would be insultingly informal and a letter was the preferred method of communication.

Now I suppose a txt is acceptable?

@daBellz: Yo @NB stop with the x<3'd or I'll put tha Man on ya cc@BBBGDLegal j/k #shakesheadyes #notreally #yes
 
olllllo said:
In a different era a phone call would be insultingly informal and a letter was the preferred method of communication.

Now I suppose a txt is acceptable?

@daBellz: Yo @NB stop with the x<3'd or I'll put tha Man on ya cc@BBBGDLegal j/k #shakesheadyes #notreally #yes
Click to expand...

@homer: @olllllo needs 2 wipe my screen now! #spitoonmonitor
 
I work as a professional in medicine and we despise lawyers almost like the plague (we prefer the plague). But the first rule of medicine is simple: if you don't document it, it never happened.

So what Bell's did was alright. To me, being heavy handed would mean that Bells sent over some goons from the Detroit Mafia to inform NB of their displeasure and "collect" royalties. Because if the name and product are highly similar they could collect royalties and damages.

Our hobby and the industry of craft brewers is small and tight knit, in so far that we are all very familiar with the owners of these breweries and the major players in the homebrewer market, its like family. Many of the small craft breweries like Bells started out as homebrewers themselves. So, when one family member sends the lawyers over to talk to another family member, it feels dirty and slimy. In a family things are handled informally. However, this is business.

In theory, some craft brewer could like NB three hearted ale so much, they buy the rights from them and now mass market produce three hearted ale. Bells might just have trouble defending their trademark here.
 
Hint:

kalamazoo.jpg
 
EyePeeEh said:
I was going to say "cease and desist ale," but "heartless" is way more appropriate.
Click to expand...

this actually happened in the ski industry last year or two years ago. little ski company called on3p had a ski model called the "Great Scott" named after the owner of the company. they got a cease and desist letter from Scott, USA who also makes skis. so on3p changed the name of the ski to the "Cease and Desist"
 

Similar threads

Mongrel
Brewers Association Responds to FDA’s Spent Grain Proposal
Replies
26
Views
3K
krackin
K
T
Northern Brewer Minneapolis Opening Fall 2011
Replies
7
Views
3K
kh54s10
kh54s10
adagiogray
Humor: The Subtle Art of Beer Snobbery ;)
Replies
2
Views
736
Homercidal
Homercidal
nostalgia
New Jersey brewing laws and new legislation
Replies
25
Views
12K
TenaciousJ
TenaciousJ
Beerrific
Small Brewers Caucus
Replies
0
Views
979
Beerrific
Beerrific
Yakima 300

Latest posts

Back
Top