Bells suing a small brewer

[DrankGoodness]

http://teespring.com/quitbullyingcraftbeer

Check it out.

Ha! I'm thinking about reserving one even though they don't distribute here.

 

[treacheroustexan]

Ha! I'm thinking about reserving one even though they don't distribute here.

I thought about it at work tonight and made that when I got home. I just thought it was funny. I didn't know through teespring you got paid a cut of what you sell until after i made the shirt, so I put on there if any of them do sell, that money will go to Innovation. Just hope I don't get sued. haha.

 

[TrustyOlJohnson]

I've just named my new start up nano brewery and have a slogan:
Ball's brewing; Want an innovative beer? Put tasty Ball's beer in your mouth.
Should I kickstart Ball's to make this innovation a reality?
Oops sorry, a Google search turned up a Balls Brewery in Indianapolis.
Can I use Salty Balls brewing?

How bout "Musty Michigan Ball's Brewery"??

 

[plumbrew]

Larry bell is a total ****** bag from what I hear from friends and family in the industry. This makes total sense coming from him.

+1000. A real jerk. It's a reason I do my best to not drink Bell's.

 

[TrustyOlJohnson]

I don't drink Bells because I've had a few of their beers and I jus wasn't impressed, then when I tried Two Hearted Ale, it twisted my stomach in a knot. I think its one of those situations where whatever yeast strain they use jus isnt appealing to me... Having said that, this is a real dick move. If Bell's (the owner, the lawyers, anyone affiliated with them) feel threatened in any way by Innovations use of the word innovation, then Bell's has got real corporate self esteem issues. If anyone knows of a way to donate to Innovation Brewerys legal costs so they can fight this bull****e lawsuit, please post it here

 

[blizz81]

Taylor Swift can't sue because she doesn't make beer. The other guys can.

At least as far as naming _breweries_ goes, it's not like it has to be in the same industry...a brewer / distiller here (Borgata) got sued by Borgata Casino and had to change their name.


I would imagine trademark doesn't care about industry either - you can't brew a beer and say "Just Do It" on the bottle (or have it as your general slogan)...hell, you probably can't even jokingly play off it and say "Just Drink It", etc.

 

[texwake]

Guess Bell has enough income offset the legal costs cause they are going to lose. Reputation sells/hurts more than a slogan. I'm boycotting Bell even though we cannot get it here in Texas haha.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

I'm boycotting Bell even though we cannot get it here in Texas haha.

That will teach them a lesson! :rockin:

 

[TopherM]

Mike, I have to point out that what you say about trademarks is very misleading, if not outright wrong.

First off, Apple does not own a trademark on the word Apple. The trademark on the product name "Apple" is actually owned by a lamp & lamp shade company, which no doubt has an agreement to let the computer company use it. Apple owns the trademark to the logo of the apple with the bite out of it.

You also can't trademark numbers, so Nascar does not own trademark on the number three. They own a particular logo design of the number three.

Learn a bit about trademark law. It's very reasonable.

And Bell's isn't particularly being sh**ty here. If they sent the small brewery a cease and desist to protect their rights, and the small brewery ignored it, then Bell's only choice is to sue. I would bet the lawsuit has nothing to do with $$$, and has more to do with the small brewery telling Bells to f-off after they asked them to stop violating their trademarks. Good businesses don't go around suing unless they have to, and Bell's is a good business, so I would bet they had to.

 

[Ridire]

This was on Bell's Facebook page today:

To our Bell’s customers and the passionate craft beer community,
We want to clear up a few things regarding our federal trademark dispute with Innovation Brewing.

1. We have not, and are not asking them to change their name or their logo. There is no lawsuit. We are not suing them. We have not asked them for money. We have not asked them to stop selling their beer. We are asking them to withdraw their federal trademark application.

2. Our concern is with their United States trademark application and potential impact on our brand, which we have spent 30 years building.

3. I personally reached out to Innovation Brewing to try to settle this matter in February, 2014 and attempted to talk about this brewer to brewer instead of involving lawyers. Our efforts were rebuffed and Innovation Brewing choose to pursue this in the legal system.

4. Over the last year, we have offered co-existence agreements and have offered to pay for their legal fees. We tried to find solutions that would work for both of us. Their response was to ask for an exorbitant amount of money and we did not feel that was a collaborative solution.

5. All offers that we proposed were rejected and after more than a year of discussion regrettably, this matter has moved to the federal trademark office.
We have the utmost respect for Innovation Brewing and we are going to keep any comments we have regarding this matter positive, honest, and collaborative. We want them to continue to brew and do the good work they’re doing under their own name.

We hope to resolve this as swiftly as the system will allow.
The passion that we have seen over the past few days is a testament to how much the beer industry means to those who support it and why we are proud to be a part of it. We always appreciate further feedback and invite everyone to continue to share their concerns with us directly: http://bellsbeer.com/contact/

Sincerely,
Laura S. Bell
Vice President
Bell’s Brewery, Inc.

 

[Homercidal]

FWIW I honestly doubt any boycott of a few craft beer fans is going to change Larry Bell's mind on this. He is a hardnosed businessman and from what I've heard of him, likes things his way and isn't taken to taking advice from others. I may be completely wrong about him, but after watching him get seriously drunk and insisting on playing drums with a band visiting from CO, I can see how he got the reputation he has.

That said, I do still like most of Bell's beers. Two Hearted is the de facto standard for American IPA for me, and Oberon is a beer that I enjoy tremendously each spring. Boycotting hurts the entire company and everyone I've met there has been very nice. I would hate to affect their livelyhoods because of the actions of one man, especially when I doubt he cares enough to think of their welfare in the end.

Simple fact is, Bells legal department is doing what they think is best for the brand, and Larry Bell is just not the kind of person to interfere and work with a smaller brewery to make it ok for both of them. At least I'd be shocked if he did.

Also, I'm not terribly sure that their catchphrase is all that well known. I barely heard of it myself. It's certainly not as catchy as some of their others.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

This was on Bell's Facebook page today:

So the little guy is trying to screw the big guy. Ha!

 

[Ridire]

So the little guy is trying to screw the big guy. Ha!

Not saying that I believe Bell's version is 100% accurate, but I have seen the "little guy" who thinks he can extort a sum of money from "Goliath" which they think is insignificant to the big guy, but would change the life of the little guy. It does happen.

I have a feeling that the truth lies somewhere between the story initially posted here and the response from Bell's.

 

[Ridire]

Also, I'm not terribly sure that their catchphrase is all that well known. I barely heard of it myself. It's certainly not as catchy as some of their others.

This is why I can't understand Bell's letting it get to this point. I don't think I've ever heard this "slogan"...and I buy Bell's all the time.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

Not saying that I believe Bell's version is 100% accurate, but I have seen the "little guy" who thinks he can extort a sum of money from "Goliath" which they think is insignificant to the big guy, but would change the life of the little guy. It does happen.

I have a feeling that the truth lies somewhere between the story initially posted here and the response from Bell's.

In the context of this thread, I sincerely hope that Bells story IS 100% correct.

It would further bolster the idiocy of this lynch mob mentality screaming boycott when they have no fvcking clue what is really going on beyond a "goliath" taking action against a "little guy".

 

[Homercidal]

Interesting. I just saw this on Bell's Facebook page. It kind of adds another twist into the whole thing. Apparently there was some amount of missing information regarding the dispute (as well knew there would be.)

To our Bell’s customers and the passionate craft beer community,

We want to clear up a few things regarding our federal trademark dispute with Innovation Brewing.

1. We have not, and are not asking them to change their name or their logo. There is no lawsuit. We are not suing them. We have not asked them for money. We have not asked them to stop selling their beer. We are asking them to withdraw their federal trademark application.

2. Our concern is with their United States trademark application and potential impact on our brand, which we have spent 30 years building.

3. I personally reached out to Innovation Brewing to try to settle this matter in February, 2014 and attempted to talk about this brewer to brewer instead of involving lawyers. Our efforts were rebuffed and Innovation Brewing choose to pursue this in the legal system.

4. Over the last year, we have offered co-existence agreements and have offered to pay for their legal fees. We tried to find solutions that would work for both of us. Their response was to ask for an exorbitant amount of money and we did not feel that was a collaborative solution.

5. All offers that we proposed were rejected and after more than a year of discussion regrettably, this matter has moved to the federal trademark office.

We have the utmost respect for Innovation Brewing and we are going to keep any comments we have regarding this matter positive, honest, and collaborative. We want them to continue to brew and do the good work they’re doing under their own name.

We hope to resolve this as swiftly as the system will allow.

The passion that we have seen over the past few days is a testament to how much the beer industry means to those who support it and why we are proud to be a part of it. We always appreciate further feedback and invite everyone to continue to share their concerns with us directly: http://bellsbeer.com/contact/

Sincerely,

Laura S. Bell
Vice President
Bell’s Brewery, Inc.

 

[Ridire]

Interesting. I just saw this on Bell's Facebook page. It kind of adds another twist into the whole thing. Apparently there was some amount of missing information regarding the dispute (as well knew there would be.)

To our Bell’s customers and the passionate craft beer community,

We want to clear up a few things regarding our federal trademark dispute with Innovation Brewing.

1. We have not, and are not asking them to change their name or their logo. There is no lawsuit. We are not suing them. We have not asked them for money. We have not asked them to stop selling their beer. We are asking them to withdraw their federal trademark application.

2. Our concern is with their United States trademark application and potential impact on our brand, which we have spent 30 years building.

3. I personally reached out to Innovation Brewing to try to settle this matter in February, 2014 and attempted to talk about this brewer to brewer instead of involving lawyers. Our efforts were rebuffed and Innovation Brewing choose to pursue this in the legal system.

4. Over the last year, we have offered co-existence agreements and have offered to pay for their legal fees. We tried to find solutions that would work for both of us. Their response was to ask for an exorbitant amount of money and we did not feel that was a collaborative solution.

5. All offers that we proposed were rejected and after more than a year of discussion regrettably, this matter has moved to the federal trademark office.

We have the utmost respect for Innovation Brewing and we are going to keep any comments we have regarding this matter positive, honest, and collaborative. We want them to continue to brew and do the good work they’re doing under their own name.

We hope to resolve this as swiftly as the system will allow.

The passion that we have seen over the past few days is a testament to how much the beer industry means to those who support it and why we are proud to be a part of it. We always appreciate further feedback and invite everyone to continue to share their concerns with us directly: http://bellsbeer.com/contact/

Sincerely,

Laura S. Bell
Vice President
Bell’s Brewery, Inc.

Go back one page in this thread...:cross:

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

Interesting. I just saw this on Bell's Facebook page. It kind of adds another twist into the whole thing. Apparently there was some amount of missing information regarding the dispute (as well knew there would be.)

To our Bell’s customers and the passionate craft beer community,

We want to clear up a few things regarding our federal trademark dispute with Innovation Brewing.

1. We have not, and are not asking them to change their name or their logo. There is no lawsuit. We are not suing them. We have not asked them for money. We have not asked them to stop selling their beer. We are asking them to withdraw their federal trademark application.

2. Our concern is with their United States trademark application and potential impact on our brand, which we have spent 30 years building.

3. I personally reached out to Innovation Brewing to try to settle this matter in February, 2014 and attempted to talk about this brewer to brewer instead of involving lawyers. Our efforts were rebuffed and Innovation Brewing choose to pursue this in the legal system.

4. Over the last year, we have offered co-existence agreements and have offered to pay for their legal fees. We tried to find solutions that would work for both of us. Their response was to ask for an exorbitant amount of money and we did not feel that was a collaborative solution.

5. All offers that we proposed were rejected and after more than a year of discussion regrettably, this matter has moved to the federal trademark office.

We have the utmost respect for Innovation Brewing and we are going to keep any comments we have regarding this matter positive, honest, and collaborative. We want them to continue to brew and do the good work they’re doing under their own name.

We hope to resolve this as swiftly as the system will allow.

The passion that we have seen over the past few days is a testament to how much the beer industry means to those who support it and why we are proud to be a part of it. We always appreciate further feedback and invite everyone to continue to share their concerns with us directly: http://bellsbeer.com/contact/

Sincerely,

Laura S. Bell
Vice President
Bell’s Brewery, Inc.

Yes, their response was "If you want me to stop, fund my brewery."

How, Innovative.

 

[Ridire]

Yes, their response was "If you want me to stop, fund my brewery."

How, Innovative.

"Hell, Bell's won't even miss a couple hundred thousand dollars...".

Not sure that is what is going down, but I've seen it happen before.

 

[kombat]

Well well well, looks like maybe Bell's ISN'T the ruthless, bullying, corporate tyrant that the pitchfork-wielding mob portrayed them to be. How does that square with the rush-to-judgement, knee-jerk, anti-capitalist narrative the 99% Occupier know-it-all Millennials preach?

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

"Hell, Bell's won't even miss a couple hundred thousand dollars...".

Not sure that is what is going down, but I've seen it happen before.

Oh, I know it happens. And I am certain the other side has a differing perspective. And yet, I find it far less frustrating than the general mood of this thread.

Point is, no-body knows what is really going down other than Bells went after a smaller brewery and that was enough to foolishly rush into derogatory emails and collaborating a boycott.

And worse, EVEN IF it was going down as assumed IT'S THEIR FVCKING RIGHT to take action. Something each and every one here would fight tooth and nail to protect if they were in the same situation.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

Well well well, looks like maybe Bell's ISN'T the ruthless, bullying, corporate tyrant that the pitchfork-wielding mob portrayed them to be. How does that square with the rush-to-judgement, knee-jerk, anti-capitalist narrative the 99% Occupier know-it-all Millennials preach?

Now they'll scream that Bells should pay because they can afford it. For the greater good of CRAFT!

 

[Homercidal]

Go back one page in this thread...:cross:

This thread updates too fast... :smack:

 

[ArkotRamathorn]

So a small company is being asked to take back their trademark application for something that *would* be their trademark, their company name, by a bigger company, for something that is *not* their trademark...

If I was the smaller company, I wouldn't take back my application for a trademark. Why should they? The trademark would be part of their entire logo, they take back their trademark application and now they can't defend against *anyone* taking something thats part of their entire branding scheme.

Yes, we aren't seeing the entire story here. Yes, they didn't ask Innovation brewing to change their name, but did they ask them to take back a trademark application that would allow Innovation Brewing to legally defend their brand in court or pursue litigation against those that infringe? Yes, of course Innovation Brewing is going to tell them to stuff it.

 

[mcartt11]

When I read all these types of stories and see the comments, I always go back to my dad telling me there was two sides to every story and the truth was somewhere in between. In the end, I just think people will believe what they want to believe.

 

[Ridire]

So a small company is being asked to take back their trademark application for something that *would* be their trademark, their company name, by a bigger company, for something that is *not* their trademark...

If I was the smaller company, I wouldn't take back my application for a trademark. Why should they? The trademark would be part of their entire logo, they take back their trademark application and now they can't defend against *anyone* taking something thats part of their entire branding scheme.

Yes, we aren't seeing the entire story here. Yes, they didn't ask Innovation brewing to change their name, but did they ask them to take back a trademark application that would allow Innovation Brewing to legally defend their brand in court or pursue litigation against those that infringe? Yes, of course Innovation Brewing is going to tell them to stuff it.

This is not quite accurate, assuming Bell's claim to have offered to enter into a "mutual existence agreement" is correct. If this is the case, the companies would, presumably, both be allowed to use the names/logos/slogans that they currently use, without taking away the rights of the other.

If this is what Bell's offered, and the other brewery declined, it sounds like the little guy thought it bought the winning lottery ticket and is dead set on cashing it.

EDIT: but who knows what the terms of that offered agreement were. Bottom line, nobody posting here knows what is going on or why. No boycotting for me based on this ridiculous speculation.

 

[blizz81]

Point is, no-body knows what is really going down

This, in general on any of these "beer morality" cases. But some people love to hate and will latch on to either side.


One thing I do know is how delicious or not delicious I find each specific beer I drink, and how much I want to drink more of it.


(That's not true - I can't justify that belief. I could be living in a Matrix-type world where my sensory perceptions are being controlled. BELLS!!!!)

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

This, in general on any of these "beer morality" cases. But some people love to hate and will latch on to either side.


One thing I do know is how delicious or not delicious I find each specific beer I drink, and how much I want to drink more of it.


(That's not true - I can't justify that belief. I could be living in a Matrix-type world where my sensory perceptions are being controlled. BELLS!!!!)

This is the point in this thread where, like a Mel Brooks film, the mob becomes offended that they didn't get to see a beheading.

 

[Disintegr8or]

Well well well, looks like maybe Bell's ISN'T the ruthless, bullying, corporate tyrant that the pitchfork-wielding mob portrayed them to be. How does that square with the rush-to-judgement, knee-jerk, anti-capitalist narrative the 99% Occupier know-it-all Millennials preach?

4. Over the last year, we have offered co-existence agreements and have offered to pay for their legal fees. We tried to find solutions that would work for both of us. Their response was to ask for an exorbitant amount of money and we did not feel that was a collaborative solution.

Sounds to me like Bell's wanted them to change their name. I would imagine that Innovation Brewery wanted money to pay for their re-branding after they spent the last years making a name for themselves as "Innovation Brewing"

 

[wardens355]

Bell's wanted them to change their name. I would imagine that Innovation Brewery wanted money to pay for their re-branding after they spent the last years making a name for themselves as "Innovation Brewing"

One of the posts you quoted stated that they were not requesting a name change, but wanted to prevent them from trademarking Innovation Brewing.