The Grinch Who Stole Cascadia

[jcc]

Some more thoughts on this issue from a friend of mine (note it is a long post)

http://hoplogblog.blogspot.ca/2012/11/t ... -beer.html

[JasonTremblay]

Some more thoughts on this issue from a friend of mine (note it is a long post)

http://hoplogblog.blogspot.ca/2012/11/t ... -beer.html

Still not sure why some bloggers, apparently trying to act in The Best Interests of the Craft Beer Movement, are stirring the pot with the expressed intent to sow division with the aforementioned movement itself.

"Cascadian dark ale" as a term to describe a dark IPA goes back to early 2010ish (there are, however, earlier references to Cascadian hops). This isn't an historical style like "dry stout" or "Irish red" -- it's a new invention that, unfortunately, runs afoul of some guy's trademark.

These bloggers seem to be working off the presumption that trademarks are good when protecting products and companies they approve of and bad when used against products and companies they approve of. It simply doesn't work like that.

[icemachine]

Well it's hitting the mainstream now

http://metronews.ca/news/vancouver/4544 ... ing-style/

[JeffPorter]

Some more thoughts on this issue from a friend of mine (note it is a long post)

http://hoplogblog.blogspot.ca/2012/11/t ... -beer.html

Still not sure why some bloggers, apparently trying to act in The Best Interests of the Craft Beer Movement, are stirring the pot with the expressed intent to sow division with the aforementioned movement itself.

"Cascadian dark ale" as a term to describe a dark IPA goes back to early 2010ish (there are, however, earlier references to Cascadian hops). This isn't an historical style like "dry stout" or "Irish red" -- it's a new invention that, unfortunately, runs afoul of some guy's trademark.

These bloggers seem to be working off the presumption that trademarks are good when protecting products and companies they approve of and bad when used against products and companies they approve of. It simply doesn't work like that.

I agree. And the most important thing, as said before - use it or lose it.

[Kel Varnsen]

Some more thoughts on this issue from a friend of mine (note it is a long post)

http://hoplogblog.blogspot.ca/2012/11/t ... -beer.html

Still not sure why some bloggers, apparently trying to act in The Best Interests of the Craft Beer Movement, are stirring the pot with the expressed intent to sow division with the aforementioned movement itself.

"Cascadian dark ale" as a term to describe a dark IPA goes back to early 2010ish (there are, however, earlier references to Cascadian hops). This isn't an historical style like "dry stout" or "Irish red" -- it's a new invention that, unfortunately, runs afoul of some guy's trademark.

These bloggers seem to be working off the presumption that trademarks are good when protecting products and companies they approve of and bad when used against products and companies they approve of. It simply doesn't work like that.

These articles are getting annoying. I totally agree that it seems some of these bloggers are only ok with applying the laws to the products they like. This writer seems to think that since Cascadia is a region a beer produced in that region shouldn't be able to trademark that name. But that makes no sense.

Here is Muskoka's trademark:
http://www.cipo.ic.gc.ca/app/opic-cipo/ ... exOnPage=1

If someone tried to make a beer and called it Muskoka Ale or something, I would hope the muskoka brewery would sue them. Even though it is a region on a map.

Here is one of Molson's trademark on the name Canadian:
http://www.cipo.ic.gc.ca/app/opic-cipo/ ... exOnPage=1

It is huge and covers all types of products, even though Canada is the name of the country. Compared to both of those Cascadia seems like a totally original name to trademark.

Reading the actual news article it is interesting that the company fighting Steamworks on this is Granville Island Brewery. It is interesting because most of Granville Island's beers are named after geographical areas of Vancouver.

[phirleh]

Everyone should really just ditch the Cascadian moniker and just call them Noonans.

[J343MY]

thank god, hopefully we can finally get rid of the whole "Cascadian Dark" name for good.

[Derek]

An American post:
http://www.newschoolbeer.com/2012/11/wh ... k-ale.html

[JasonTremblay]

Dear lord ...

If the angry intertubes mob were so certain that the trademark is bunk, why don't they crowdsource some $$$ and hire a trademark lawyer to get the name expunged?

Oh yeah, they aren't so POed that they'd put up their own money.

And, FWIW, Lagunitas has a trademark for Lagunitas and Russian River has one for Russian River.

And why aren't they pissed at Select Botanicals Group, LLC ... who seem to have trademarks for Citra (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citra) and Simcoe (http://www.simcoe.ca/)?

It's standard business, in the brewing industry, to name products both for the region the brewery is in AND for regions that have no connection, at all, to the products.

[JeffPorter]

A lot of bunk in this article - most of all, the idea of "not coming up with the concept of Cascadia".

Kurt Cobain and the boys didn't come up with the concept of Nirvana either, but I'd bet the surviving members would have something to say if a band came out tomorrow with that name.

[icemachine]

New post from Barley Mowat - Steam Works owner seems to be a bit of a TM troll

http://barleymowat.com/2012/11/27/the-plot-thickens/

[saints_gambit]

I find myself agreeing with Jason Tremblay for the most part.

The difference in the situation is that it can clearly be argued that regardless of the copyright, the term Cascadian has been adopted (for better or worse) to refer to an entire range of products falling under a single beer style. While we could argue all day whether the style is de facto a style, it is clear that it has become a catchall term.

Steamworks is right to defend their copyright, but this is not to say that there will not be repercussions to this action.

I think that we can probably agree that they fell ass backwards into owning a relevant term. There was nothing to indicate that this would happen. The difficulty here is that simply attempting to enforce the copyright is essentially futile for the reason that Steamworks has been outstripped by the culture surrounding the copyright.

It would be a little like if Nokia had released a phone specifically called The Smartphone in the late 90's-early 2000's instead of calling their phone game rig the N-Gage. While they would certainly own the copyright to the term smartphone, they would be powerless to prevent the public from referring to other companys' products as smartphones.

The difficulty is that since the name Cascadian Dark Ale has been used to refer to a certain segment of the market, it is unlikely that it will be rebranded in the minds of the public.

As Jason mentions, the CDA style didn't really exist until 2009-2010 in common parlance. Anchor is notoriously litigious about their Steam trademark, but you have to remember that they have been around for longer than most craft breweries and they certainly have a point in re: their hybrid style beer.

The real issue is that protecting the copyright will sour relations with craft breweries all over North America. It might be a good tactic. It is a bad strategy. It might prevent breweries using the term CDA, but the term is already in wide use among beer drinkers and slightly inebriated people tend not to like cognitive dissonance.

[JasonTremblay]

I genuinely like the fact that the bloggers haven't yet talked to a lawyer to get a legal opinion on the matter and instead are relying on brewers and other bloggers to offer up validity opinions.

And most of those opinions tend to be summed up by, "Big meanie!"

It also makes me slap my head when, with regards to the Cascadia mark, the bloggers haven't had, to my knowledge, a single BC affected brewery go on the record with a statement.

[saints_gambit]

I genuinely like the fact that the bloggers haven't yet talked to a lawyer to get a legal opinion on the matter and instead are relying on brewers and other bloggers to offer up validity opinions.

And most of those opinions tend to be summed up by, "Big meanie!"

It also makes me slap my head when, with regards to the Cascadia mark, the bloggers haven't had, to my knowledge, a single BC affected brewery go on the record with a statement.

Plus, given the legal costs involved with enforcing that many perceived copyright violations, this is probably a tempest in a teapot. Even with unlimited funding, this would be like a game of Whack A Mole for Steamworks.

[jcc]

I genuinely like the fact that the bloggers haven't yet talked to a lawyer to get a legal opinion on the matter and instead are relying on brewers and other bloggers to offer up validity opinions.

And most of those opinions tend to be summed up by, "Big meanie!"

It also makes me slap my head when, with regards to the Cascadia mark, the bloggers haven't had, to my knowledge, a single BC affected brewery go on the record with a statement.

Jason why assume all blog posts were done by people with no knowledge of the law? The link I posted was from a friend of mine who is a lawyer specializing in IP law. He of course doesn't have all the facts in the case, just like the rest of us, and only posted his opinion based on what he knows now. Ask 12 lawyers their opinion on a topic and you will get 12 different answers, kind of like if you asked 12 beer geeks if a beer was to style and you'd get 12 completely different answers.

Regardless of whether Steamworks is in the right here, this has already turned into a badly handled PR nightmare for them.