JeffPorter wrote:So far in this, has or is Steamworks taken anyone to court, or is it just a matter of "cease and desists"?
I believe the main action so far has been a "shitstorm", to use the technical term
We have a shit-front moving through.
"You know what a shit rope is, Julian?"
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:23 pm
by Belgian
JasonTremblay wrote: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.
It's probably cheaper and more effective to make the target hateful scum, IF that party in question are really truly being hateful scum. It can really hurt sales.
Don't underestimate the tar-and-feather mob response. Ideas are viral and can be more powerful than advertising or legal jousting. (Note the Larry DiMarzio example I mentioned earlier.)
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:31 pm
by midlife crisis
The problem, I think, was a failure to fully understand the beer industry by the trademark examiner who originally granted the marks. Trademarks cannot be granted if they are "merely descriptive". What most on the forum seem to be arguing is that the terms "nitro" and "Cascadian" are descriptive of beer styles. If that is the case, they should not be capable of being trademarked, just like you couldn't trademark "best bitter" or "porter". But was "Cascadian" an actual beer style at the time the mark was granted, or has that evolved only recently?
Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2012 11:05 am
by JasonTremblay
midlife crisis wrote: But was "Cascadian" an actual beer style at the time the mark was granted, or has that evolved only recently?
The original trademark application dates from 1999 -- it was approved a few years ago.
"Cascadian dark ale", as a style name, was largely introduced to the world via this BYO article from July / August 2010, https://www.byo.com/stories/beer-styles ... n-dark-ale . Earlier usage of the phrase is VERY limited, and seems to be dated no earlier than late 2009, with a more formal usage dating to a beer tasting in late January, 2010.
A handful of dark, hoppy beers have been introduced over the last 20 years, but there was no particular style attached to them. Rather, the beers were largely called "dark / brown and hoppy."
Google news has a few instances of "Cascadian hops" from the last few years, but the term has never gained traction.
Again, as Jordan said, Steamworks seems to have fallen ass-backwards into this.
FWIW, I think there's a lesson to be had in this tempest in a pint glass: if you're going to come up for a name for a new style, it should either be descriptive (American-Style India Black Ale) or cleared (via 5 minutes' worth of searching) for trademark infringement.
Jason
Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2012 8:07 pm
by Derek
JasonTremblay wrote:
FWIW, I think there's a lesson to be had in this tempest in a pint glass: if you're going to come up for a name for a new style, it should either be descriptive (American-Style India Black Ale) or cleared (via 5 minutes' worth of searching) for trademark infringement.
Jason
Unfortunately the Americans probably didn't check, or care about, any Canadian trademarks.
Philips and other brewers probably should have... but I'd argue that it is now recognized as a legitimate style, and consumers should not be confused. Steamworks had NEVER sold ANY of their brews outside their pub.
If you make the use it or loose it argument, I'd say they already lost it.
Every brewer in Canada ought to make a Cascadian Dark Ale and name it accordingly. There's no way Steamworks could enforce their trademark for a few small batches they brewed YEARS ago.
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:47 pm
by cmadd
The fun continues this week with Storm Brewing's Cease and Desist Cascadian Dark Ale that will be served on cask at the Whip restaurant in Vancouver!
