Dale
Posts:1767
 |
| 12/11/2013 09:44 PM |
|
How'd that crow taste, Mike?
|
|
|
|
|
Cosmic Kid
Posts:4209
|
| 12/11/2013 10:22 PM |
|
Hmmm....I know counterfeit products are a pretty big deal right now (been there, seen it), but I'm not buying his cop-out excuse. Especially given their litigious past.
And this may be one of the biggest cr@p paragraphs ever written.....the quote don't even address the question. WTF?
As Richter was not attempting to sell fake products but was being targeted for the name of his business, Sinyard explained the misguided action against the shop owner. "I still remember losing sleep about this guy who submitted a lawsuit to us and his face was completely destroyed and teeth knocked out," he said.
|
|
| Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
|
|
|
Hoshie
Posts:134
|
| 12/11/2013 10:49 PM |
|
Well, regardless, he backpedaled. Tried to save some face and looks like the owner gets to keep his name, so hard to take issue with that. It's about the most positive outcome one could expect, so seems fair enough to me.
j
|
|
|
|
|
Hoshie
Posts:134
|
| 12/11/2013 10:52 PM |
|
CK - if you re-read, I think Sinyard's point is that he was worried about a product liability case and it turned out the bike that broke was a fake, Hence, his "reason" stated for going nuts on legal / counterfeit stuff.
Whether that is true or not, not for me to judge, but that was the intention of the paragraph if you read that and the next one near as I could tell.
Regardless, seems like a decent end result.
j |
|
|
|
|
Cosmic Kid
Posts:4209
|
| 12/11/2013 11:04 PM |
|
Oh yeah, I (eventually) got the point. I just couldn't believe what a horribly constructed paragraph it was. Bad enough that someone wrote it, worse that an editor signe off on it.  |
|
| Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
|
|
|
Entheo
Posts:317
|
| 12/12/2013 07:39 AM |
|
final thoughts -- i'll reiterate my original statement that this was as much the fault of the TM grant itself as it was the over eager S legal department not wanting to get caught out by counterfeiters, etc.
stop granting TMs and patents to that which can be rightfully argued to be in the public domain! |
|
|
|
|
Cosmic Kid
Posts:4209
|
| 12/12/2013 09:19 AM |
|
"Over? Was it over when the germans bombed Pearl Harbor?!?!"
posted today on Slowtwitch. Specialized still at the same ol', same ol'
Wow, after hearing this case, I cannot believe what appears in my mail today. A cease and desist from Specialized lawyers, claiming my small custom apparel brand EPIX is too similar to their EPIC mtb frames. "..is likely to cause confusion, mistake and deception as to whether products are associated with or sponsored, licensed or otherwise approved by Specialized." Because EPIX = EPIC and bike frames = apparel in their minds. I respect that trademarks are important and should be protected, but this is nonsense. They didn't mention anything about wanting to talk/negotiate or options for a peaceful co-existence. I abandon my brand/logo and pending trademark application, or they sue. Now I have to hire a lawyer to try and fight this. And if I lose, I risk losing my livelihood. Obviously no lessons have been learned by Specialized.
http://www.epixgear.com |
|
| Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
|
|
|
longslowdistance
Posts:2881
|
| 12/12/2013 10:39 AM |
|
It's like whack a mole. The Specialized Serpent has so many heads.
A truly *epic* combination of clueless and evil.
Keep your jet's engines warm, Mr. Sinyard. You'll be making another flight to apologize shortly.
|
|
|
|
|
winterale
Posts:48
|
| 12/12/2013 12:35 PM |
|
| Please tell me this is an internet hoax. |
|
|
|
|
jrt1045
Posts:363
|
| 12/12/2013 12:47 PM |
|
I read the article, Sinyard sounds like -7 as he attempts to control the narrative. When in doubt, blame the legal team - just wish they could have arrived in time to save that dude's face. "I had just got back from a ride when I heard the terrible news".... What a crock, they knew exactly what they were doing
Kind of a hollow "Sorry" if you ask me. At least he burned some of those pesky sky miles in the process FWIW |
|
|
|
|
stronz
Posts:447
|
| 12/12/2013 12:54 PM |
|
| since when is having a SIMILAR brand name a good enough reason to sue? Doesnt it have to be THE SAME? A tademark gives you the rights to your name. Not names that are similar. Pepsi Cola and Coca Cola are similar because they both have Cola in their name and people might confuse those words, no? "Lets see I want a soda to drink. What was the name? Oh yeah it ended in Cola. I'll have a Coca Pepsi." So why doesnt Coke sue Pepsi? Cause its NOT the same. How about Hyndai vs. Honda? There are other examples in other fields. Big S should concentrate on counterfeits. Not every player whose brand has a few letters that are similar to one of its haloed products. |
|
|
|
|
79pmooney
Posts:3180
|
| 12/12/2013 06:30 PM |
|
jrt, I actually do believe that Sinyard was probably clueless about this incident until the internet blew up. Does that exonerate him? No, because it was his legal department doing what he and his honchos have tasked (and paid) them to do; send C & D letters to all on the planet, checking with the upper echelons not required.
We know this has happened multiple times before (with less web coverage but local web coverage at least a couple of times). I have yet to hear of one of these Sinyard "make-up" trips before this incident. That the local web coverage never made his desk before is pretty hard to believe.
Ben |
|
|
|
|
jrt1045
Posts:363
|
| 12/13/2013 08:51 AM |
|
| You may be right, Ben. Not the specific instance but certainly the concept. They've always done it and I'm sure that comes from the top |
|
|
|
|
Entheo
Posts:317
|
| 01/03/2014 07:17 AM |
|
looks like starbucks is on the receiving end from one of their jihads...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/31/best-response-starbucks-cease-and-desist_n_4524621.html?ir=Parents |
|
|
|
|