Apparently Cosmic Fog is trying to bully VapeOholic

[hairball]

I don't understand why companies get their panties in such a wad. Kryptonite is easy to clone...are they going to come after all of us now? Second, things aren't looking good with the fda. The last thing I would do is spend money on this issue because it may not even be around in the near future.

Sent from my LGL75C using Tapatalk 2

 

[stevegmu]

I don't understand why companies get their panties in such a wad. Kryptonite is easy to clone...are they going to come after all of us now? Second, things aren't looking good with the fda. The last thing I would do is spend money on this issue because it may not even be around in the near future.

Sent from my LGL75C using Tapatalk 2

Maybe because they spent time and money developing a product only to have another company try to make money off of their good name and work...

 

[Despraci]

Just hope nobody gets the idea to try this...

So what you are saying is... if I order some of the Kryptonite juice from either company and drink it... my head will have a green hue?

 

[hairball]

Maybe because they spent time and money developing a product only to have another company try to make money off of their good name and work...

I wasn't talking about cloning it and selling it so get your panties unbunched as well...I was talking about the name. But still, any vendor juice can be cloned...easy peasy.

Sent from my LGL75C using Tapatalk 2

 

[stevegmu]

I wasn't talking about cloning it and selling it so get your panties unbunched as well...I was talking about the name. But still, any vendor juice can be cloned...easy peasy.

Sent from my LGL75C using Tapatalk 2

That's just it- they are selling it based on the name, doesn't matter what it tastes like...

 

[zoiDman]

That's just it- they are selling it based on the name, doesn't matter what it tastes like...

If you do Not Register your Product's Name as a Trademark, aren't I Free to use that Name for My Product?

 

[Despraci]

That's just it- they are selling it based on the name, doesn't matter what it tastes like...

But it comes down to who used the name first (I believe Vapoholic) vs who trademarked the name first (Cosmic Fog). And there may be a point that Vapeoholic could still use the name is they can prove they were using it before the Trademark was filed. Honestly I've read entirely too much about Trademark law at this point and I am only getting more confused. Then you can throw DC Comics into the loop, and if they can prove some reference to Superman, they could stop both of them from using the name (see lovely green Kryptonite liquid in comic above). At this point it comes down to lawyers of two or three parties making crap up to prove ownership, non-reference or reference to a Superhero and then it's up to a judge to decide.

Isn't it easier to google a product name first and don't name it after anything famous? I know there are juice companies out there they try to avoid trademark infringements as best as possible, honestly that's probably the best course of action. Who wants to get a cease and desist letter from a overpaid Hollywood lawyer who's only ambition I life is to sue somebody regardless probability of winning so they get paid more?

 

[Despraci]

If you do Not Register your Product's Name as a Trademark, aren't I Free to use that Name for My Product?

After reading laws regarding Trademarks, I can answer with certainty of.... Yes probably maybe no.

If you try to trademark something was already I use, the originator could still be permitted to use the name if they can prove they used it first and have a good lawyer and you try to prevent them from using it. So now you gotta get a lawyer to sue them.

Different markets and not direct competition, yes.

Same market but common name... Like "Milk" nobody can really Trademark Milk except maybe a cow, so yes.

Same market and a made up name that is trademarked or protected by copyright, no.

And then different markets, but you reference something else through the use of the name or image... No.

So glad I write computer code for a living, that's easier to understand then Trademark law.

 

[zoiDman]

After reading laws regarding Trademarks, I can answer with certainty of.... Yes probably maybe no.

If you try to trademark something was already I use, the originator could still be permitted to use the name if they can prove they used it first and have a good lawyer and you try to prevent them from using it. So now you gotta get a lawyer to sue them.

Different markets and not direct competition, yes.

Same market but common name... Like "Milk" nobody can really Trademark Milk except maybe a cow, so yes.

Same market and a made up name that is trademarked or protected by copyright, no.

And then different markets, but you reference something else through the use of the name or image... No.

So glad I write computer code for a living, that's easier to understand then Trademark law.

One thing that you are Absolutely Correct about, Trademark Laws are Very Convoluted.

And the Concept of "Intent" is about as Abstract as it gets.

 

[Despraci]

One thing that you are Absolutely Correct about, Trademark Laws are Very Convoluted.

And the Concept of "Intent" is about as Abstract as it gets.

Yup, probably why part of the Trademark process is to add a description and image during the application process to try and clear up possible conflicts before they take place. But in the case of a made up word like Kyrptonite, it could get extremely confusing depending upon parties involved.

 

[stevegmu]

If you do Not Register your Product's Name as a Trademark, aren't I Free to use that Name for My Product?

Perhaps, but that doesn't change the fact that one is attempting to make money off of the good name of another...

 

[zoiDman]

Yup, probably why part of the Trademark process is to add a description and image during the application process to try and clear up possible conflicts before they take place. But in the case of a made up word like Kyrptonite, it could get extremely confusing depending upon parties involved.

As for Intent. I was more going along the Lines of the Intent of the Person who Starts Selling a Product under an Unregistered Name. And the Intent of the Person who then Comes along and Uses that Name.

So will argue that Since a Company/Entity did not Register a Product's Name, that they had No Intent to have Product Name Protection. That it was Free Use.

And Some will argue that the Intent of the Person who comes along Down the Road and uses the Unregister Name was to Glean Sales on the Name Only.

Arguing Intent is Many Times what makes Lawyers Rich. On Both Sides.

 

[zoiDman]

Perhaps, but that doesn't change the fact that one is attempting to make money off of the good name of another...

Who's to says that they Are or Aren't? And if it is Legal, why Can't I do It?

Can't I just like a Name for my Product, Do a Trademark Search and see that it is Not Taken, and then Use that Name.

What if My Product is (in this Case) a Completely Different Flavor? Does that Play any role?

 

[Despraci]

As for Intent. I was more going along the Lines of the Intent of the Person who Starts Selling a Product under an Unregistered Name. And the Intent of the Person who then Comes along and Uses that Name.

So will argue that Since a Company/Entity did not Register a Product's Name, that they had No Intent to have Product Name Protection. That it was Free Use.

And Some will argue that the Intent of the Person who comes along Down the Road and uses the Unregister Name was to Glean Sales on the Name Only.

Arguing Intent is Many Times what makes Lawyers Rich. On Both Sides.

Absolutely agree with that.

 

[Racehorse]

these kind of shenanigans have been going on in the craft beer community for at least 5 years now. It's definitely frowned upon by the consumers, but luckily hasn't really affected much. Sometimes, breweries will at least call each other and try to hash things out without lawyers.

Well heck, you can't create any drama that way.

And, as we know, drama creates posts and links and headlines and twitters......i.e. FREE advertising

To be optimized the best way to get your name up to the top for at least 15 minutes is to start a fight w/another company in your industry........bingo!

 

[stevegmu]

Who's to says that they Are or Aren't? And if it is Legal, why Can't I do It?

Can't I just like a Name for my Product, Do a Trademark Search and see that it is Not Taken, and then Use that Name.

What if My Product is (in this Case) a Completely Different Flavor? Does that Play any role?

Just because something is legal doesn't mean it is ethical or even moral...

 

[zoiDman]

Just because something is legal doesn't mean it is ethical or even moral...

Never Said it Was for Some People.

But Unfortunately, we Don't live in a Happy, Magical Land where Everyone agrees on what Ethical and Moral behavior is.

Whereas I would Like to have Ethics and Morality aligned with Legality, when No Clear Definition for either can be Established for All People/Entities, we kinda have to fall back to the is it Legal / Illegal way of Settling Differences.

 

[Ken_A]

I am more surprised that DC Comics doesn't have the name Kryptonite Trademarked.

They do

DC Comics Moves to Cancel KRYPTONITE Trademark - Pirated Thoughts

Bet they would pitch a fit if someone mentioned THIS Turf war.

 

[Krashman Von Stinkputin]

All this kind of stuff makes me Coo Coo for Coco Puffs. I say Show me your Trademark Registration Application or get off of my Cloud.

BTW - I have Recently been Served a Cease and Diesis Notice from General Mills for my persistent Public Use of the Phrase "Coo Coo for Coco Puffs". But Screw Them! Fight the Power.

Please cease and desist from using the phrase "Get Off Of My Cloud" or we will be forced to take action.
The Rolling Stones

 

[Krashman Von Stinkputin]

I don't understand why companies get their panties in such a wad. Kryptonite is easy to clone...are they going to come after all of us now? Second, things aren't looking good with the fda. The last thing I would do is spend money on this issue because it may not even be around in the near future.

Sent from my LGL75C using Tapatalk 2

Great point.
And if it does survive....then comes the lawsuits.
I suspect we'd even see some simply against similar type names,description, and logotypes if the company is vigorously opposed to "smoking"

I doubt Quaker Oats-- who markets Cap'n Crunch to little kiddies-- would be too thrilled with eliquid manufacturers using the word "crunchberries".
Even the knock-offs in the grocery store can't do it.

No Quaker Oats won't allow it especially since they're the only one's that can even grow a Crunchberry Bush---which the FDA would consider as the "predicate" product.
(I've been burying those little suckers in my garden for decades and have NEVER gotten a crunchberry to even germinate. The MO soil, I guess)