Philip Morris VS. Freedom2Vape.com

[AngusATAT]

Well, I am going to have to disagree with all of you. If I were Philip Morris, I would be doing exactly what they are doing.

E-cig companies are obviously trying to gain market share by associating their products with the trademark Marlboro so that they can gain market share. It is obvious to everyone that you can not sell Marlboro juice.

Philip Morris is also trying to assert their rights to "cowboy and cowboy imagery associated with tobacco products. First, you will not get sued for having a cowboy avatar on an e-cig forum - if you start selling e-cigs, expect a letter. You have to ask yourself, if someone said to you "Cowboy type cigarettes" Most people will think of Marlboro. So, the e-cig companies are trying to get their customers to associate their product with Marlboro by using the "cowboy" that Philip Morris spent a lot of time and money to get the public to associate with their product.

That said, I have not looked into exactly what rights PM has nor have I read the cases that would act as precedence for a lawsuit, but as a quick test - if a customer looks at your product advertisement and immediately thinks of another well established product it's time to call your lawyer.

edit: PM probably also doesn't want any confusion in case they start selling Marlboro Cowboy e-cigs.

And BINGO was his name-o... Eloquently and accurately said.

Like it or not, e-cigs are now legally tobacco products. Because they are, vendors are going to have to watch what they name their e-liquid. It's as simple as that.

 

[ShannonA]

It's not that the "cowboy" is copy righted. It's that the use of the cowboy and "western" themes a direct reference to the PM brands and the e-juice companies intend to capitalize on the PM icons. If a generic brand of coca cola used red and swirly letters and changed coca-cola to cola-coka, Coca-cola would have legitimate right to sue for TM infringement. If a boot company made a Harvey Davison logo for their boots, Harley Davidson could sue.

The deciding factor is if Freedom2vape can prove that their labeling does not take a direct reference to PM products in their sale of liquid with intent of manufacturing a replacement of that brand for profit. I think it's pretty obvious that they do make direct reference in order to capitalize on their branding.

It sounds dumb, but unfortunately it does make sense.

So Dr. Pepper is very tolerant becase Dr. Wow (as well as other generic knock offs) look an awful lot like Dr Pepper and even contain part of the name.

I think Dr. Pepper would do something about it if they could.

Even generic coke brands just leave off the font, the wavy lines, and the word coca. Just as close to coke as "cowboy" is to Marlboro... closer I'd say.

So What I'm saying generic soda brands clearly indicate which name brand they're closest too... same concept with this. It's even more vague than what they do in the soda industry.

 

[Katatonik]

So Dr. Pepper is very tolerant becase Dr. Wow (as well as other generic knock offs) look an awful lot like Dr Pepper and even contain part of the name.

I think Dr. Pepper would do something about it if they could.

Even generic coke brands just leave off the font, the wavy lines, and the word coca. Just as close to coke as "cowboy" is to Marlboro... closer I'd say.

So What I'm saying generic soda brands clearly indicate which name brand they're closest too... same concept with this. It's even more vague than what they do in the soda industry.

Generic soda's wasn't the best example. I know. It was just a tool to explain the issue.

It's a lot more complex than simply imitating something or not. It also has to do with market share, reserved rights, extent of the claimed trademarks, profitability based on borrowed slogans, royalties, legal precedent, area where the suit is filed, etc. Everyone in here that's going "hey I have a picture of a cowboy in my blah blah blah. Is PM going to sue me?" simply don't understand the issue.


My point is, that using cigarette logos, names, partial or not, to lure customers in as saying "Hey you like those? Our liquid tastes like it.", is never a good idea. PM will fire a thousand lawyers at you until you stop. Even if they (big tobacco) shouldn't win legally, it's simply not worth it to these liquid suppliers to fight against it. All they have to do is change the name on their site and change the stickers on the bottles. It's a lot easier to do that than to fight big tobacco, and lose. Because they will lose.