boycott Pusser's Rum

[wadewood]

Pusser's Rum is trying to enforce that it owns the name of a tiki drink known as a Painkiller. It sued and forced changed of bar with that name. It wants all Painkillers to only be made with Pusser's rum. Can you imagine if BT/Sazerac tried to do the same with a sazerac drink?

http://www.examiner.com/spirits-in-n...mmunity-online

[ratcheer]

Did they invent the drink as part of an ad campaign or other promation and copyright or trademark it? If so, I would assume they are within their rights. Otherwise, they should back off. Just IMHO. Tim

[wadewood]

http://www.cocktailians.com/2011/06/...s-revenge.html

http://www.cocktailians.com/2009/08/...-of-booze.html

Above are a couple of articles about what they have trademarked. The drink existed long before Pusser's starting doing any trademarking of it. Actually on the Pusser's website, they tell the history of the drink: http://www.pussers.com/t-pussers-painkiller.aspx

[mrviognier]

Sounds like an effort to enforce their trademark...and one in which they hope the owners of the bar don't have the balls (and/or dollars) to fight. I suspect that if they do want a fight, any judge would laugh Pusser's lawyers out of his courtroom.

[ratcheer]

Ok, I am totally against anyone copyrighting or patenting anything that has been in general use for a long time, especially patents. I am not so clear on trademarks, though.

Did you know that someone has had a patent granted for a throwing stick as a dog toy? It is totally absurd,

Tim

[cowdery]

This type of discussion is usually littered with ignorance and this one is no exception. Abuse of intellectual property law is one of those areas where people get exercised about vague rumors and half truths spread by people who have little or no idea how intellectual property law works. Rampant intellectual property law abuse is a myth.

[ratcheer]

Sounds like you don't believe me.

http://c4sif.org/2011/01/patent-on-a-stick/

http://www.google.com/patents/about?...J&dq=6,360,693

Tim

[wadewood]

Well we do have one SBer who is a intellectual property lawyer - maybe he will chime in.

My real issue is with Pusser's even being able to get the trademarks to begin with. They did not invent this drink or drink name so why should they be able to trademark it?

[cowdery]

Sounds like you don't believe me.

http://c4sif.org/2011/01/patent-on-a-stick/

http://www.google.com/patents/about?...J&dq=6,360,693

Tim

I believe you have completely misrepresented what is, in fact, a manufactured toy that resembles a throwing stick, and is not in fact a stick. You have, however, provided a good illustration of how these tales of intellectual property abuse are exaggerated or outright fabricated for some dubious purpose about which I won't speculate.

[silverfish]

They did not invent this drink or drink name so why should they be able to trademark it?

DC Comics didn't invent Superman or the Superman name
yet they hold the the © & TM (current litigation pending).

The law is a ass.