Become a Patron!

Trademark Infringement

Markw4mms

#Team Jimi Supporter
VU Donator
Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
ECF Refugee
It was bound to happen sooner or later.
 

pete67

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
ECF Refugee
When you play with fire you will get burned sooner or later.
 

Mattp169

Platinum Contributor
Vape Media
Member For 5 Years
Its about damn time if you ask me.

The industry needs to do better. To gain acceptance you need to be responsible. And using other's trademarks is just not responsible business practices.

We as consumers should not support vendors and manufacturer's who jeopardize the industry with such practices. Many of the shops I have dealt with may have a Capt Crunch Vape, but they don't call it that. They are inventive and give it a new name and in the description creatively let many know what the flavor mimcs

I mean it just doesnt make sense with the hundreds of juice makers out there. If all of them made their own version of Capt Cruch and all of them called it that, it would not be seen as anything special. Just like RY4 is no longer something special. Everyone has their own take on it now and calls it RY4 or something very very similar and now RY4 is no longer the Mysterious Exotic hard to describe juice it originally was.
 

Mike H.

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Im still not on this bandwagon with the whole "its just marketing to kids" thing.

Are adults not supposed to like cinnamon toast crunch and froot loops and all those sweet sugary cereals just because were over 18...I know i do but, i dont see the copy right infringement here.

Flashy packaging has always been used as a marketing strategy and it forever will be.

You could put rainbows and cartoon characters on e juice named "Liver and asparagus" and it would sell.

I recall the x wanna be rapper Vanilla ice being sued for using lyrics that sounded similar to someone elses song. (Cant remeber who it was).

If im recalling correctly Vanilla ice won the lawsuit because it had just enough change in it to not be the same although it was similar.

I can see exact wording of a product as infringement but not some of the bottles of e liquid shown in the article.

If i want to make an ejuice with the words apple smacks in it i will..The word apple is not a copy write, neither is smacks...Even putting the 2 together is not an infringement.

Perhaps the art work is what they are pissing about but change one color or one design and its game over for general mills...People will still know what the e juice company is marketing flavor wise
 

OBDave

VU Donator
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Don't know that this is bad news at all, other than the fact it's drumming up negative publicity. I don't even like juice makers that steal the name of other vendors' juices, let alone theft of legitimate trademarked property.

How many Cereal Killers or Unicorn Milks are out there? Not to mention the fact that even though adults can like kid-friendly flavors, this mock-up of cereal packaging is copying advertising that's directly, specifically, and undeniably marketed at young children. Is it really that far of a leap to assume a reasonable, moderate non-vaper could draw the conclusion that products derived from marketing to children could appeal to children?
 

Dr3d

Yes. What was the question?
VU Donator
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
I can see exact wording of a product as infringement but not some of the bottles of e liquid shown in the article.
If i want to make an ejuice with the words apple smacks in it i will..The word apple is not a copy write, neither is smacks...Even putting the 2 together is not an infringement.
Perhaps the art work is what they are pissing about but change one color or one design and its game over for general mills...People will still know what the e juice company is marketing flavor wise

Mike, you have valid points.

Popped in over at: http://www.bitlaw.com/trademark/infringe.html to take a quick peek at the whats and whys of the trademark thing. Briefly, here is a snippet from that page:

EIGHT FACTORS FOR LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION
To analyze whether a particular situation has developed the requisite "likelihood of confusion," courts have generally looked at the following eight factors:

  1. the similarity in the overall impression created by the two marks (including the marks' look, phonetic similarities, and underlying meanings);
  2. the similarities of the goods and services involved (including an examination of the marketing channels for the goods);
  3. the strength of the plaintiff's mark;
  4. any evidence of actual confusion by consumers;
  5. the intent of the defendant in adopting its mark;
  6. the physical proximity of the goods in the retail marketplace;
  7. the degree of care likely to be exercised by the consumer; and
  8. the likelihood of expansion of the product lines.
What I see is that trademarks are not absolute. I think the response we are seeing and will see results from the disparity between cost of defending against a trademark infringement claim and the cost of simply making the infringement claim go away. The simple fact that ejuice is not sold on the cereal aisle in the grocery store could carry enough weight to defeat an infringement claim ... of course, that will depend on the quality of the defense and the opinion of a judge.
 

Kent B Marshall

Bronze Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Companies build and protect their brand. Millions of $.

I want to believe that any e-liquid company wouldn't know this.
If e-liquid companies are advertising for market shares, then one COULD believe they understand that this type of marketing is successful for children.
 

Mattp169

Platinum Contributor
Vape Media
Member For 5 Years
It does not matter if they are really infringing on a trade mark.
It does not matter if it looks like you are marketing to kids

All that matters is the impression the names,packaging etc give to people who make decisions or influence those who do in the political system

It simple STOP ROCKING THE DAMN BOAT
 

OBDave

VU Donator
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Are adults not supposed to like cinnamon toast crunch and froot loops and all those sweet sugary cereals just because were over 18...I know i do but, i dont see the copy right infringement here.

...snip...

If i want to make an ejuice with the words apple smacks in it i will..The word apple is not a copy write, neither is smacks...Even putting the 2 together is not an infringement.

Perhaps the art work is what they are pissing about but change one color or one design and its game over for general mills...People will still know what the e juice company is marketing flavor wise
Missed this earlier, but good post. My point is that adults may certainly like Cinnamon Toast Crunch and Froot Loops, but you don't see TV commercials for those products on the nightly news, you see them on cartoon channels. Thus, they're marketed to kids, and they pick up market share when kids' parents eat them or kids who grew up on them become adults and continue to like them. But kids are undeniably the target of the marketing.

I agree that some of the bottles used as examples in the article seem like they're similar, but not exact enough ripoffs to necessarily go down over trademark lawsuits, but there was another thread here within the last week or so that had some bottles that I'd say were toeing the line much closer. Regardless, if General Mills' lawyers come knocking on the door of Bob's Bathtub Vapes, do you think Bob is gonna have the capital to fight over technicalities in court?

My bigger point is that a reasonable, moderate non-vaper (the kind of people we need on our side in the court of public opinion) could see brands well-known as children's products altered just enough to avoid copyright lawsuits as being appealing to children. There are plenty of ways to still have compelling brand marks that convey what flavor you're delivering without going out of your way to piggyback onto a Saturday morning cartoon campaign (do they even have Saturday morning kids' specials any more?).
 

Mike H.

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
The products are being advertised on adult vaping sites and inside stores. All be it some underage have access to places when mommy and daddy arent around but what 10yr old or 16yr old has a debit card to order this stuff?

I dont see it targeting kids...well maybe i do..the big ones like us who like the stuff.
 

Mattp169

Platinum Contributor
Vape Media
Member For 5 Years
The products are being advertised on adult vaping sites and inside stores. All be it some underage have access to places when mommy and daddy arent around but what 10yr old or 16yr old has a debit card to order this stuff?

I dont see it targeting kids...well maybe i do..the big ones like us who like the stuff.

Thats not the point of what it appears to YOU, a vaper, who does not have much if any influence over the people in power in government.

It don't matter how it appears to me either

What matters is how things appear to those who can and do influence the people in power

Also keep in mind

Lots of kids have access to debit cards. Mom gave them 20 bucks to go to the mall, Buy a $20 visa card, then they can order on line.
Lots of parents buy this stuff for their kids
Those kids sell it to other kids
 

Mattp169

Platinum Contributor
Vape Media
Member For 5 Years
General Mills is pissed cuz vape shops are profiting because they are using General MIlls names and images to sell something and GM gets nothing for it but a bad rep.

Think about this. A person completely uninformed about vaping and never smoked etc. See someone with a bottle of Juice Labeled Capt Crunch. It is reasonable that a person like this MAY think this Juice is sold, produced or endorsed by the cereal company.
 

Mike H.

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
General Mills is pissed cuz vape shops are profiting because they are using General MIlls names and images to sell something and GM gets nothing for it but a bad rep.

Think about this. A person completely uninformed about vaping and never smoked etc. See someone with a bottle of Juice Labeled Capt Crunch. It is reasonable that a person like this MAY think this Juice is sold, produced or endorsed by the cereal company.
Apple smacks is a general mills cereal name?

Cap'n Crunch is..Capt. crunch isnt
 

Mike H.

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Fruit loops isnt one either But "froot loops" is

Theres similarity but not the same...therefore no infringemnt.
 

CurlyxCracker

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Fruit loops isnt one either But "froot loops" is

Theres similarity but not the same...therefore no infringemnt.
False. If they can prove there may be a mix up by a consumer it's still infringement. Changing a few letters around doesn't void infringement. Froot loops and fruit loops are extremely close in that regard. Second, a picture of said cereal on the label with a name like Froot loops is infringement.
Let's say you make starburst, strbrst with a picture of a fruit chew on it is in fact infringement, since it could be assumed staebursts makes or endorses the product and that company makes profit from it without the owners consent, you are using their intellectual property to sell a product. It's infringement. Same thing with the Cana clones.... It's a close name to be confused with Hana.
 

CurlyxCracker

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
That being said and put to rest.
Again, I'm glad they are doing this, like it or not, disagree or not, a main factor in proposed regulation is that these nicotine liquids are be marketed to children. I personally love a fruity pebbles liquid. Doesn't mean it should be called frooty rocks and have the label covered in a delicious assortment of fruity pebbles, fruity pebbles ARE marketed to children, even though adults, myself included love them. Make a new label without the cereal that is marketed to kids and call it fruity cereal or something not so generic, but not a misspelling of an item marketed to children.
 

5150sick

Under Ground Hustler
Staff member
VU Administrator
Senior Moderator
VU Donator
Diamond Contributor
Press Corps
Member For 5 Years
Mod Team Leader
False. If they can prove there may be a mix up by a consumer it's still infringement. Changing a few letters around doesn't void infringement. Froot loops and fruit loops are extremely close in that regard. Second, a picture of said cereal on the label with a name like Froot loops is infringement.
Let's say you make starburst, strbrst with a picture of a fruit chew on it is in fact infringement, since it could be assumed staebursts makes or endorses the product and that company makes profit from it without the owners consent, you are using their intellectual property to sell a product. It's infringement. Same thing with the Cana clones.... It's a close name to be confused with Hana.

Hana sued for the logo only not the name.
When people used Chana and cana for a 30watt aluminum box with no logo they were OK.
It was the mom & pop vendors who had "Hana Clone" and a picture of a 30watt aluminum box with the Hana logo who got sued.

When you go to wal mart and buy generic cereal you see the box and the name and you can tell the exact cereal they are copying so I don't know why that wouldn't work for eliquid too.

As long as they aren't using the exact name and logo as a real cereal.

I tried touching on the subject here.
I even put it in "You mad bro?" ahead of time figuring it would end up there eventually anyway:

http://vapingunderground.com/thread...-we-support-really-this-fucking-stupid.88180/
 

CurlyxCracker

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Hana sued for the logo only not the name.
When people used Chana and cana for a 30watt aluminum box with no logo they were OK.
It was the mom & pop vendors who had "Hana Clone" and a picture of a 30watt aluminum box with the Hana logo who got sued.

When you go to wal mart and buy generic cereal you see the box and the name and you can tell the exact cereal they are copying so I don't know why that wouldn't work for eliquid too.

As long as they aren't using the exact name and logo as a real cereal.

I tried touching on the subject here.
I even put it in "You mad bro?" ahead of time figuring it would end up there eventually anyway:

http://vapingunderground.com/thread...-we-support-really-this-fucking-stupid.88180/
They also sent cease and desist letters to places who were selling without a logo. I forget which shop but the could even sell their non logo versions.
If it can be easily mistaken by a consumer it is infringement. Elev8vape got one for referring it ad a Cana, with photos of non logo versions (did originally have stock original photos though)
Also fruit circles and golden puffs are far from fruit loops and smacks, respectively...
 

5150sick

Under Ground Hustler
Staff member
VU Administrator
Senior Moderator
VU Donator
Diamond Contributor
Press Corps
Member For 5 Years
Mod Team Leader
By the way this already happened early on when vendors were using cigarette names on their eliquid.
Like "Camel" and "Newport",

Honestly i'm surprised it took this long for food and candy manufacturers to follow suit.
 

5150sick

Under Ground Hustler
Staff member
VU Administrator
Senior Moderator
VU Donator
Diamond Contributor
Press Corps
Member For 5 Years
Mod Team Leader
They also sent cease and desist letters to places who were selling without a logo. I forget which shop but the could even sell their non logo versions.
If it can be easily mistaken by a consumer it is infringement. Elev8vape got one for referring it ad a Cana, with photos of non logo versions (did originally have stock original photos though)
Also fruit circles and golden puffs are far from fruit loops and smacks, respectively...

Right, but there is no reason vendors can't do what the generic cereal companies are doing.
Vapers aren't (well, i'm not sure after seeing some of those labels) stupid.

They will figure out what they mean.

Plus how hard would it be to type a flavor profile under the eliquid they are selling.

That bugs the hell out of me.

I saw a juice named "Heisenburg" I'm thinking what the fuck does this taste like?
If I vape it am i going to be awake for 3 days or something?

If I'm going to buy something named "Crystal Blue Persuasion" I would like to know what it's going to taste like first.
 

5150sick

Under Ground Hustler
Staff member
VU Administrator
Senior Moderator
VU Donator
Diamond Contributor
Press Corps
Member For 5 Years
Mod Team Leader
I think Hana tried to sue vaping watch?
I know the guy had lawyers and they told hana to eat a dick.
illvapes (I think) never bothered to respond to the lawsuit and never went to court so hana won by default but I haven't heard of any other vendor going to court over it since.
 

Mike H.

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
I recall now that lawsuit against vanilla ice...it wasnt lyrics but music notes...One key off of copying a david bowie riff..That one key difference is what was ruled not infringement...Naming something Fruity pebbles or even FROOTY ROCKS is in fact not "FROOTY PEBBLES"and wont be won in court on basis of infringement...the fact is its not against the law to make something similar...It just cant be an exact duplicate of something and then take credit for it.

If this was the case, why isnt the first ego battery company suing all the others as they all pretty much look alike...same battery pretty much...they all have a push button and now 510 connectors...Shrugs...You can say the same now for box mods and almost any tank and rda.

Maybe since these products are all mostly made in china they cant sue each other and thats the reason but then again why doesnt china sue america for using buttons to fire a mod or something that uses an 18650 battery...Maybe the lcd display showing watts and ohms.

General mills has no case and its a scare tactic by some rich billionair snobs who know these little guys cant pay to fight it for 10 years down the road.
 

Mike H.

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
The save a lot grocery store in my area sells generic almost everything..Capn crunch is Croco crunch...froot loops is Fruity Rings....As long as they arent using the EXACT DUPLICATE of PICTURING and NAME its not infringement.

Funny though how the actual contents you couldnt tell the difference from the general mills sitting in a bowl of milk.
 

Mike H.

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
You are 100% factually incorrect. Your belief that in order to infringe, it must be an "exact copy", is simply untrue. Plus in general, I just can't stand whining and pity parties about others' accomplishments.
If you're a "little guy" it's prolly because you chose to be one through a lifelong lack of motivation.

The success of a lawsuit to stop the infringement turns on whether the defendant's use causes a likelihood of confusion in the average consumer.

...just like @CurlyxCracker said

Link

PS... We ain't China. :)

Ive always mistaken E liquid for actual cereal humans consume and digest then shit out....I guess some likelihood of confusion.o_O

J. HIGGS brand of cereal...look it up to see what i mean...They are either kissing general mills ass or found these loopholes you dont read about while "google'ing" copy right infringements and reading what that says.

Whats the pity party and whining thing about?..and the little guys "choose" to be through lack of motivation?
 

OBDave

VU Donator
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
snip...
If this was the case, why isnt the first ego battery company suing all the others as they all pretty much look alike...same battery pretty much...they all have a push button and now 510 connectors...Shrugs...You can say the same now for box mods and almost any tank and rda.

Maybe since these products are all mostly made in china they cant sue each other and thats the reason but then again why doesnt china sue america for using buttons to fire a mod or something that uses an 18650 battery...Maybe the lcd display showing watts and ohms.
snip
Second graf answers the first - different copyright laws in China, which is why mod manufacturers copy one another (including logos) with impunity.
The save a lot grocery store in my area sells generic almost everything..Capn crunch is Croco crunch...froot loops is Fruity Rings....As long as they arent using the EXACT DUPLICATE of PICTURING and NAME its not infringement.
Those packages are designed to make it perfectly clear that the product inside is a knockoff and not the actual brand. They're named similar to make that connection, but the naming is off just enough to let the customer know what they're imitating, while the package looks completely different.

To prove infringement you'd only have to make the case that a consumer could reasonably be duped into thinking they were buying a product made by the owner of the copyright or trademark - using a slightly altered name with a similar font, color scheme, and graphics is a strong case, if we're talking about only a similar name but otherwise completely different packaging the case gets weaker, but a strong legal team could still argue the issue against a weaker one.

I'm going grocery shopping tomorrow, I'll take some pics of legit brands versus knockoffs, and we'll see how many folks here can tell the difference...
 

Mike H.

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Second graf answers the first - different copyright laws in China, which is why mod manufacturers copy one another (including logos) with impunity.

Those packages are designed to make it perfectly clear that the product inside is a knockoff and not the actual brand. They're named similar to make that connection, but the naming is off just enough to let the customer know what they're imitating, while the package looks completely different.

To prove infringement you'd only have to make the case that a consumer could reasonably be duped into thinking they were buying a product made by the owner of the copyright or trademark - using a slightly altered name with a similar font, color scheme, and graphics is a strong case, if we're talking about only a similar name but otherwise completely different packaging the case gets weaker, but a strong legal team could still argue the issue against a weaker one.

I'm going grocery shopping tomorrow, I'll take some pics of legit brands versus knockoffs, and we'll see how many folks here can tell the difference...
So an e juice named frooty rings or Kaptain Krunch is something so similar that the average consumer cant tell the difference between that and actual cereal you eat?..lol.
 

OBDave

VU Donator
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Ive always mistaken E liquid for actual cereal humans consume and digest then shit out....I guess some likelihood of confusion.o_O

J. HIGGS brand of cereal...look it up to see what i mean...They are either kissing general mills ass or found these loopholes you dont read about while "google'ing" copy right infringements and reading what that says.

Whats the pity party and whining thing about?..and the little guys "choose" to be through lack of motivation?
I didn't find any J. Higgs cereal in a quick googling of "J. Higgs Cereal," but I did find this:
JHiggs-SpicyHot.jpg

I know these are supposed to taste like Flamin' Hot Cheetos, but it's also painfully obvious these are not Flamin' Hot Cheetos...the color scheme is the same, but the actual manufacturer mark is clear (NOT Frito Lay), the name is different, and, aside from the color scheme, the bag graphics are dissimilar. This to me is a good example of conveying that you're peddling a knock-off of a popular product without creating any confusion as to whether it's legit or endorsed by the company that makes the legit product.
 

Mike H.

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
E juice isnt even a cereal food product...its clear they arent labeling exact trademark names and for some to think its actually a box of cereal has some real issues to deal with.

How can J higgs use the word cheetos though?...isnt that something frito lay came up with?..see my thinking in this?

Everyone knows its a knock off already but probably tastes identical...So the name cheetos can be used in whoever wants to copy a product...the same as using captain Krunch which isnt even spelled in the same manner...so who wouldnt know it was a knock off "flavoring" in the e juice market and not actually a box of capn crunch cereal?o_O
 

Mike H.

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Unless these companies are paying royalties to use these similar name to describe a product..Potato chips, corn chips, pretzels, granola bars, cheese, biscuits etc...Clover Valley food products use the word Raisin Bran on the box....Copy right infrigement of Kellogs?
 

OBDave

VU Donator
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
"Cheezies" and "Cheetos" aren't the same words. I don't think J. Higgs used the word "Cheetos." They used "Cheezies" instead.

I think we've just got a difference of opinion as to whether or not marketing like this is beneficial for the vape industry and vapers in general. Not right, not wrong, but different. I make my own juice and haven't bought anything from a B&M in months, so I don't really have a dog in this fight anyway...
 

Mike H.

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Im getting tired...long day...lol

So as long as people in the e juice market dont put the name general mills on the bottle and dont call it the same name it shouldnt be infringement...Calling an entirely different product captain Krunch (and not Cap'n Crunch) with the makers name (and not general mills) is very clear its not the general mills cereal product but may introduce a similar taste to...as cheezies does to cheetos.
 

5150sick

Under Ground Hustler
Staff member
VU Administrator
Senior Moderator
VU Donator
Diamond Contributor
Press Corps
Member For 5 Years
Mod Team Leader
This here is just stupid.
These people need to be run out of the vape community.
11390139_10203379735888950_6321933564617496925_n.jpg
 

5150sick

Under Ground Hustler
Staff member
VU Administrator
Senior Moderator
VU Donator
Diamond Contributor
Press Corps
Member For 5 Years
Mod Team Leader
This is the kind of branding I've been talking about - same font, same color scheme, same graphics...if I was an uninformed regular Joe, this bottle might make me wonder whether General Mills had started making e-liquid...

The vaping community jumped on them about it.
So they changed it to this.
Still just as stupid and makes us look just as bad:

15mlkaptain_1024x1024.jpeg
 

Whiskey

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
This Topic sooooo reminds me of the continuing Mod controversy of "Clones VS Authentic".....its the same deal
 

CurlyxCracker

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Right, but there is no reason vendors can't do what the generic cereal companies are doing.
Vapers aren't (well, i'm not sure after seeing some of those labels) stupid.

They will figure out what they mean.

Plus how hard would it be to type a flavor profile under the eliquid they are selling.

That bugs the hell out of me.

I saw a juice named "Heisenburg" I'm thinking what the fuck does this taste like?
If I vape it am i going to be awake for 3 days or something?

If I'm going to buy something named "Crystal Blue Persuasion" I would like to know what it's going to taste like first.
Oh yes! I agree! I misunderstood what you were referring to by the generic cereal thing. I thought you meant they were using names like "froot loops". But yes, I completely agree! You can do the same with e liquid! Fruity bits or something for a fruity pebbles shouldn't be an issue infringement wise. But I also think that these cereals and other flavors should remove the "pictures that resemble a cereal box or whatever in the particular case of whatever flavor". Like I said before I love a fruity pebbles vape, one of my top 3 actually. I'm not saying adults don't enjoy these flavors, but that particular cereal is marketed to children. And I feel it does more harm than good. Why give MORE ammunition to those who want to take my vape away??
Also, I agree with the names/product description! OMG it pisses me off. More so when I'm purchasing concentrates, FA Oba Oba for instance, wtf is it?!
 

CurlyxCracker

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
I recall now that lawsuit against vanilla ice...it wasnt lyrics but music notes...One key off of copying a david bowie riff..That one key difference is what was ruled not infringement...Naming something Fruity pebbles or even FROOTY ROCKS is in fact not "FROOTY PEBBLES"and wont be won in court on basis of infringement...the fact is its not against the law to make something similar...It just cant be an exact duplicate of something and then take credit for it.

If this was the case, why isnt the first ego battery company suing all the others as they all pretty much look alike...same battery pretty much...they all have a push button and now 510 connectors...Shrugs...You can say the same now for box mods and almost any tank and rda.

Maybe since these products are all mostly made in china they cant sue each other and thats the reason but then again why doesnt china sue america for using buttons to fire a mod or something that uses an 18650 battery...Maybe the lcd display showing watts and ohms.

General mills has no case and its a scare tactic by some rich billionair snobs who know these little guys cant pay to fight it for 10 years down the road.
How about the more recent "blurred lines" suit? That was in fact won....
If a product can be confused by consumers (making a sale based on a trademark established by someone else) it is infringement. I'll post links to copyright law if you need? Or you can Google it yourself. Fruity pebbles and froot rocks is different than fruit loops and froot loops. The generic cereal thing mentioned provides proof they can come up with names that don't infringe on a trademark...
 

CurlyxCracker

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
You are 100% factually incorrect. Your belief that in order to infringe, it must be an "exact copy", is simply untrue. Plus in general, I just can't stand whining and pity parties about others' accomplishments.
If you're a "little guy" it's prolly because you chose to be one through a lifelong lack of motivation.

The success of a lawsuit to stop the infringement turns on whether the defendant's use causes a likelihood of confusion in the average consumer.

...just like @CurlyxCracker said

Link

PS... We ain't China. :)
Ok no link needed. Thank you @Shark Vape!
 

CurlyxCracker

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Ive always mistaken E liquid for actual cereal humans consume and digest then shit out....I guess some likelihood of confusion.o_O

J. HIGGS brand of cereal...look it up to see what i mean...They are either kissing general mills ass or found these loopholes you dont read about while "google'ing" copy right infringements and reading what that says.

Whats the pity party and whining thing about?..and the little guys "choose" to be through lack of motivation?
It's not that we eat it. The confusion could cause a consumer to believe general Mills endorsed the product, therefore generating sales based on the endorsement.

If a company doesn't protect their trademark, they can lose it.
 

CurlyxCracker

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
So an e juice named frooty rings or Kaptain Krunch is something so similar that the average consumer cant tell the difference between that and actual cereal you eat?..lol.
See previous response
 

CurlyxCracker

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
This Topic sooooo reminds me of the continuing Mod controversy of "Clones VS Authentic".....its the same deal
China will reverse engineer and infringe all day. It's what they do! These are both US companies.
 

bondo

Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
cereal_no_space.png


This is a perfect example of infringment 2x over.
first you have the name.
cerealicious cafe could legally sue and most likely win.
GM,could also sue for use of the trademarked logos. (Toucan Sam and the Trix bunny )
Changing the spelling of a brand name is 100% perfectly legal. (Fruity loops,kap'n Krunch,etc.)
There's a grey area for logos though and it usually falls on the judge to make the decision as to wether a Trix bunny that looks half retarded is infingment.

My .02 on the matter is that anyone knowingly using trademarked logos and/or names is only in it for the short run and quick profits before the hammer falls.
these unimaginative pricks deserve any Ill fate the law decides to impose upon them.
I can't lie,I bought a bottle of cerealicious and it's a pretty damn good juice but I remember when I first saw the bottle. My first thought was "wow,what a shameless rip off.."
Since then I only buy juice with original labels.
cuttwood and beard are two of my favorite premium brands atm even though the latter is pretty generic in there advertising.
beard is a tricky brand to buy juice from without an a curate description. But again,even with beard,the description for #88 reads "Literally a Girl Scout thin mint. Literally." But atleast they don't have the damn girls or cookies on their bottle.
Plus how hard would it be to type a flavor profile under the eliquid they are selling.

That bugs the hell out of me.

I saw a juice named "Heisenburg" I'm thinking what the fuck does this taste like?
If I vape it am i going to be awake for 3 days or something?

If I'm going to buy something named "Crystal Blue Persuasion" I would like to know what it's going to taste like first.

This bugs the hell out of me!
by all means,come up with a unique name for your juice but for God's sake,TELL US WTF IT TASTES LIKE!
I saw a thread awhile back and someone said they were vaping "orc spunk".
Wtf is that and even if it's the most delicious juice EVAR, can/would you go around telling everyone that your puffing on orc spunk?
 

CurlyxCracker

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
This here is just stupid.
These people need to be run out of the vape community.
View attachment 21907
Perfect example. Blatant infringement!
That aside the community jumped on them, not for infringement but for the fact we are looking at government regulation. One of the reasons is they believe some liquid is marketed to children. As I said earlier, I'm not saying adults don't enjoy these flavors (I adore fruity pebbles type vape). I am saying these cereals are specifically marketed to children, therefore an eliquid that can be confused to be made by the same company (when it isn't, or even if it was that'd be even worse) with a name that can be confused, will be looked at as marketed to children....
Honestly, I could care less, infringe away, I don't have a stake in general Mills. I do care however that these can be deemed as marketed to children based on said infringement.
 

CurlyxCracker

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
General Mills is pissed cuz vape shops are profiting because they are using General MIlls names and images to sell something and GM gets nothing for it but a bad rep.

Think about this. A person completely uninformed about vaping and never smoked etc. See someone with a bottle of Juice Labeled Capt Crunch. It is reasonable that a person like this MAY think this Juice is sold, produced or endorsed by the cereal company.
Which proves infringement, btw. This is actually the exact form of what I'm talking about. You and I know it's not but I'm not an "average consumer". I'm not new to this. But Joe smo sees it and says "Oh I love that brand/flavor cereal", infringement.
 

Mattp169

Platinum Contributor
Vape Media
Member For 5 Years
If General Mills fails to protect their trademarks, who do you think will get sued
the first time an irresponsible parent's kid finds it, drinks some, and ends up in the hospital with nic poisoning.

Will daddy dumbass be held responsible? Nah, he's broke.
Will the juice maker be held responsible? Not a chance.
General Mills has the deep pockets, and America has an endless supply of brainless jurors
always willing to buy into the 'But I'm just a poor victim' bullshit used to generate inappropriate sympathies.

'Merca!!!

Great Point

In regards to spelling

How many people do yo think know off the top of their head the exact correct spelling of many kid's cereals. I know I sure don't
Its not the truth that matters. Its the impression something gives.

Vapers(vapors??SP??) are fighting in the court of public opinion. we need as a community to act and look responsible. We need to not give others any reason to think we are infringing on their freedoms or rights or endangering others.


I hate government regulation. I hate public opinion of shit. But the fact is if the community as a whole doesn't step up and act responsibly then we will all be facing prohibition, massive scrutiny, taxation, and worse.
 

CurlyxCracker

Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
If General Mills fails to protect their trademarks, who do you think will get sued
the first time an irresponsible parent's kid finds it, drinks some, and ends up in the hospital with nic poisoning.

Will daddy dumbass be held responsible? Nah, he's broke.
Will the juice maker be held responsible? Not a chance.
General Mills has the deep pockets, and America has an endless supply of brainless jurors
always willing to buy into the 'But I'm just a poor victim' bullshit used to generate inappropriate sympathies.

'Merca!!!
This as well!
A kid can look at a bottle and say "Oh froot loops (with a picture of fruit loops in the background of the label), it's a fruit loops drink, mine!"
Damn right parents should be responsible! But as a parent of 4 (soon to be 5) beautiful children, craziness and accidents occur! I can't tell you how many times I chase my 1 y/o and prevent him from hurting himself while at the same time my 2 y/o is climbing up the back of the couch to jump off. Just an example of an "incident", kids will always find a way to get into things or hurt themselves, it's inevitable.
I read an article recently where a child (with parents) was visiting an aunt, who wasn't home at the time or when they arrived (idk why or how the entered the home). Anyway, aunt left a bottle of 100mg nic uncapped on a table, drank it and died. Parents should have been keeping an eye on said child but accidents happen, let's not entice them by putting beloved characters or known logos and whatnot marketed to children on dangerous products.
And that's even anti vaping advocacy aside, which is another issue I expressed.
Outside the "main topic" of this thread but still needed said, imo.
 

VU Sponsors

Top