Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Flight Following' started by AggieMike88, Jul 31, 2020 at 8:48 PM.
Apparently some people at AAL didn't think through their actions...
No, it’s a simple matter of trademark law. If you do not enforce your trademark, then it can be argued in court that the trademark should be ruled invalid. You really have to enforce any unauthorized use of a trademark. I got cought up in the same type of thing a few months ago. I felt it was stupid but I understand the TM holders position.
Is it odd that I would rather read the idiocy of “journalism” rather than watch video of it?
plus the video won’t play for me.
Not all uses of the trademark need "authorization." Further, the simple answer would be to "authorize" the use. AA was being a corporate bully and got caught out, not only did they tell her to cease but they wanted damages even though they had caused her far worse.
The epilogue is that both parties are happy and the Nutty people can sell the inventory at will without reference to the airline. Seems fair.
I should track down the Nutty people and sell them some ERP software they so don't end up with an extra million in inventory of a perishable product!
FYI they have free shipping. I ordered two 1.25lb mixes for $25 shipped. It’s really not a bad price for what you’re getting. The free shipping closed the deal.
I stopped watching at.....''I'm a small woman owned business....''
I thought airlines stopped serving nuts years ago.
Are you sure about that?
The "damages" part was a bit over the top, but let's realize large airlines, with all the regulations that apply to them, have comparatively large legal departments. Doubtless the biz owner received a version of a standard cease & desist letter, the form of which had long before been reviewed and vetted by the corporation's chief counsel (and probably some expensive outside law firm as well).
As for American "causing her far worse", if the final release was accurate the airline never actually ordered that inventory. If that is the case hopefully the business owner ensures in future she has a valid PO with appropriate cancellation terms before she inventories $1 million of product for a single customer.
At least they didn't drag her off an airplane and knock her unconscious, or even worse...break her guitar.
Thanks for that, ordering a couple myself. We will even heat them in a little ramekin to make them feel at home.
I bought a couple bags. AA might have done them a big favor by putting them into the news.
My grandpa used to say, “there’s nothing that a big woman can do that a small one can’t.”
I hope she has learned that lesson. Without a valid PO she is on her own. I don't do anything for a client without a PO in place, other than provide a proposal or estimate. Work? Not without a PO.
That’s not a cease and desist, this is a cease and desist...
Background. A Minneapolis microbrewery released a “Dilly Dilly IPA” beer a few years ago. Anheuser Busch or whichever subsidiary owns the marketing intellectual property for Bud Light found out about it. One can imagine the board meeting. “We have to protect our trademark!” “I know, Bob, but we are a huge company and they are a beloved microbrewery. People are already drinking more microbrews instead of Bud Light. If we act like a big bully, we will be reviled among all beer drinkers.”
Then, some humble genius speaks up. “Guys, I think there’s a way to protect the trademark without alienating our entire customer base. We might even make some new friends. Hear me out...”
^^^Now that was entertaining...and likely effective.
Jack Daniel's wrote a letter to an author whose cover design looked similar to the JD label. Not all letters are angry.