Tabberone is pronounced tab ber won
not tay ber own

Tabbers Temptations     www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/ Home | Site Index | Disclaimer | Email Me!

Tabberone Logo
The latest Hartsel weather.

  "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"
Edmund Burke


Bumble and bumble
Hall Of Shame Member
Added August 30, 2007

Last Updated - December 12, 2009


Snidely
Michael Gordon, founder and one-time president of Bumble and bumble, is quoted on their web site as saying, "Everyone needs a hero." Interesting sentiment there, Michael. Who's your hero, Mike? Snidely Whiplash? (For those who don't know, Snidely Whiplash was constantly after Nell who was rescued by Dudley DooRight). Or would Attila The Hun be more your company's style, Mike-baby?
Gordon

 


Inquiring minds want to know exactly what did Bumble and bumble do to deserve being enshrined in theses haunted pages? After all, Tabberone does have standards. Unlike Bumble and bumble and their attorneys.

It was a dark and stormy night, ...no, that's another story. It began on December 23, 2006. Bumble and bumble instructed eBay to terminate some 104 auction listings SD Haircare had listed, falsely claiming "Trademark Misuse". The eBay email stated:

"The rights owner, Bumble and Bumble Products, LLC, notified eBay that this listing violates intellectual property rights. When eBay receives a report of this type of violation, we remove the listing to comply with the law." Contact information provided was kplevan@skadden.com.

So, you ask, what did SD Haircare do to invoke the wrath of Bumble and bumble? SD Haircare was re-selling (gasp) genuine Bumble and bumble products on eBay! GASP AGAIN! What, you say? How can this be so? Any fool knows that re-selling an unused product is perfectly legal. Oh? There is one fool who doesn't? Just who is that fool?



Pleavan
Kenneth A. Plevan, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP, of New York City. According to eBay, he was the contact person who was responsible for the 104 takedowns. To characterize Kenneth A. Plevan, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP, of New York City, as a typical corporate lawyer bottom-feeder would be to insult bottom-feeders everywhere. He is lower. Much lower. Bottom-feeders wouldn't socialize with him.
Bozo


Why do we believe this? Before Kenneth A. Plevan, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP, of New York City, filed a false affidavit with eBay, improperly and (in our opinion) criminally terminating the 104 auctions, SD Haircare had a thriving internet business and making a good living. Since then, SD Haircare has
  • had her business damaged and her customer goodwill damaged by those false claims
  • suffered a devastating financial loss (zero income - down from $45,000 per month before takedowns)
  • had irreparable conflict in her personal life
  • been suffering from almost constant anxiety and uncertainty
  • a major reduction in income
  • had more disruptions in her life


And how can we say that Kenneth A. Plevan, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP, of New York City, filed a false affidavit with eBay? Because court after court after court has ruled that reselling cosmetics is perfectly legal. See our Cosmetics page for a list of the lawsuits and links to them.

Does Bumble and bumble or Kenneth A. Plevan, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP, of New York City, care? No! But she has done nothing wrong! Her web site, www.sdhaircare.com, gives a brief rendition of what happened, and says goodbye to her former customers, under the heading of, "SD Haircare put out of business by Bb!"

On the web site, she also says,

"I sold most of my jewelry & personal posessions, earned working over 100 hours per week, for pennies on the dollar just to pay rent and utilities."

Gee, you say, so why didn't she sue the bastards? Because, for months, and months, Bumble and bumble and Kenneth A. Plevan, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP, of New York City, have been discussing a financial settlement with her to compensate for their stupidity and their gross thoughtlessness. And they have been dragging it out, and out, and out. This is how scum like Bumble and bumble and Kenneth A. Plevan, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP, of New York City, wear down innocents and take advantage of their inability to afford a lawyer who would sue them until their ears bleed. Maybe they are waiting for for her to die first? Naw. These guys are blood-suckers, not ghouls. Yet.

And, while Bumble and bumble and Kenneth A. Plevan, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP, of New York City, are playing the damaging delaying game, it appears that Bumble and bumble effectively shut down any possiblility that SD Haircare could get more product. Her last attempt, through T'eez Salon in Omaha, NE ended in her receiving bad Bumble and bumble product.

We have never been advocates of negotiating a settlement until AFTER a lawsuit against the trademark liars has been filed. This is a good example of why. They will not get serious until they know you are serious. They will not get serious until they think they could lose a federal lawsuit. They will not get serious until they are faced with major lawyer bills for defending them against their own stupidity (especially when that stupidity is reinforced by the lawyers).


Bumble and bumble and Kenneth A. Plevan, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP, of New York City, you are pathetic. You are examples of why the public needs civil as well as enforced criminal penalties for trademark and copyright liars and the corporate lawyers that represent them. The bottom-feeding corporate lawyers that promote these activities under the guise of "zealously protecting the interests of their clients" are 21st Century hoodlums hiding behind antiquated legal ethics (legal ethics: an oxymoron). These scum use the trademark and copyright laws to hurt people who are not infringing. Why do they do this? Because they can. This type of abuse will not end until there are severe federal civil penalties for trademark and copyright abuse aimed at the IP holders and their law firms who engage in this type of activity.
Their idol
Attila


                               

We are happy to announce that Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP, of New York City is our First Award Winner of The Putrid Plecostomus Award to those corporate law firms that go above and beyond the call of duty.

                               

 

 

Rebuttals

In an effort to provide a balanced view, we make the following offer to anyone who feels they have been wrongly accused on this web site.

If you, or your company, have been referenced on these pages, and you would like the chance to post a rebuttal, we will post your rebuttal (provided it is in good taste) so others can read it. The rebuttal must be submitted in a format that can easily be converted into HTML. We reserve the right to alter the rebuttal to make it more readable. However, we will not alter the content (unless there is offensive material to be removed). We also reserve the right to comment on any rebuttal received. Emails protesting the content of this web site may be treated as rebuttals by us at our discretion.

General
Articles | Cease and Desist Letters | Federal Court Cases | FAQs & Whines | Glossary | Hall Of Shame | Contributions

Corporate Lawyers
Cartoons | Code Of Ethics | Courtroom Remarks | Definition Of A Lie | Jokes | Lawyers | Lying | Who Have Lied

eBay - Land The Game

Definitions

Trademark Definitions
Blurring   |   Confusion   |   Damages   |   Dilution   |   History   |   Initial Interest Confusion   |   Likelihood Of Confusion   |   Material Difference Standard
Parallel Imports   |   Post-sale Confusion   |   Puffery   |   Secondary Meaning   |   Subsequent Confusion   |   Trademark Abuse
Unauthorized Use   |   Unfair Competition   |   What is a Trademark?
Copyright Definitions
Angel Policies   |   Contributory Infringement   |   Copyrightability   |   Copyright Extortion   |   Copyright Misuse Doctrine
; Derivative   |   The Digital Millennium Copyright Act   |   EULA   |   Fair Use   |   First Sale Doctrine   |   Product Description   |   Registration
Registration Denied   |   What is a Copyright?   |   What is not Copyrightable?
Other Issues
Embroidery Designs   |   FAQs & Whines   |   Image and Text Theft   |   Licensed Fabric   |   Licensing & Licenses   |   Patterns
Patterns Index   |   Profit   |   Quilting   |   Selvage   |   Stanford School of Law Case Outline
Tabberone Disclaimer   |   Trademark Extortion   |   Urban Myths   |   What To Do If You Are Veroed

Federal Court Cases
Alphabetically | by Federal Circuit | by Subject | by Court Quotations

Federal Statutes
Copyright Act 17 U.S.C. 5 | Digital Millenium Copyright Act 17 U.S.C. 12 | Lanham Act 15 U.S.C. 22
<

VeRO (Verified Right's Owner Program)
VeRO Commandments | VeRO-Verified Rights Owners Program | Counter Notice Letter
Counter Notice (pre-2003) | Counter Notice present | On-Line Survey from 2004 | Articles about VeRO | What To Do If You Are Veroed

Original material by Karen Dudnikov & Michael Meadors is © 1999-2016

 

 

iweb counter