Tabberone is pronounced tab ber won |
|
The Tabberone™ Archives These articles concern what we consider major trademark and copyright issues. They are usually reproduced with the original source referenced. Bear in mind, these articles are copyrighted and commercial use without permission of the authors may be considered infringement. The intended use here is educational, commentary and non-commercial. The reason they are reproduced in the Tabberone™ Archives, as opposed to just providing a link, is because links disappear and pages are removed. That presents a messy confirmation process that is annoying to the browser (you) but also presents a credibility issue. We do not claim any rights in these pieces. Do not regard the absence of a copyright statement or © to mean the article is not copyrighted. Some sites do not have a copyright statement. When an article or a comment is posted on the internet by the copyright owner, the owner is seeking a world-wide, 24/7 audience; sometimes for a limited amount of time, sometimes indefinitely. In essence, an internet posting intentionally relinquishes one's copyright for exclusivity because the owner has posted it on the internet to been seen by everyone, everywhere. The Tabberone™ Archives non-commercial duplication of the posting is simply a continuance of the original wishes of the copyright owner. We post these articles for reference, for commentary and for confirmarion of our position. |
Source: http://consumerist.com/5382858/monster-energy-trains-legal-guns-on-beverage-review-website October 17, 2009. Advertising and comments omitted. |
Monster Energy Trains Legal Guns On Beverage Review Website
By Chris Walters, 9:32 PM on Thu Oct 15 2009
|
When you're working on developing a reputation as a trademark bully, it's good to go after multiple targets. We guess that's why the website BevReview.com has received notice that it should remove any advertisement and sale of Monster Energy drinks from its site. The only problem is, it doesn't advertise or sell drinks—it reviews them. And it didn't give Monster Energy a good review.
BevReview's editor Steve Tanner has been contacted twice now by Continental Enterprises, a firm working for Hansen Beverage Company to "help control the use of its mark." Based on the language they used in their communications with BevReview, we think they didn't even bother to read the page they're complaining about. |
Continental Enterprises ("Continental") has been engaged by Hansen to help control the use of its mark. You are receiving this letter because Continental has received information that you advertised and/or sold products bearing one or more of the Hansen marks, or confusingly similar derivations thereof. We understand that the inclusion of the Hansen marks on your product may have been an oversight. However, on behalf of Hansen, Continental must demand that you discontinue your advertisement and sale of these products.
Upon your receipt and review of this letter, please contact our offices so that we may work toward a resolution of the issue that is satisfactory to all parties involved. [...] Hansen Beverage Company considers this a serious matter and, if you do not take immediate steps to resolve this issue, they will be forced to take more aggressive action to protect their intellectual property rights. |
At first we were amused by how stupid Continental Enterprises was being by mistaking a review for an advertisement. Then we though Hansen was being duped
by a firm that was just trying to look busy so it could earn its keep. But after reading the review in question, we wonder whether they're confusing the two
formats on purpose.
You see, BevReview's review of Monster Energy was not that favorable: |
The color of the drink was dark yellowish... I guess you could call it amber, but who really knows. Think apple juice with a somewhat red tint.
As for the taste, well... it was odd. Think citrus + medicine. Yum! There wasn't a lot of carbonation (which reminded me somewhat of how Vault is
being positioned as a hybrid soda/energy drink). The aftertaste was somewhat bitter, rather acidic. Not really pleasant, to tell you the truth.
I actually couldn't quite place what the heck the flavor actually was. It starts out smooth, and then the aftertaste kicks in and ruins it. (Of course,
this might also have to do with the fact that sucralose is listed as an ingredient.)
Overall, the taste was weird and I don't think I'd want to drink this again. |
So maybe Hansen and Continental aren't being as dense as they appear; maybe they know that if they intentionally misread the content of a site, they may be
able to informally pressure the blog's owner to remove the negative review. Either way, before you drink a can of Monster Energy, we hope you take
BevReview's fair and honest review of the drink under consideration.
© 2005-2009 Consumer Media LLC. |
To return to the Continental Enterprises Articles Page, click here. |
General Articles | Cease and Desist Letters | Federal Court Cases | FAQs & Whines | Glossary | Hall Of Shame | Contributions
Corporate Lawyers |
Definitions |
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 © 1999-2019 |