Cerveceria Costa Rica (Magic Hat) Suing West Sixth Brewing

Who says Magic Hat has the right of refusal in the first place? They are already conflating two designs that look really nothing alike. I could understand West Sixth's reservations considering the fact that the only reason they're here in the first place is due to Magic Hat's overly-expansive way of defining their own mark.

 

Couldn't tell you ... though even with option three you still risk going to option two if it does not work out.

 

They actually told Georgetown that they would allow them to use 9 Lb. Porter if Georgetown would allow Magic Hat to own the name of 9 lb porter. Magic Hat would then license the use to Georgetown for no fee. Crazy entitlement syndrome.

 

I'd be curious to see a tally of people who had responded on this thread. The other thing to keep in mind is that the legal standard isn't whether or not the logos have a casual resemblance or similar elements, but rather whether there is genuine risk of confusion in the mind of the projected end-consumer. I have a feeling that even some of those on this thread noting the similarities wouldn't accidentally mistake #9 for West Sixth and vice versa.

 

Businesses always call for "free markets", so let's use free markets. I am not going to buy Magic Hat. I will buy West 6th. I have the right to vote with my $$ and that is EXACTLY what I am going to do. Viva capitalism.

 

Love seeing all that blatant bias against Magic Hat because some poor label designer couldn't come up with a more original logo. I don't expect anyone to mix up a 6 and a 9 but the fact that the numbers are printed in a strikingly similar font and there also happens to be an 8-pointed star in the logo is just poor design on West Sixth part. I don't like MH and certainly think a lawsuit is a bit overkill, but they do at least have a legitimate reason to defend their trademark. The average craft beer customer (i.e. NOT a BeerAdvocate user or beer geek) could easily see that logo and think it's another beer produced by Magic Hat on a crowded shelf with hundreds of other brews.

 

Do you see anything that could mix up the MH #9 logo with that Georgetown 9 Lb. Porter logo?

 

I'm not going to disagree that Magic Hat's interpretation of their trademark might well be "overly-expansive," but when it comes to the star/compass it was West Sixth's idea to get rid of it - so obviously they thought it was on the less expansive side of things.

I think we're talking past each other when it comes to what you're calling "right of refusal". Magic Hat didn't ask for any such right; what happened was West Sixth asked them to give up their right to protest a design without showing them what the design was in the first place. Do you dispute the fact that a trademark holder has a right to defend their trademark by protesting a competitor's use of a similar design?

Why should Magic Hat be expected to take it on faith that a redesign of West Sixth's products would get rid of any and all confusion? They didn't say that any and all design ideas had to be cleared with them ahead of time; they simply weren't willing to promise not to continue their complaint if a redesign failed to differentiate to an acceptable extent.

Frankly, I don't see how any trademark holder could possibly agree not to protest a design that they haven't seen yet. Surely no lawyer would ever sign away a client's rights to defend their trademark, which is what West Sixth was asking them to do. Let's look at the letters.

From West Sixth's list of suggested compromise agreements:
"4. West Sixth will either amend its current federal trademark application or will re-file the application to remove or replace the old "dingbat" with a new design.
5. Magic Hat agrees to neither oppose West Sixth's pending application nor otherwise challenge the use of West Sixth's composite mark with the wording WEST SIXTH BREWING alone or in conjunction with the numeral "6" and new compass design."

From Magic Hat's response:
"You request that Magic Hat agree that it will not oppose West Sixth's pending trademark application or West Sixth's use of a mark that contains (or will contain) West Sixth's new compass design. ...Magic Hat cannot make such an agreement without evaluating the new compass design."

Note the language of each excerpt. The W6 lawyers use the future tense in #4, referring to their clients' proposed redesign, and then use the present tense in #5 regarding MH's required actions. They are demanding that MH agree now not to oppose a trademark application that hasn't been made yet.

Then, note the verb in MH's response: "cannot." Not "will not," not "declines to," not "would prefer not to," but simply "cannot." It's impossible for their lawyers to agree not to assert their clients' IP rights over a redesign that they haven't had the chance to evaluate.

This isn't a dick move, it's just common sense.

 

Suing over this one....dick move...or common sense?

 

Except is isnt. I have covered the differences in the fonts in a post in this thread, they arent similar at all.

The biggest dick move in everything done here, the part that really pisses me off, is MH referring to the West 6th logo as an "inverted nine" repeatedly in their letter. That is bullshit of the highest order.

I will yell for emphasis:

A SIX IS NOT AN INVERTED NINE. A SIX IS A SIX.

 

Absolutely not. The font for the number is drastically different and their is no star. That porter is a pretty boring and plain label but it's nothing like Magic Hat. It's easy to get caught up in focusing on just the number itself, but in reality there is a lot more going on in each logo. The argument can (and likely will) be made that the similarity of the W6th and #9 logos could lead someone to thinking that they are made by the same brewery. BA's and geeks will know better, but the average consumer perusing the shelves full of hundreds of different beers may not notice those differences, especially since the eyes are naturally drawn to flashy logos and not to the text on the can/bottle.

 

Well that's the label that Magic Hat threatened to sue Georgetown over, about the same issues. I have no reason to think their judgement is any better here.

 

I was thinking the exact same thing!

First, West 6th reasoning for reneging on their own offer, as stated by them in their last letter was that they thought the change was cost prohibitive. Which is stupid, because they should have never offered in the first place. Furthermore, if someone is defending their copyright, trademark, patent, etc. it's not their problem if it's cost prohibitive for the other party.

So you admit they reneged, but then claim there's something "missing from the chain"? Between the W6th and MH they've made public almost everything except private conversations with their respective lawyers. Don't you think if there was something "in the chain" that damned or vindicated either Magic Hat or West 6th that one of them would have provided it by now? Come on.... you're clearly not being objective about this. But I still appreciate that you are giving this more thought than the majority of those in the "Magic-Hat-Sucks" camp.

Seeing as how Magic Hat #9 is quite popular among non-beer geeks (i.e. people that don't regularly read about beer, post in forums about beer, write detailed beer tasting reviews, or generally obsess over their beer) there could be a lot more confusion over the logos than you are giving credit. Will anyone who is a member of Beer Advocate mix up the labels? ...hell no! Could "average Joe or Jane" who vaguely remembers enjoying a #9 [or more likely "some number beer"] from when they were semi-drunk at a bar weeks or month(s) ago mix up the logos? I say it's very possible that they could get confused.... but that's just like, uh, my opinion, man.

 

It doesn't matter what the number is. They could be called West 1st or West 204th and it wouldn't make a difference. I agree, the fonts are not 100% exactly the the same, but they are certainly in the same style and the presence of an 8 pointed star next to a similar looking number is just too much of a coincidence for me to believe. Similar fonts and features could be argued as deceiving enough, regardless of whether or not us knowledgeable BA's would know better.

 

My wife just looked at them and said there was no way she could ever mix those labels up....her exact words were, different fonts, different number, different colors. Definitely not a "beer geek".

 

Really? I haven't bought a MH beer in years for a number of reasons but I didn't know about that Georgetown logo. Either way, I still feel that the West 6th logo is just weak and unoriginal label design.

 

I maintain that only the very laziest craft beer customer could look at the West Sixth logo and think they were buying a Magic Hat product. Anyone who would confuse these two logos would also be at risk for confusing Grolsch and Heineken. Natty Light and Busch. Beck's and Stella Artois.

 

Admittedly, I'm partly just playing devils advocate here because I don't buy MH and West 6th isn't sold around here so I have no vested interest. The West 6th logo is oddly similar IMO though and thats the exact argument I could see being made by the lawyers.

 

I work for a bar in TAcoma, and we came out with some badass hats....they had a green hop on the left hand side of the hat....I saw another hat from a brewery that looked dead on ours.....I mean dead on....they were new, they were also not from this area. I really don't think that they could have copied our design..but it was close to dead on.

Then I see another hat from another brewery. DEAD ON ours...even the colors. Total ripoff....except that the hat ended up predating ours by about 2 years. There is no way we ripped off this design, never had seen it before.

It was coincidence. With all the new breweries opeening on a daily basis in this country, it's not suprising that someone is going to have something similar looking.

Litigation, or the threat of litigation is not the answer. Bunch of crap, and it pisses me off.

The Georgetown Brewery in Seattle is a great example of a locally grown brewery that donates time, money, and product to a ton of charitable causes, both local and national. That these douche canoes at Magic Hat came after them for that 9 lb. Hammer porter pisses me off to no end. The 9 lb hammer tavern is an institution in Seattle and godforbid a local brewery brews them their own labeled beer. Georgetown is draft only...no bottles or cans.

This is not beer advocacy. It's fucking throwing your money/weight around and it's bullshit. If you think this is the right thing to do, then you really need to rethink whether you grasp what the craft beer movement is about.

Collaboration, not litigation. Avery and Russian River got it right. Magic Hat can't?

 

http://brewyorknewyork.com/post/51103816741/west-sixth-magic-hat-dispute-enough-bickering-and

Local beer writer Chris O'Leary put out a great piece on the lawsuit, really sees both sides. Unsure if this has been posted but I thought it was well done.