Sony sues Knee Deep Brewing over "Breaking Bud"

Bad Sonny.

 

Back in the early 2000's, I received a C&D from a MLB baseball team because I used the team name on my website. It was a forum, with links to team stories and news. The C&D was delivered via email from my link on the site, and was very strong in their wording (aka: intimidating). I could no longer keep the name, any photo's, or likenesses..from that point forward. If chose to continue, I would be subject to legal litigation. Being a 40 hour workweek schmuck with a wife and kids, I took the site down.

KD should be aware that Sony has spent a lot of time in court over the years. They have been on both sides of the line.. and quite frankly, don't appear to be the most honest in their own business practices. They've been caught using Rootkit software on their music CD's and sued for price fixing et al.

After the rootkit incident, I stopped buying anything Sony.

This whole thing brings up the question.. if Sony can sue KD for the BB parody.. has anyone ever sued the makers of **** movies, who parody Hollywood movies all over the place?

 

It never ceases to amaze me how the bigger the company, the more likely they are to come after things like this! If anything, it keeps the show at the fore of people’s memories and reminds them to watch it!

 

Fantastic last point!

 

Really? More lawsuits and lawyers over this? And suing a craft beer company over a simple label? Good job setting your l sites high. You look pretty dumb. Good luck offsetting your legal costs. Geez!

 

Does SONY or whoever really think that we, the consumers, are so stupid that we will buy the beer thinking it's made by a TV show? Or sponsored, or promoted by it? Do any of us think that would make the beer worth buying, or taste better? I'm sure everyone on this site is far smarter than that. This "confusion" arguement is bogus.

A local brewery, Martin City Brewing, brews a "Hard Way IPA", that poked a bit of fun at A-B for their advertisement. A-B sued them and lost. Heh, heh, Goliath takes a fall! I toast them every time I have one of those beers, and a good IPA it is.

 

There's a show called Breaking Homicide. I wonder if they'll be sued too.

 

Interests me as a person intrigued by language.

Aside from the vague suggestion that the beer is probably hoppy imparted by the biological link between cannabis and hops (which isn't well-known to the layman consumer anyway), the name "Breaking Bud" doesn't actually pull its weight in terms of giving consumers information about the product in an appealing way. Frankly, it's a name better suited to a cannabis strain sold commercially in a Colorado dispensary - and it has the stoner (lack of) originality thereof.

Even increasingly tired pun-based names like "Hoptimum," "Hoptologist," "Hopothermia" (et al.) are at least obvious in their advertising.

 

If Knee Deep could afford to fight this, they could win if they had any record of the earlier communication from Sony where they raised no issue and seemed to applaud the name emulation. That and the length of time taking no action when they knew about it does not bode well for Sony.

At this point - after the show is long cancelled - the beer is even more of a promotion than it was when the show was still being made, so Sony would benefit from dropping the suit. That said, fewer and fewer people will get the connection so Knee Deep will likely end up renaming or dropping the beer instead of putting a lawyer's kids through college.

 

Seems this is going to come down to who has the best lawyers. My money is on Hollywood.

 

I actually don't think Sony has a legitimate case. Trademark infringement is determined by consumer confusion (i.e., if a mark confuses consumers as to the source of the goods or services, then the original mark holder can sue the infringer). This usually happens when competitors, or at least two companies in the same industry, have a similar mark attached to similar goods or services.

I don't see how Sony could argue that consumers would think that the beer originates from it.

For further reference, these are the factors courts consider when determining trademark infringement:

1. Similarity of the marks.
2. Strength of the plaintiff's mark.
3. Relatedness of products/services.
4. Defendant's intent (i.e., whether he sought to deceive consumers).
5. Actual confusion.
6. Purchaser sophistication.

The most important factors for determining confusion are 3, 4, and 5. All favor the defendant.

 

... on more issues than trademark law!

 

Sounds like they're gonna be knee deep in legal fees

 

And it’ll be a way better beer but no one will drink it.

 

In other words, a parody of a parody beer.

 

Is a beer's name obligated to 'pull its weight in terms of giving consumers information about the product'? There are a multitude of beer names that are slapped on the side of a can/bottle that have no relation to the contents of the vessel. And if you're tired of pun-based names, I would think you'd welcome a name that does not go down that road (though I will point out that Breaking Bud is, in fact, a pun -- though without using 'hop').

 

Seems reasonable to me that the brewery should have to stop using the name. But I don't agree that they should have to pay any money to Sony Pictures.

 

No, no it isn't.

Yes, I would welcome a name that does not rely on a cheap pun. And you're right: "Breaking Bud" is exactly one such name.

"Breaking Bud" is neither an informative nor a clever or inventive moniker for a beer. But I imagine someone thought it was clever, and I can't figure out why. The connection to cannabis is too tenuous, and the pun utilized is too cheap.