I see what they did there

Funnily enough, that's exactly what I initially thought the other day when someone posted the new 'Margaretville" beer in the Kelsey Grammer brewery thread

https://www.beeradvocate.com/commun...er-to-open-brewery.401881/page-2#post-6251035

 

I stared at the picture for about a full minute and couldn't figure out what OP was talking about.

Yeah, no. Island Gose is nothing like Goose Island. Then again, what do I know? If Three Floyds can sue Abnormal for sounding similar to "It's not normal", then maybe anything can be a copyright infringement now.

 

We are not qualified to judge the similarity, because, among other things, we are sophisticated buyers. Further, we (or many here) have a far too literal view of what "similarity" means in trademark law.

"Another factor examined is the similarity between the marks. Similarity of marks is tested based on sight, sound and meaning. The marks will be considered in their entirety to determine any similarities. A mark that looks different from another but gives off a similar commercial impression might be considered similar and thus weigh in favor of confusion. For example, a trademark that consisted of the word MONEY might be confused with the mark $$$ because the marks have similar commercial impressions."

-- The IP Law Blog, "Trademark Infringement: Factors Considered in Consumer Confusion" By Weintraub Firm on May 9th, 2007.

 

Took another look and still think it's ridiculous, I didn't see a connection looking for it. It's beyond abstract.

 

I can understand what the OP is getting at. But is the OP 100% sure the brewer is trying to poke the bear (ab/inbev)?

After reading the description on the pic of the beer to note "passion fruit, orange and guava" in which are not original ingredients of a true gose that this is Ellicottville's take on what many of us are seeing as a trend in 'tropical styled' goses, often noted to consumers as fruited wild ales. In turn, "island" and "tropical" seem close enough to be used interchangeably in order to describe this beer. Also, after running an Untappd search, there seems to be more goses out there with "tropical" in front of their names than "island" in front of them.

Gose is a beer style. Goose is a bird. One is something I drink, the other is something I shoot. I certainly hope ab/inbev understands attention to detail and how one letter changes the meaning of these two words. If they want to go after Ellicottville, just means they're hard up for money. Didn't they tell the world, they're done buying breweries fairly recent - oh darn, I forget when they said that.

To me, it just seems we (Beer Advocates) are trying to poke the bear "ab/inbev," in which well, I'll just get my popcorn now.

 

A local story, sort of similar: https://www.bellinghamherald.com/news/business/article221169835.html

 

The only way this would apply to this beer situation is if the brewery in question decided to create a whole line of beer and called them the "Gose Island" series. One beer one time with such vague connections shouldn't even be discussed at this length like this is questionable.

 

Or even more similar to Goose Island / Island Gose:

Maternally Yours / Your Maternity Shop
Dutch Masters / Little Dutchman

In both cases, the plaintiff "won."

There are plenty of people here who didn't make any connection - and that's fine (and to be expected), but the OP did and that's more important. These things need to confidently pass a hypothetical test: If someone tells their non-beer drinking spouse to "pick up some of that Goose Island beer that the neighbors have been talking about," what are the odds that this person will buy Island Gose in a hurried mistake while they are buying everything else on their errand. For Goose Island, this is a lost sale at best and a lost potential new regular customer at worst. It's not that Ellicottville is intentionally trying to pass their product off as someone else's, but that their beer name can cause confusion. This isn't anything personal for me, and I am not a lawyer, but I would think that if there was a plaintiff and defendant in this case, the plaintiff's lawyers would be able to do this one with their eyes closed even though the average beer hobbyist doesn't "see it."

 

I would wager Ellicottville isn't putting a lot of energy into vetting their beer names to avoid these kinds of issues. They also have beers called "Oops! All Berries" (same exact name as a Captain Crunch variant) and Tie Dye IPA (several other beers have had the same or similar names including Great North Aleworks Tie Dyed which is in NH and not that far away).

 

Eventually those long, drawn out beer names will be the only ones not trademarked out of legality.

 

Stared at the pic for a few minutes before I got it. Then laughed out loud. Also wondering if the brewer did it on purpose..

 

I also made the connection immediately, though maybe helped along by the thread's title. Also read enough of the infringement threads to know there's likely enough there legally to make a complaint, if so desired. I think in some of those earlier complaints font and colors can come into play - a basic serif here like the Goose Island insignia, black and green (although GI's overall product packaging has changed fairly recently).





So no, it's obviously not a "replica" - but it's not totally dissimilar, either (to me) - and being a replica isn't the legal burden of proof, anyways (similarly my impression alone doesn't matter). FWIW, the updated packaging:

 

Of course they did.

 

If it was on purpose why not call it "Gose Island?"

 

IMHO, because that woulda been just "too" obvious.

From my view, it's blatantly obvious; the brewery calls it this, and if the lawyers don't call, nothing lost.

But, if (when) the lawyers are called, they get to play the "huh, didn't know, won't do it again, so sorry" card.

It's just business. But, also, the more small animals poking a bear? Maybe the bear gets distracted . So, maybe the bear can fight a dozen opponents, but maybe not a hundred, at once.

As a friend once said to me: "fight one bean, you gotta fight the whole burrito".

Perhaps the small breweries shouldn't think so small?

 

I don't think it is obvious or even intentional. If this was 2014 maybe but not today.
The pronunciation is just too off for anyone who can say gose properly or has common sense. How about Island IPA or Island Porter?

Now is someone puts out an IPA and calls it House Trees sure there you go. This one just is not that that the way I see it.

I like your metaphors though.

 

But, House Trees does not have the weight Inbev does. What if a brewery named a 4/16 pack Murk-uh-Lobe?

No common words, so, no issues?

Again, I think the brewery did it intentionally, and the moment the letter arrives from Inbev, in a nicely (probably already written) letter, they respond, publicly ; A: hey, the big guy is trying to push us around, and, well, we were just joking anyway. B: we wouldn't ever repeat this behavior. So sorry.

Any publicity is good publicity, as long as the names are spelled correctly .

Again, I approve of poking the bear, as long as you don't whine to me when the bear rips your arm off.

 

That would be brilliant.

 

Ahh , my comment wasn't as funny as I thought, but once I hit reply......

Sorry .

 

Remember, too, that Anheuser-Busch sued a company which produced a product called "Buttwiper":
Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. VIP Products, LLC, 2008 WL 4619702 (E.D. MO. 2008)

--- and that was for a dog squeeze toy:

(BA "REX" reviewed it by noting:
"... a slight "vinyl" aftertaste, but otherwise hoppier and more flavorful than Budweiser".)