Petition to get Bells to stop squeezing Innovation Brewing

The Bells tent at Hunahpu Day is going to be like a ghost town!

 

I really hope they are getting the blowback now. Their Facebook and Twitter is FULL of pissed off folks who are saying they won't buy any more Bells until they drop the bullshit lawsuit.

 

it sure sounded like a dick move by Bells from the onset but just read this from Laura Bell (via facebook) and gave me some pause....not saying Bells is in the right by a long shot but maybe not as dickish as it appears they were at first

To our Bell’s customers and the passionate craft beer community,

We want to clear up a few things regarding our federal trademark dispute with Innovation Brewing.

1. We have not, and are not asking them to change their name or their logo. There is no lawsuit. We are not suing them. We have not asked them for money. We have not asked them to stop selling their beer. We are asking them to withdraw their federal trademark application.

2. Our concern is with their United States trademark application and potential impact on our brand, which we have spent 30 years building.

3. I personally reached out to Innovation Brewing to try to settle this matter in February, 2014 and attempted to talk about this brewer to brewer instead of involving lawyers. Our efforts were rebuffed and Innovation Brewing choose to pursue this in the legal system.

4. Over the last year, we have offered co-existence agreements and have offered to pay for their legal fees. We tried to find solutions that would work for both of us. Their response was to ask for an exorbitant amount of money and we did not feel that was a collaborative solution.

5. All offers that we proposed were rejected and after more than a year of discussion regrettably, this matter has moved to the federal trademark office.

We have the utmost respect for Innovation Brewing and we are going to keep any comments we have regarding this matter positive, honest, and collaborative. We want them to continue to brew and do the good work they’re doing under their own name.

We hope to resolve this as swiftly as the system will allow.

The passion that we have seen over the past few days is a testament to how much the beer industry means to those who support it and why we are proud to be a part of it. We always appreciate further feedback and invite everyone to continue to share their concerns with us directly:http://bellsbeer.com/contact/

Sincerely,

Laura S. Bell
Vice President
Bell’s Brewery, Inc.

 

It isn't a lawsuit.

 

Bad semantics on my part. Should be "dispute/challenge".

 

Just because someone is small doesn't mean they can't be the bully in a situation.

 

Bells is still trying to get them indirectly to change their name. If a brewery can't trademark their name, they will have no brand trademark themselves. Nobody with any aspirations will go forward with an un-trademarked name and therefor have to change it and re-brand and file a new trademark request.

Bells raised the challenge, not Innovation. Innovation just filed the trademark application. Since they couldn't work out an agreement for Bells to drop the challenge, the next step in the challenge is a court case. Bells offered them X amount of money to drop the trademark request but Innovation rejected their offer and countered with an amount deemed exorbitant by Bells. If it wasn't important to Innovation, they would have taken the money and changed their name. Apparently it is so they are proceeding with their trademark request.

They aren't being the bully, but they aren't backing down from what they feel is right. Bells picked the fight but the little guy is pushing back.

 

If a business is going to close over a trademark issue, you really have zero business being in business. This is purely over-dramatizing the situation. If it's really to that point for Innovation (after Bell's offered to pay the legal fees!) it's entirely of their own doing.

If you aren't going to back down, then be prepared to fight the fight. Don't whine about it. Larry Bell never whined when Molson came after him, or when he stood up against NYC and distributors in other places. He simply was an obstinate and immovable figurehead who didn't take crap from anyone.

In my opinion, the people who take these issues and do something "innovative" with them, are the ones that really come out on top and are truly great breweries. Good examples: Oberon (irony!), Undead Party Crasher, Disputin/Cease & Desist, Collaboration Not Litigation...

There is nothing in a name. Especially an un-innovative one. Wahhhhh! We chose a boring name and we want to keep it. Who cares. The ability to work through a situation creatively is the sign of a great business owner (and more of what craft is about beyond just being the cool little guys). Shane's perspective and comments (from Sixpoint) on the Oasis/New Belgium issue were spot on. All brewers should take what he said to heart and move on.

Some of these trademark disputes are starting to bore me.

 

Beginning to think small breweries think they can get away with this crap because of the Lagunita's suit.

 

You realize that no lawsuit exists right?

and after looking at it again, pretty much everything that was stated on the petition page is either horribly twisted in favor of Innovation Brewing or just flat out wrong.

 

What crap, exactly?

 

Refuse to try and work an agreement outside of the courts, then try and play themselves out as the victim in the news. This is Oasis vs NBB all over again. It didn't work out for Oasis, and in the long run it won't work out for Innovation since it isn't even the same kind of case as Lagunitas vs SN. Both Bell's and NBB. You can't shame someone out of a legitimate trademark claim if they're willing to fight for their IP.

 

Throwing a hissy fit and putting the dirty laundry out for all to see, for one (in order to get a PR gain at the expense of someone else).
Being stubborn and not having the maturity to find an amiable solution between two deserving parties, secondly.
Fighting over something inane - a very generic, and frankly, boring name, third.
Thumbing their nose at a company that laid the foundation for many other breweries to come along and do their thing. (Larry Bell vs. asshole distributors, anyone?)
Being tools.

Agree to this.

 

Gets more interesting.

https://www.facebook.com/innovationbrewing/posts/455657244592313


Innovation Brewing
56 mins ·


To Our Wonderful Craft Beer Community:

We felt it was important to get our story out to the media because this is an important matter for the craft beer industry. We did not intend (nor do we want to) have a social media battle with Bell's, but because of allegations posted on Bell’s Brewery’s Facebook page we now have to defend ourselves. Settlement discussions are protected communications that are not to be disclosed publicly, so out of respect to Bell’s Brewery’s rights we would never have disclosed them. Furthermore, Mr. Bell pointedly stated that he would not “play this out on social media” – and so we again respected his wishes by keeping the details to ourselves. Now, it appears they changed their mind.

We are planning to deliver a full statement of the facts and events that have brought us to this point. Until then, we feel it necessary to respond to Ms. Bell’s enumerated allegations. Thank you for continuing to support and believe in us. You keep us going through this difficult time.

1. Yes, this is a TM proceeding and not a lawsuit, although it is like a lawsuit, requiring legal representation, being personally deposed, and including a trial. They are asking us to withdraw our federal trademark application for our brand name.
2. We do not believe that any human on earth would confuse Innovation Brewing with Bell’s Brewery, despite their slogans.
3. Laura Bell did contact me at 7:00 pm the night before their opposition filing was due. They had already hired attorneys to represent them and file for their extension to file the opposition. We had not hired an attorney. After she advised us that she would “let us” keep using the name in NC only, and never expand beyond it, she said that we had until the next day at 5:00 PM to respond. That is 22 hours to find an attorney and decide on the future of our business. That was the one and only attempt Ms. Bell made to contact me. From there their attorneys took over.
4. Not a single co-existence agreement has ever been presented to us by Bell's. In fact it was we who submitted a written co-existence agreement – subsequently declined by Bell’s. The only monetary compensation they have ever offered us was $2,500 which was to cover the inconvenience of being forced to abandon our trademark and go register a different one. The “legal fees”, as Ms. Bell puts it, brought on by their legal action against us, may exceed $50,000. We did not feel like being bought off.
5. This matter was before the TM office one day after she began talking to us. No offer has ever been presented to us other than the offer to limit our business to NC or take $2,500 to start over and build a new brand. We believe in our business, so those are not really offers at all.
6. In regards to Laura Bell stating "we hope to resolve this as swiftly as the system will allow" we suggested the accelerated trademark opposition process that would have brought this to a legal end much sooner and with far less expense, but Bell's denied it.

You great people don’t deserve to be peppered with sides of the story. So we will give you a full account of the facts so you can decide for yourself. We are good people and we know we have your support. Stay tuned.

-Chip and Nicole

 

Bell's felt compelled to respond (again) considering the response they are getting. Can't really blame them seeing as how unreasonably out of control this stuff gets/has gotten.

So why not take the $2,500 and come up with a better name and brand that isn't so generic? (And one being used by someone else as well.)

So they have made a clear choice to fight this. Deal with it then. No one is forcing them to do so. Don't choose to fight someone and then cry about getting punched in the nose.

Sounds a bit arrogant. Business is business. You can feel nice about yourselves all you want, but at the end of the day, the bottom line is a business one.

And if you believe in your business, make it work and make it a success. Bogging yourself down in legalities only drags you away from what should remain your focus: growing and establishing yourselves.

 

Your position is really, really odd. I imagine you a Philistine complaining that David used a sling and a rock against Goliath.

The two sides are still coming out, and they are certainly shaded by the party posting them. We'll probably never know the whole story. But, it is clear to me that Bells is trying to keep a small batch brewery from trademarking their name despite the lack of any trademark or IP being registered or held by Bells in anyway. Most likely way to accomplish this? Forcing a small startup into litigation and bankruptcy therefrom.

I've not made up my mind on this one, but it sure doesn't look good for Bells to me.

 

I'm just going to assume you are a parody, posting for attention.