I see what they did there

You could make a case in court that the brewer meant the backwards double meaning, but then, maybe not and there won't be anything come of it.

 

I suspect InBev probably has the financial strength to apply a legal beatdown on pretty much any independent brewery even if the BA got involved. I suppose it simply comes down to the whims of InBev whether or not the persue a C and D order.

 

I seriously doubt AB-InBev decides whether to address any trademark infringement based on a "whim".

 

I don't know, their "Whim Department" employs over 3 dozen people.

That seemed funnier in my head than it does now that I've written it down, but I guess I'm committed now.

 

If they have to spend time and effort defending it, I cannot imagine that the novelty of attention was worth it.

Why poke the bear???

 

Why not? Sometimes bears need poking. Gose is a legitimate style, so no issue there. They might have a point with Island, but.....

 

Whoever gets a trademark on the word the is going to kill it...

From the outside looking in a few of these copyright lawsuits sure look whimsical. I mean if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck chances are it's a duck.

 

Examples?

 

You don't recall InBev sending a town cryer to read a cease and desist order to a small brewery brewing dilly dilly ipa? That is probably the most whimsical of any C&D order sent to anyone. Ever.

 

There is a difference in meaning between on a whim (impulsive) and whimsical (humorous).

I noted your subtle change in meaning in your second post, and I assumed this would be your example. It is obvious the dilly dilly C&D was not done "on a whim" even though it was "whimsical".

 

My initial definition of whim was intended to come across as an unexplainable decision. Neither of us can conclude what conditions lead to a decision by InBev to persue legal action in instances like the OP brings to light. My use of whimsy was based on fanciful behavior, and I feel both words can be exchanged in regard to both situations in that sending a town cryer is both fanciful and unexplainable behavior as is the behavior of corporate executives in my personal estimation.

 

That price point seems terrible. Maybe $12-14 for a sixer. But a four pack of 12 oz. bottles? They almost deserve to be sued

 

Not to sound obtuse but totally missing the point of this post?

 

Goose Island - Island Gose.

Will the lawyers have a bone to chew, or.....

 

is a Goose a Gose.

/thread.

 

Well, that's really stretching it, thanks for the clarification.

 

+1 big stretch

 

Definitely not "/thread." Surely almost all of the people in the US have no idea what a Gose is. Granted, seeing this beer packaging in the context of this thread (as opposed to in a store) already creates bias in my perception of it, but my knee-jerk reaction is that this is easily a case of deliberate trademark infringement OR unintended but careless trademark infringement. I would guess that the only legal hope that Ellicottville has here is to claim that "Gose" is a "descriptive" word of their product since it's a "style" of beer... but that would have more to do with Ellicottville not being able to trademark their own beer name. The "likelihood of confusion" between these beers for a non-BeerAdvocate audience seems like an easy case (not a "big stretch" at all in my eyes), and the strength of the senior mark is a no-brainer.

Or kill themselves when they realize that they've wasted their time and money trying to play a trademark game that would never actually work.

 

I think the issue is a quick glance could have someone grab this thinking it’s goose island product.

Enjoy