Comments on: Fake product draws real cease-and-desist letter

By: David Schwartz

David Schwartz — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 10:58:25 +0000

The letter is meritless. No chance of confusion equals no infringement. No product for sale equals no dilution.

By: Robert

Robert — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 05:24:52 +0000

In all fairness, don’t you have to show that you’ve taken steps to protect your trademark? That’s what my lawyer explained to me when we went through the process for the name of my consulting company and several of our branded products.

If the pork council didn’t routinely send out these letters, couldn’t that weaken their trademark?

By: PKO Strany

PKO Strany — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 04:11:11 +0000

What would they say about advertising “Long Pig” as “The other, other white meat?”

By: CALACTX

CALACTX — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 14:00:05 +0000

“This is clearly the case of an attorney tooting his own unicorn!”

By: captnhal

captnhal — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 12:47:13 +0000

I’d like to know if, and how much the law firm got paid for this nonsense and if the pork board complained and got their money back.

By: VMS

VMS — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 12:36:06 +0000

You mean that the product that I’ve been buying all along that’s labeled “Unicorn Meat” is an April Fool’s joke! Hogwash!

Did anyone consider the possibility that the May 5th Cease and Desist Letter was a Cinque De Mayo joke?

By: Richard Nieporent

Richard Nieporent — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 12:30:19 +0000

I’m only surprised that PETA didn’t complain about it. 🙂

By: Ps

Ps — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 08:48:18 +0000

Like North Face and South Butt?

By: Bill Poser

Bill Poser — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 06:29:19 +0000

Even if this had been a real product, I question whether “the NEW white meat” should be considered as infringing “the OTHER white meat”. The epithets have different meanings and in fact serve to contrast distinct products.