I think Hansen has taken a major step toward destroying that.If you owned a company, wouldn't you want your product to be thought of and associated with positive characteristics? Once you achieved that level and type of association, wouldn't you fight hard to maintain that?

Boycott Hansen's Natural Beverage
#41
Posted 16 October 2009 - 06:02 AM
#42
Posted 16 October 2009 - 06:19 AM
If someone came out with a product that diluted the Monster brand name, I'd be all for the legal action. It only takes the smallest modicum of common sense to see that Rock Art's Vermonster doesn't do that. There are probably thousands of products out there with 'monster' in their name. Like Vermonster, none of them have anything to do with energy drinks.If someone started a car company called Boston Motor Works and was pushing their cars under the BMW moniker, that's diluting a trademark. This garbage with Monster is patent lawyers trying to keep themselves busy.Many products work hard to get branded like this. Cars make great examples. Mercedes, BMW, Acura (IMHO)rely on that people think of them as "good cars." "I want a sedan, I will look and see what Mercedes has...."Ben & Jerry sold ice cream because people thought "Ben & Jerry make quality ice cream." Then the only decision was which flavor of ice cream your were going to get. But you knew they were all "good quality ice cream."Hansen has spent money to get people thinking that Hansen is "good soda" or Monster "gives you energy." As far as it being single most valuable asset, sure. You are buying Hansen brand soda. Not soda made in El Segundo, or soda in a round can or the cheapest soda on the shelf. No other assets gets you to put a six pack of Hansen soda in your cart as much as the name.If you owned a company, wouldn't you want your product to be thought of and associated with positive characteristics? Once you achieved that level and type of association, wouldn't you fight hard to maintain that?I think would save any contempt I might have for consumers that fall into some of these traps. zymot
#43
Posted 16 October 2009 - 07:44 AM
#44
Posted 25 October 2009 - 08:36 AM
#45
Posted 25 October 2009 - 09:26 AM
so I wonder what the settlement was???Just an update that a settlement has been reached on October 22nd!https://www.rockartb...en_satement.pdf
#46
Posted 25 October 2009 - 11:20 AM
#47
Posted 25 October 2009 - 11:21 AM
That sounds like a pretty good dealI heard it was very similar to what Rock Art Brewery attempted to achieve before the C&D letter. That is, that Rock Art would refrain from using the name Vermonster in any way outside of the beer industry. Hansen also agreed not to try to recoup attorney's fees.

#48
Posted 25 October 2009 - 11:22 AM
#49
Posted 25 October 2009 - 11:54 AM
I'll be honest... it doesn't sound as great to me. "Monster" needed to come to the plate and say that they wouldn't produce alcoholic beverages under a name that would confuse Vermonster or any of the other 55 beers with Monster in the name.That sounds like a pretty good deal
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users