Pete losing Flor de Lis symbol??

[Crypto Sailor]

I have tatuaje on my license plate...pete please don't sue me I'm a broke SOB who loves your smokes!!

 

[njstone]

I have tatuaje on my license plate...pete please don't sue me I'm a broke SOB who loves your smokes!!

Lol that's awesome, Brian.

 

[mcroom]

The only winners could be attorneys. BTW, the symbols look different enough to me but I am far from being an attorney.

 

[RobustoMoe]

If this is true... Pete has nothing to worry about. The logos are completely different. To add another point, didnt they steal the Monte name from the CC monte? I want to see what will happen to the name if/once the embargo is lifted, free trade = lawsuit!

Exactly my thoughts.

 

[El Baton]

The folks at Swedish Match are throwing their weight around. Perhaps if they took the resources, both physical and fiscal, and through them behind their sticks, this would be a moot point.

Bottom line, their sticks (for the most part) suck, and Pete's don't!

 

[smokinghole]

In addition to the Boy Scouts, The Saints, and Tatuaje, Altadis would also have to take on the Roman Catholic Church. As much money as Altadis may have I know the Pope and the rest of the Vatican has MUCH MUCH MUCH more. One of their works of art is worth more than Altadis as a company. The church I grew up in now has fleur de lis all over the wall.

 

[RobustoMoe]

In addition to the Boy Scouts, The Saints, and Tatuaje, Altadis would also have to take on the Roman Catholic Church. As much money as Altadis may have I know the Pope and the rest of the Vatican has MUCH MUCH MUCH more. One of their works of art is worth more than Altadis as a company. The church I grew up in now has fleur de lis all over the wall.

:rolling:

 

[VirginIslander]

Then VirginIslander's arm!

My papers were served to me yesterday, along with a 3 pack MC sampler and an appointment with a plastic surgeon. They said to write "not this arm!!!" on my right arm

 

[Josh.CHI]

I think France is going to sue them all if altadis pushes forward

 

[Josh.CHI]

just saw eodcoles post... so I guess I mean +1

 

[3rdworldchild]

If a party owns the rights to a particular trademark, that party can sue subsequent parties for trademark infringement. 15 U.S.C. �� 1114, 1125. The standard is "likelihood of confusion." To be more specific, the use of a trademark in connection with the sale of a good constitutes infringement if it is likely to cause consumer confusion as to the source of those goods or as to the sponsorship or approval of such goods. In deciding whether consumers are likely to be confused, the courts will typically look to a number of factors, including: (1) the strength of the mark; (2) the proximity of the goods; (3) the similarity of the marks; (4) evidence of actual confusion; (5) the similarity of marketing channels used; (6) the degree of caution exercised by the typical purchaser; (7) the defendant's intent. Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Elect. Corp., 287 F.2d 492 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 820 (1961).

Also, I am sure Pete has his attorneys too.

 

[smokemifugotem]

All I have to say is that if this is true...Pete needs to counter sue on the fact that they are making shitty cigars with his Flor De Lis symbol on it...

 

[xddco]

I can't believe that the flor de lis would be a trademarked symbol, don't think Pete will have a problem. Of course, that's just my .02

I agree... maybe France should sue too..... it's a French symbol, I believe.
This sounds like a wolf piss thing..... if Altadis (domestic) wasn't stuck in the 1980s, they wouldn't have time to worry about this crap... they'd be selling out every cigar they made....rather than losing market share to dion, Pepin, Pete...and all the others who have captured the interest of cigar smokers everywhere. IMHO. :yes:

 

[Mast3r_Shake]

If a party owns the rights to a particular trademark, that party can sue subsequent parties for trademark infringement. 15 U.S.C. �� 1114, 1125. The standard is "likelihood of confusion." To be more specific, the use of a trademark in connection with the sale of a good constitutes infringement if it is likely to cause consumer confusion as to the source of those goods or as to the sponsorship or approval of such goods. In deciding whether consumers are likely to be confused, the courts will typically look to a number of factors, including: (1) the strength of the mark; (2) the proximity of the goods; (3) the similarity of the marks; (4) evidence of actual confusion; (5) the similarity of marketing channels used; (6) the degree of caution exercised by the typical purchaser; (7) the defendant's intent. Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Elect. Corp., 287 F.2d 492 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 820 (1961).

Also, I am sure Pete has his attorneys too.

(1) the strength of the mark - I think Pete would lose here
(2) the proximity of the goods - He would lose this because both are cigars
(3) the similarity of the marks - Lose here, both are Flor de Lis
(4) evidence of actual confusion - This would be a battle which costs $$$
(5) the similarity of marketing channels used - Lose here
(6) the degree of caution exercised by the typical purchaser - Battle so more $$$
(7) the defendant's intent - Think he wins this one, but again proving it costs $$$


Lets say Pete and his company are worth 100 Million and Alt is worth 10 Billion (using this to compare very large to small), do you really think he can afford to call there bluff. If they did actually sue he would actually have to get a whole lot of lawyers to fight those above points and that would cost a whole lot of money. Alt knows they can out spend him.

Again in another thread a while back I said that how could the Flor de Lis be trademarked because of what it is, but I didn't think about proximity of goods. In this case the symbol resides on two like products. I bet the saints would maybe have a problem is Pete made a black and gold band and called the stick Tat Saints Reserva.

Again legal things are complicated and I am not a lawyer but if this is true (which I would love to know) it could be bad news for Pete which is unfortunate because he only cars about guys like us.

 

[Mast3r_Shake]

This is interesting about the Flor de Lis in the cigar world:

http://cigarlaw.wordpress.com/2009/08/11/05-05-03-design-code-for-fleur-de-lis/

 

[Mast3r_Shake]

Someone from another site brought up a good point here:

"I wonder if this issue has arisen now based on Tatuaje's recent effort to export cigars abroad. Altadis owns a portion of Habanos. Habanos owns (and distributes) Cuban Montecristos. Maybe the claim is that foreign consumers of Cuban Montecristos might buy the newly-exported Tatuajes thinking they were Montecristos? It's the same argument that caused Pete to remove the 'Havana VI' markings from the cigars that he exports to avoid offending Habanos." - Regis

 

[smokemifugotem]

This is interesting about the Flor de Lis in the cigar world:

http://cigarlaw.wordpress.com/2009/08/11/05-05-03-design-code-for-fleur-de-lis/

I think this just says it all...they are two different designs...they can copyright a design, but not everything that is similar. I look at it like Ford sueing every car maker for making a car...it might not be exactly like a ford...but there are 4 wheels and a body...now gimme ur money...

 

[tatuaje]

Let's just say that many people use a fleur in the logos or artwork. Altadis actually registered a new fleur design 15 days ago. Why? To be continued.

P.S. So if I were distant or short with anyone at the show, you can see I had a lot on my mind but also way too busy for a few people to handle. My A.D.D kicked into overdrive.

 

[smokemifugotem]

Thanks for clearing up Pete...those guys sound like a bunch of douches...keep doin what your doin...there is only one reason for them to even step up...jealousy! Keep it real Pete!

 

[Mast3r_Shake]

Thank you Pete. Just keep making the quality sticks you make!!

Good luck, you have my support (if that means anything)!