E And J Gallo Sends Cease And Desist Trademark Notice To E And B Beer

from the bullies-be-bullying dept

Thu, Jul 27th 2017 6:27pm — Timothy Geigner

It's been a refreshing bit of time since we've last written about a silly trademark dispute in the beer and alcohol space, so perhaps you, the dear Techdirt reader, had thought that the complete fuster-cluck that is trademark and alcohol had somehow begun to calm the hell down. Sadly, not so much, it seems. To serve as one reminder, E & J Gallo, maker of wines and spirits and a company that has previously demonstrated its inability to tell different kinds of drinks apart, has sent a cease and desist notice to E & B Beer, a company that makes, you know, beer.

The case pits well known wine and liquor company E and J Gallo against E and B Beer. The owner of Eand B, Santo Landa, says he sees no similarity and feels like this is a case of a big company trying to stomp out the little guy.E and B Beer has been around since the late 1800s in Detroit. It's already been trademarked once before.

Since buying the brand, Landa applied for his own trademark but he's run into a roadblock. An attorney for E and J sent a legal notice saying similarities may cause confusion for customers.

So, let's start with the names of each company. It should be immediately clear that any concern about confusion between the two names is fairly silly. The only similarity between them is the "E and" at the start of each name. Everything else about the names is distinct, from the second initial used to the inclusion of another name (Gallo) and the other mark's description of what the product is (beer). Even if we set aside my personal quest to have the Trademark Office realize that beer, wine, and spirits are all distinct industries and should be treated as such for the purposes of trademark, there's little likelihood of confusion purely from the names of each business. Add to that the logos for each company are beyond distinct and it seems clear that confusion ain't going to be a thing.

None of each company's various iterations of their logos appear to be any more similar than the above. Other than the start of the name and both logos having red in them, there's just nothing there. Certainly not enough to rise to the level of trademark infringement. Which is probably why Landa himself can't figure out what the issue is and sees this as nothing more than a bullying attempt by a larger company.

"I'd like to get an explanation as to what they think is confusion," he says.

The most troubling thing for Landa? He insists he can win a legal fight, but not without big money - money he simply doesn't have.

Now, E and J Gallo apparently offered Landa the rights to keep his name, but only if he limited his sales to 2 states. If you think that's reasonable, you aren't paying attention, because there's nothing remotely like trademark infringement here and there is no reason for Landa to give up his right to sell anywhere at all, never mind limiting himself to 4% of the country's states.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: beer, trademark, wine
Companies: e & b beer, e & j gallo

24 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 27 Jul 2017 @ 5:35pm

Qualities of growth, or tasting
Is there any chance that E&J's attorneys wrote this up after attending a product sampling, or is it axiomatic that once one becomes big, they also become bullies?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pixelation, 27 Jul 2017 @ 6:50pm

And fun was had by all!
I think they should have a drinking contest to determine the outcome.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 27 Jul 2017 @ 7:09pm
  
  Re: And fun was had by all!
  Absolutely, make them drink their own products (balanced for alcohol by volume) and the police should have a sobriety checkpoint outside to determine the winner (high score), along with a rank of cabs to take people home...or not.
  
  They might also balance the results by who brings the most/least lawyers, but don't tell them this in advance.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
orbitalinsertion (profile), 27 Jul 2017 @ 8:13pm

As they also own the Batles and Jaymes mark, maybe E & J Gallo think they have the rights to anything something and something in any sort of drinky space.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2017 @ 11:24pm

So why doesn't a techdirt lawyer/reader offer to do a free defense of the beer company and stick one up the wine company's arse?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
OldMugwump (profile), 28 Jul 2017 @ 4:58am

Why "big money"?

The most troubling thing for Landa? He insists he can win a legal fight, but not without big money - money he simply doesn't have.

I know there a lot of lawyers here at Techdirt.

Can somebody please explain why fighting and winning this requires "big money"?

IANAL (as I've amply demonstrated in the past). But surely there is some process for adjudicating this dispute before the PTO.

Why does that process, in a simple case like this, require "big money"? I find it hard to imagine it would require more than a few hours for a competent trademark attorney to draft a document disputing Gallo's claim.

So - what? $2000? Is that "big money" for a brewery?

Somebody please explain.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2017 @ 7:08am
  
  Re: Why "big money"?
  The initial reply isn't that expensive, but that initial reply just starts the battle. After that is discovery, and responses, and sur-responses, and appeals, and motions, and counter-motions, ad naseum. Each of those takes some time for your lawyer to write and file, and lawyers tend to expect to get paid to manage the paperwork and writing the filings. 5 minutes of work here and 5 minutes there adds up to a billable hour here and a billable hour there (or half hours) The company with the deeper pockets can afford to keep filing trivial and nonsense paperwork that you have to reply to until you can't afford to fight anymore.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - OldMugwump (profile), 28 Jul 2017 @ 7:44am
    
    Re: Re: Why "big money"?
    Still, it's an intrinsically simple case.
    
    How much does that add up to, realistically? A couple hours a month?
    
    That doesn't strike me as "big money" for a business of 10 or 20 people. And at some point either there will be a resolution or Gallo will give up (esp. if they're getting bad publicity, which they are).
    
    Am I not getting something? Why does this guy think he can't fight this?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2017 @ 7:51am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Why "big money"?
      It may be a simple case, but that has nothing to do with how many motions filings etc. that the bullies lawyer can file, and therefore how much cost they can impose on the defendants.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - OldMugwump (profile), 28 Jul 2017 @ 9:30am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Why "big money"?
        Do you speak from experience as an attorney or litigant?
        
        If you're correct, and if the courts don't address the justice of that via assignment of costs, etc., then this is a condemnation of far more than the PTO and trademark law - it's a condemnation of our entire legal system.
        
        But I don't know if you're correct.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2017 @ 5:09am

Rewards...
I feel that if judges would award the accusers' brand name to the defender if the litigation prooved frivoulous, a lot of these lawsuits would simply not happen...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- OldMugwump (profile), 28 Jul 2017 @ 5:17am
  
  Re: Rewards...
  That's probably overdoing it.
  
  But awarding double or triple costs...yes.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Annonymouse, 28 Jul 2017 @ 5:58am
    
    Re: Re: Rewards...
    Money? Pah.
    
    Award triple hours from the loosers attorneys directly.
    That will make em sweat.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - OldMugwump (profile), 28 Jul 2017 @ 6:24am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Rewards...
      It'll make them increase the rates they charge clients.
      
      One way or another, clients pay.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oblate (profile), 28 Jul 2017 @ 7:59am

Only 2, I can think of more...

Now, E and J Gallo apparently offered Landa the rights to keep his name, but only if he limited his sales to 2 states.

Are those the states of confusion and disbelief?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2017 @ 8:13am

"perhaps you ... had thought that the complete fuster-cluck ... had somehow begun to calm the hell down"
No, but I had a minor hope that you abandoned the area as trivial, besides entirely out of your control. You've railed over trademark disputes, by my count 659 times now, and I doubt anyone outside of Techdirt readers has ever noticed. I suspect that you have an obsession with alcohol because you seem to be highly interested in trivia that relates in any way.

In any case, what's the point of presenting yet another copy-and-paste-in-names piece? What's your wished for, and practical solutions, no matter how alcohol-fueled?

(Also, try to improve as a writer: avoid even euphemisms for vulgarisms and hackneyed phrases. Those add nothing unless you're paid by the word...)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2017 @ 8:17am
  
  Re: "perhaps you ... had thought that the complete fuster-cluck ... had somehow begun to calm the hell down"
  Best not to give writing advise when you can't even complete short paragraphs without making grammatical errors.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
McGyver (profile), 28 Jul 2017 @ 10:57am

It's soooooo confusing!
Wait now...
I'm confused...
Both product are liquids, so they must be the same...
Right?
But they both use red in their logos and so does Stolichnaya vodka, so that means they are both vodkas...
Right?
And the font on the E&B logo is very similar to the font of J&R's Steakhouse and since both products use ampersands in their logos...
Both products must be Steak Vodka...
Right?
Both names start with an E and the E in E&J refers to the name Ernest, and that is very similar to Ernie, and since I know about Ernie and Bert, the B must stand for Bert...
So both products are Steak Vodka, made by the rival muppets on Sesame Street... Right?
Okay... Got it.
It was very confusing, but I figured it out.
I'm glad their stupid lawsuit cleared this up for me.
Okay, Ernie & Bert Gallo... I want my Steak Vodka now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2017 @ 12:05pm

It would help considerably if this and your future articles included images of the actual trademarks being discussed. The article from which you liberally quote suffers from the same failure. Merely FYI, the wine company you are talking about has a very large number of registered and active state, federal, and foreign trademarks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- bob, 28 Jul 2017 @ 6:02pm
  
  Re:
  Sounds like you work for the wine company.
  
  It would help considerable if you included links to the trademark images of which you speak.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- orbitalinsertion (profile), 29 Jul 2017 @ 6:36am
  
  Re:
  The ones displayed are not good enough? Then perhaps you might get the Porch Sittin' Brothers to cough up which specific marks they mean, if not the general format of X&Y. Because they don't own that format. And it doesn't matter what quantity of marks they own.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Coyoty (profile), 28 Jul 2017 @ 9:44pm

Strike That, Reverse It
Ernest & Julio Gallo was founded in 1933. E&B's logo declares they've been in business since 1873, and a quick search shows beer cans with the mark predating 1933. If E&J is claiming similarity, then E&B can reverse the charges and show that by E&J's argument, E&J are infringing on E&B. E&J's larger pockets would make lawyers salivate for the settlement they could get by applying E&J's argument back on them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DOlz (profile), 29 Jul 2017 @ 10:21am

If they can’t they think the public can't
Since E&J Gallo produces fine products such Boone’s Farm, Thunderbird, and Ripple perhaps their taste buds can no longer differentiate between different beverages.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Andrei Mincov | Trademark Factory®, 14 Aug 2017 @ 8:16am

The local brewer is asking the right question when he says, "I'd like to get an explanation as to what they think is confusion." That's what trademark disputes always come down to. Would the purchasing public be likely to be confused into thinking that products of two different manufacturers actually come from the same source. Here, the question is not whether E&B is too close to E&J but whether the overall impression created by the two logos is such that consumers with some vague recollection of the E&J logo would be likely to think they are buying the product from the same company when they get to buy beer with E&B logo. I would say that if you don't know the history behind both brands, the answer to that question is, possibly yes. Apparently, E&J does not mind that E&B keep the mark as long as they restrict their sales to Michigan and Ohio, which is probably as far as common-law would protect E&B's brand.

Andrei Mincov
Founder and CEO of Trademark Factory® / https://trademarkfactory.com, the only firm in the world that offers trademarking services with a predictable, guaranteed result, for a predictable, guaranteed budget. We can help you register your trademarks with a free comprehensive trademark search, for a single all-inclusive flat fee, with a 100% money-back guarantee.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]