M5farm
Well-known member
did you see where Jack Daniels is suing Popcorn Suttons whiskey because of there new bottle
http://www.wtsp.com/news/national/artic ... mark-fight
http://www.wtsp.com/news/national/artic ... mark-fight
M5farm":1zwlozi5 said:did you see where Jack Daniels is suing Popcorn Suttons whiskey because of there new bottle
http://www.wtsp.com/news/national/artic ... mark-fight
MO_cows":2zpestua said:Which one is a b@st@rd? The company making money off the reputation of the dead moonshiner, or the 900 pound gorilla of a company over zealous about protecting their brand? Neither one is exactly lily white if you ask me.
MO_cows":3e76on01 said:Which one is a b@st@rd? The company making money off the reputation of the dead moonshiner, or the 900 pound gorilla of a company over zealous about protecting their brand? Neither one is exactly lily white if you ask me.
3waycross":vp1thedr said:MO_cows":vp1thedr said:Which one is a b@st@rd? The company making money off the reputation of the dead moonshiner, or the 900 pound gorilla of a company over zealous about protecting their brand? Neither one is exactly lily white if you ask me.
Since when does anyone OWN the shape of a bottle. Come on!
Probably trying to intimidate them into changing the bottle or outright drive their costs up and make them less competitive. I'm sure JD has the money and the attorneys to take this far enough in court to hurt smaller distillers. In fact this could be more of a message to other small competitors to stay out of their market. If you look at what craft beer has done to the larger beer brewers these kind of lawsuits could be intended to discourage that trend in the distillery business.3waycross":1o9e20yn said:I guess my question would be did Jack Daniels patent their shape or copyright it? I have at least two other whiskey bottles on my shelf with more than a passing resemblance to the square bottle of Jack. In fact i have two different shaped bottles of Jack.
To me at least their suit seems punitive and not realistic. Why have they not seeked an injunction against Wisers or Revelstoke?
Jogeephus":2l196g77 said:MO_cows":2l196g77 said:Which one is a b@st@rd? The company making money off the reputation of the dead moonshiner, or the 900 pound gorilla of a company over zealous about protecting their brand? Neither one is exactly lily white if you ask me.
Why shouldn't Mrs. Sutton make money off her husband's work? I think it was good of Hank Williams Jr. and a few other country singers to come to her aid and make the Sutton business legitimate in the eyes of the law. Not everyone can afford the high up front tax required to make liquor that won't make you blind.
I do have to lean toward Jack Daniel's argument though because I feel the same way toward all of you who are blatantly raising four legged cattle like I do. I'm in agreement with Jack Daniels and think you should send me all of this years receipts from your cattle sales.
I definitely will not be buying any Jack in the future. Of course hadn't planned on it anyway because its pretty foul stuff of course what can you expect a preacher to know about making liquor.
Jogeephus":1et3xujf said:I agree with you on the Jackson Elvis point but I don't think this is anyway like that. They railroaded the man and used him as a scapegoat. It was so blatant many of the famous country singers came to his wife's aid and they set up the legal still.
As for it not being the same, it surely is. Its simple chemistry and as long as they use the same yeast and the same ratios in the mash its what it is. Alcohol.