Want to place an ad email email@example.com
$50+GST / month
Have to wonder if the real commissioner would have a different opinion than the "assistant".... you know when you want to make a compliant in a store you get the "manager" not the "assistant".
As said, it's a moot point, but we have seen that IPONZ has revoked some of the trademark categories, so let's accept that law has prevailed, similar to the anti-smacking law...... (I still see kids being killed by abusive parents.... welcome to the nanny state).
Here is a few direct quote to stimulate a bit of thought. Moot point mind you as the lawyers have already thrashed it about. Funny thing about lawyer though is that by average they are always wrong 50% of the time.
From Section 17 of the Trademarks act:
The Commissioner must not register as a trade mark or part of a trade mark any matter—
(a) the use of which would be likely to deceive or cause confusion; or
and this:The Commissioner must not register a trade mark if the application is made in bad faith.
Or from the IPONZ site: Trademarks can't be terms that are customary in the trade. (emphasis on trade?)
My thoughts exactly Christian. That said, my anger remains, though not at DB. I am concerned that IPONZ' incompetence continues, and can impact a lot more than a style of mixed beer. SOBA's argument was never about Radler(tm). It was about the fact that IPONZ can and do allow a business to trademark a generic term and require little more than "people in NZ haven't heard of it yet". For example, if I'd timetravelled back to 1970 and trademarked Pinot Gris, that would have been perfectly acceptable by IPONZ' terrible standards. This should not stand. Unfortunately, our only option was to make it about Radler(tm).
Those of you who attended SOBA's Matariki festival may already know that we have to change the name next year, as IPONZ have allowed Matariki Wines to trademark that word also, when used in conjunction with any alcoholic beverage or situation involving beverages. Yes, that means they have a trademark on New Year.
So I repeat, DB may not be the best corporate citizen for taking advantage of terrible law, and given that they knew damn well what a radler was when they registered it, certainly acted in bad faith, but they are not the enemy here. IPONZ and by extension, the NZ govt are. We need to stop assuming that failed teachers, lawyers, and unionists elected by popularity contest every three years are somehow magically capable of making our decisions for us, and start holding these morons to account. Not just with IPONZ, but everywhere.
Hey there Grieg.
On the one hand I think DB can have their RTD. On the other hand, it is the principle of the thing!
However, this looks interesting. The German Brewers' Federation, an organisation I suspect with considerably more bite than our own Brewers's Guild (after all they enforce the Reinheitsgebot) has waded into the argument:
"German Brewers Federation managing director Peter Hahn says Radler is a generic German name for a mixture of beer and lemonade and the term should be impossible to trademark.
Mr Hahn says Radler is the oldest and most popular beer-based mixed drink in Germany. He estimates that half of the country's 1300 breweries produce it."
This is from this article from Radio NZ's site. I am sensing this is not an issue that is going to end here.