Shandy Application

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by kier on August 11, 2011 at 8:58pm

and excellent beers they are too.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ralph on August 11, 2011 at 2:13pm

So if Soren makes the beer on gear that is not his then he is contract brewing as well as actual brewing and can call it "brewing"??

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Simon Cooke on August 12, 2011 at 10:00am

some of NZ's heavyweight brewers rely on contract brewing. Things would be pretty gutless if you HAD to own your own s/s.
Am I right in my understanding that contract brewing means, to brew your beer in someone elses gear? not to pay someone to brew your recipe in their gear?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ralph on August 12, 2011 at 11:02am

Well there is the thing.

 

As far as I know Soren brews his beer in gear that is owned by Renaissance and that is called contract brewing.

and as far as I know some contract brewers basically give a brewery a recipe and simply sell the product... There might have been a bunch of R&D (eg brewing at home to get the recipe right), but the actual brew is done by the brewery and not the person contracting them to do it.

 

Both called contract brewing, but not quite the same thing?

 

Both methods can create some fantastic beer tho??

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kelly Ryan on August 12, 2011 at 9:15am

Jeepers, I guess when we're developing a new brew for Epic I better not go in and do that brewing thing anymore!

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dai on July 30, 2011 at 11:15am

Are you the same guys that trade marked "Craft Beer Capital of New Zealand"?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by AndrewC on July 30, 2011 at 12:51pm

I'm a member of the incorporated society that is looking to trademark Craft Brewing Capital,  not Beer.   It will be used to promote the Nelson region (breweries, outlets, tours and events) and you may see a brochure at Beervana.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dominic Kelly on July 30, 2011 at 2:34pm

Unless and until someone gets in touch with IPONZ and withdraws IP application 838605 (which I'm told is going to happen) the correct answer to Dai's question is "yes". Although the actual wording of the application excluded "of New Zealand".

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dai on July 30, 2011 at 3:11pm

Why would you need to trademark such a term?  Please do not say "to protect our commercial interests". Surely you do not have to trademark something so that everyone will believe it to be true?  Can't beer drinkers make up their own minds about where they consider the 'Capital' to be?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Greig McGill on July 30, 2011 at 3:55pm

Andrew: Much as I love the attitude behind what you're doing here, I think there's an issue with interpretation somewhere. Have you read the ruling from IPONZ? As was stated earlier, it's the law that's the problem. We (SOBA) ended up having to show that in 2003 a reasonable proportion of NZ knew what a Radler was. We couldn't do that. I think you'll have an impossible time proving that a reasonable proportion of people in NZ don't know what a shandy is now, and thus, you will be unsuccessful, and without showing any form of double standard between big and small brewers at all.

 

The issue is not that DB has a trademark on Radler. It is that, if I travelled back in time, I'd have been able to trademark Pinot Noir. If something is a well known, generic term elsewhere in the world, and that's the way that thing is referred to or could be expected to be referred to (to show origin, for example with Radler), then IPONZ shouldn't grant a trademark. There's no double standard here. No big versus small (even though that's been the media spin). Simply shitty trademark law. Any big versus small issues come about because bigger breweries have deeper pockets and time to apply for trademarks on these terms. A small company could misuse the law just as much. *cough* Matariki Wines *cough*.

 

Also, regarding the "Craft Brewing Capital" trademark, as you know, SOBA has maintained a fairly hard stance on that. I hope you now understand why? It was never meant as an attack on your fine organisation, but now you hopefully understand why we're so anti trademarking generic words and phrases. It ends up causing animosity, outrage, and injustice.

 

Martin: Oi! What's this ragging on contract brewers? I was going to bring you a nice rigger of Brewaucracy PIL too! ;P

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Martin townshend on July 30, 2011 at 4:07pm

nothing against matey. just a trademarked anyhtinng by anyone is getting on my tits

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by kier on August 10, 2011 at 4:13pm

I don’t think Martin is criticising the excellent NZ contract brewers that have done so much for this country’s craft beer scene (Epic, 8 Wired, 666…..etc).

 

His (and my) problem is the cynical perversion of the contract brewing concept for marketing purposes only (which sounds depressingly similar to the recent and historical behaviour of “the big two”). 

 

House/relabelled beers are common throughout NZ.  What’s to stop every pub in the country creating its own “brewing company” and marketing the work of others as their own?  Where is the integrity?  Isn’t it hypocritical for those in the craft beer scene to criticise DB while executing similar marketing stunts themselves?

 

It has the potential to dilute the reputation of many genuine, talented contract brewers and brew-pubs.

 

I was pleased to see that the recent bronze medal awarded to “Neudorf Ale” was credited to West Coast Brewery and not MBC – so at least there is evidence of some common sense on this issue.

 

(NB –  I’m still named on the Moutere Inn/MBC website as a part owner of the company.  I, with relief, left 9 months ago and have nothing to do with the business or any of the recent trademark applications.)

Kieron Lattimer

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page