Also piling on here, but after counting off 6 points for the lactose you're at 73% apparent attenuation. That sounds pretty good for S-04.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
. . .the movie, the song, the coffee houses, the software co, etc. are in totally different lines of business that have, with the possible exception of the movie, nothing to do with beer.
Agreed. Even so, the value of the Trademark should bear some weight in the argument - here they took a name that was already widely used by others for a use relating to beer and want to close the door behind them for future use by others where little to no confusion in the marketplace is occurring. Sometimes the law has to catch up to the facts in order to properly apply.
Strange Brew trademark (that is alive) was registered in 2007 for beer and beer supply retail.
The federal trademark is registered for the homebrew shop. The strange brewing brewery was established in 2010 and by the trademark has no chance to win this dispute.
From the homebrew shop perspective. They have to defend their trademark otherwise they would lose the trademark. It is that cut and dry. I do not think that homebrew shop owner is happy to pay the legal fees ether.
Tinfoil hat alert! One of the big brewers is behind this:
In a telephone interview from Munich, Willy Buholzer, AB InBev’s director of global hops procurement, cheerfully insists that the company still brews the traditional way with Hallertauer Mittelfrüh. He says the reason that AB InBev stopped buying it was that it has a surplus. “We just have too much right now,” Buholzer says. “We need a break for a couple of years.”