^^^ What he said
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.
Heard you have to cut your out tube short to miss the sediment?You can, or you can just accept that the first pint will be cloudy. It's not that big a deal.
Im a little hesitant at room temps after listening to Bamforth's interview. Maybe without cause
Forgot about that.I think you can become a 501c7 'not for profit' social organization without too much trouble. That would give you the liability protection of having a corporation, but the requirements are not too difficult. It's basically set up for clubs - like ski clubs, running clubs, etc - that want to organize events for members but are not trying to make money at it. The main requirement is that your expenses equal revenue each year so that you are actually not making money.
You will still need to incorporate or elect another limited liability organization through your state. The IRS does not and cannot create limited liability entities.
I noticed on the trademark application that there is a disclaimer that the company does not claim 'Brewing' as a mark separate from 'Innovation' (which is appropriate). But there is no such limit for 'Innovation' which could cause real problems.it's as easy as pointing out that to a customer unfamiliar with the specifics of either one of those companies, a google search could wind up on the other and be confusing. Thus, lost business due to the other company using your trademarked name.
In this case, it would be lost business due to another company being allowed to trademark a word already in common use in the marketplace, but yeah.
The real lesson here is to pick a creative name for your brand.
Switch the water with antifreeze and it won't.I put an aquarium heater in a pitcher of water, foil over the top to minimize evaporation, does the trick.
Doesn't this encourage mold growth?
We want to clear up a few things regarding our federal trademark dispute with Innovation Brewing.
1. We have not, and are not asking them to change their name or their logo. There is no lawsuit. We are not suing them. We have not asked them for money. We have not asked them to stop selling their beer. We are asking them to withdraw their federal trademark application. ... 2. Our concern is with their United States trademark application and potential impact on our brand, which we have spent 30 years building.
3. I personally reached out to Innovation Brewing to try to settle this matter in February, 2014 and attempted to talk about this brewer to brewer instead of involving lawyers. Our efforts were rebuffed and Innovation Brewing choose to pursue this in the legal system.
4. Over the last year, we have offered co-existence agreements and have offered to pay for their legal fees. We tried to find solutions that would work for both of us. Their response was to ask for an exorbitant amount of money and we did not feel that was a collaborative solution.
5. All offers that we proposed were rejected and after more than a year of discussion regrettably, this matter has moved to the federal trademark office.
That's true. Bell's filed an opposition to Innovation's trademark on 'Innovation Brewing'. If that trademark were granted, it would pretty much ban any other US brewery from using the word 'Innovation' in marketing. I doubt Bell's is saying they own the word Innovation, just that the word is too commonly used in the craft beer to be granted trademark protection.At this point, I don't know, it is pure conjecture. The indisputable facts are:I thought it was a challenge to a trademark application? Not a law suit, but it is before the Feds for a decision, so both sides need to lawyer up.
A: Bell's filled a lawsuit
B: That is a dick move
C: I stopped buying their products as a result and so did thousands of others
JD s can correct me.