Become a Patron!
The ECC Video of vendors getting served.
- Thread starter VaporJoe
- Start date
kelli
Vapid Vapetress
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
m3rma1d
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Fixed that for ya
I like how the fat one....ahem, the fatter one, indignantly slings his purse over his shoulder as he sashays toward the booth like he's on a mission from god. I honestly think these guys thought "we'll be heroes", you can hear the bearded hipster yelp "put me in that shit". It's all pretty sad, the lot of 'em look like a gaggle of man-child douchbags that still live with their mother.
The C&D letter they "presented" (not served, served papers are official court documents) is not only hand written as others have pointed out, but has the address as the LA Convention Center. If they were serious about building a case in civil court, they would need to show that the C&D letter was received (certified mail, return receipt requested) to an actual person at an actual business address. The fact that the letter is hand written tells me they had a pile of photocopied letters ready to give out indiscriminately (classic scare tactic). They don't have a record of who received what and when, unless they plan to use the video, which, quite frankly any lawyer would be embarrassed to present in court; and the judge would probably not even entertain as proof of receipt anyway.
The C&D letter they "presented" (not served, served papers are official court documents) is not only hand written as others have pointed out, but has the address as the LA Convention Center. If they were serious about building a case in civil court, they would need to show that the C&D letter was received (certified mail, return receipt requested) to an actual person at an actual business address. The fact that the letter is hand written tells me they had a pile of photocopied letters ready to give out indiscriminately (classic scare tactic). They don't have a record of who received what and when, unless they plan to use the video, which, quite frankly any lawyer would be embarrassed to present in court; and the judge would probably not even entertain as proof of receipt anyway.
Last edited:
Almost looks like an Kanger Emow, I like the scrolled SS one
Idk what the hell this is but the red one looks cool and I want one
no I just saw them on the ijoy website. Where did she get hers? I want one.. they're pretty
Ranger71d
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
I believe that if you want to be indignant about someone stealing your intellectual property or ideas that is fine.
First off you should probably be professional. Making a video of yourself cursing and attempting to start a fight isn't what a professional should do.
It represents your company, product, and yourself poorly.
If you do decide to go the "ass clown with a smart phone video" route, at least make it coherent and/or viewable.
Video of half your face, blurry and shaky shots of the "evil-doers", your bro's capris and kicks isn't getting your point across.
Second you may want to hire a lawyer to handle that issue (in its entirety, video evidence included). Copyright, trademark, any law for that matter is very complex.
Also realize that China doesn't recognize patent law like most nations do, if at all.
These guys give the vaping community a bad name. What I like most about the vaping community is that overall its very friendly. And this video is divisive if nothing else.
First off you should probably be professional. Making a video of yourself cursing and attempting to start a fight isn't what a professional should do.
It represents your company, product, and yourself poorly.
If you do decide to go the "ass clown with a smart phone video" route, at least make it coherent and/or viewable.
Video of half your face, blurry and shaky shots of the "evil-doers", your bro's capris and kicks isn't getting your point across.
Second you may want to hire a lawyer to handle that issue (in its entirety, video evidence included). Copyright, trademark, any law for that matter is very complex.
Also realize that China doesn't recognize patent law like most nations do, if at all.
These guys give the vaping community a bad name. What I like most about the vaping community is that overall its very friendly. And this video is divisive if nothing else.
Uber300
Bronze Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Well said Ranger71d. These fools do give our friendly community a very bad name. If I owned the company that they were supposedly representing, I would fire them, on the spot. They were inciting violence. At the very most, they should have walked up to the booth and handed the vendors the legal document. I have bought several products from said company, but I will never purchase anything from them again. I am goign to write the CEO and explain my total disgust.
Uber300
Bronze Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Most Definitely. I just got off the phone with the owner of my local B&M, he has 3 locations in my area. He was well aware of the situation at the ECC, well, suffice to say, he had an order for 50 454's to be delivered today fro his stores and his going to refuse delivery. He knows the owners name, address, and personal email. I am going to his shop after work to pick up a 200ml ejuice order and he told he would give me the info once I came in.
This blog is reporting that Kryptonite has disavowed any affiliation with the video crew, claiming they were simply "volunteers." No idea if anything there is credible, so take everything you read with a grain of salt.
So essentially, Kryptonite handed the operations of their legal department over to a few thugs. It's almost worse than if one or more of them had been employees of the company. Someone was definitely going for an intimidation factor.
So essentially, Kryptonite handed the operations of their legal department over to a few thugs. It's almost worse than if one or more of them had been employees of the company. Someone was definitely going for an intimidation factor.
Did they issue a statement?
m3rma1d
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Yeah, bit too late for that!
tombaker
Bronze Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Thanks for that, I had to free frame, to read it before. FWIW, the address of the lawyers, is a PO Box in a strip mall postal store.
Just saw this, as if everyone did not already guess. Listen to Click Bang here http://vapersplace.com/vplive
I heard that #ECC was pretty cool, and that lots of cool vapers and great vendors had a great time. I also heard that ECC was a giant clusterfuck filled with douchebags, drama, and con artists.
Tonight on Click, Bang! I'll be doing a recap of ECC with some people who where there. If you were there, I'd like to hear from you about your experiences, good, bad, or otherwise.
Tonight on Click, Bang! I'll be doing a recap of ECC with some people who where there. If you were there, I'd like to hear from you about your experiences, good, bad, or otherwise.
InMyImage
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
The interesting thing is that there does not appear to be trademark or word mark registered with the US Trademark Office for Kryptonite Vapor.
BTW... assault is normally defined as verbal, battery is physical.
As a side note, just a comment that words using "tard" as a derivitive of "retard" is offensive to people who care for the developmentally disabled, as a father of one it would be nice to see this sort of insult go away especially given the number of other words in the English language that could be used without insulting a huge group of people who simply see or hear you use the word. Thanks
BTW... assault is normally defined as verbal, battery is physical.
As a side note, just a comment that words using "tard" as a derivitive of "retard" is offensive to people who care for the developmentally disabled, as a father of one it would be nice to see this sort of insult go away especially given the number of other words in the English language that could be used without insulting a huge group of people who simply see or hear you use the word. Thanks
The C&D letter says something about "the Mark" but Idk wtf that is
Tripster
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
tombaker
Bronze Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
They are saying that "Kryptonite Vapor" is their Mark, otherwise known as trademark.
---The thing is that I don't think any of the 454 clones say anywhere "Kryptonite" anything. All I have seen is Kr. And that is not nearly enough to protect. Kr could just mean made in Korea
InMyImage
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
A "trademark" or "word mark" has to be officially registered with the US Patent and Trademark Office in order for it to actually be a Trademark or a Word Mark with legal protections and recourse. These are easily searched for through the USPTO web site.
Otherwise they are just words. Additionally, trademarks and word marks can be legally used in one companies product literature when describing their own products as long as the recognize the trademark owner. That's how Pepsi and Coke use each others trademarks in their own advertising.
Bill
Otherwise they are just words. Additionally, trademarks and word marks can be legally used in one companies product literature when describing their own products as long as the recognize the trademark owner. That's how Pepsi and Coke use each others trademarks in their own advertising.
Bill
I work with adults with intellectual disabilities and dislike the use of that term as well.
m3rma1d
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Tripster
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
h
I was born with FAS and many other drugs in my system...pretty much I was a speedball baby. I have intellectual disabilities among other disabilities. IMHO, using the term "retard" is offensive but using the term "fucktard" doesn't relate to "retard" to me. I could really go deep with my life being born the way I was but I won't not because I'm ashamed cause it would completely derail this thread.
I do apologize for using that word nonetheless.
I was born with FAS and many other drugs in my system...pretty much I was a speedball baby. I have intellectual disabilities among other disabilities. IMHO, using the term "retard" is offensive but using the term "fucktard" doesn't relate to "retard" to me. I could really go deep with my life being born the way I was but I won't not because I'm ashamed cause it would completely derail this thread.
I do apologize for using that word nonetheless.
vapingunited
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Hobby Kid, with the letter that I can see, they don't have to divulge anything. Could they receive a subpoena for their books and records (which may or may not reveal who their supplier is for the item in question), sure, but I don't see this getting that far, or even close to it.
I agree with what you're saying here Bill, however, I don't personally think any of it really matters at this point. The letter was canned, with space at the top to "write-in" the vendor's information, so this was planned well before the convention started, or the attorney sent the letter to them during the convention, in a form that they could "pick-and-choose" which vendors to hand them out to.
Seeing as though ijoy was undoubtedly NOT the only vendor selling 454 clones, should this go further (which I can't see happening), the ijoy vendors have all sorts of possibilities to fight the charge, as well as file some complaints of their own. For instance, and assuming these papers were "served" to only ijoy, why only them? As long as they were not selling these fraudulently as "authentic" devices, they may have a case for discrimination based on the fact that only they were approached.
Also, from the video, you can clearly see that harassment, threats, and wrongful accusations were clearly made. Yes the ijoy employees did talk back aggressively, but it could be argued that this was in defense and in response of the incoming barrage of profanity and threats coming from the Kryptonite personnel. Accusations that the paper being torn up was a felony is just completely false. This was a cookie-cutter C&D letter that you can probably download on legalzoom, and far from served in an official capacity.
The other point that makes me believe that this was nothing more than a scare tactic is that her specialization have absolutely nothing to do with trademark law, copyright law (domestic or international), or anything closely related. Her specialties are in political campaigns, legal writing, negotiation and lobbying. In other words, they hired the "cheap guy".
The video certainly did more damage than good for the "servers", enough to where the C&D letter may not even be recognized as it could also be argued that it was received under duress as they were being threatened, aggressively approached and led to believe the document was something that it was not (a legally protected letter).
InMyImage
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Sorry if it didn't come through clearly, but my intention was to basically say that not only do they have problems with the service itself, although the letter itself and the fact that the name and address were handwritten does not impact the content of the letter itself assuming that they made a copy of it with the info filled in, but the "service" and handling were unprofessional, as well as not being done to the proper people. You can't serve a regular employee of a company at an event, you need to do it at their corporate address. In this case, the paper is flawed because I doubt that iJoy actually operates out of the convention center
As far as the trademark and word mark comments, it was trying to convey that regardless of the contents of the letter and the way it was delivered, Ravens Moon Productions / Kryptonite Vapors do NOT have a legal right to anything because there is no trademark or word mark filed and/or effective (you can be filed but not accepted, or expired) registered at all. Not one for anything at all.
So... they don't have ANY legal rights in this matter at all except in the case of counterfeiting and attempting to sell something as if it was what they were making and selling.
Sorry for diving in deeper here, but I have quite a bit of experience in this area of law.
Bill
Last edited:
InMyImage
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Thanks to TomBaker for sending me a PM to let me know that my sentence above was missing an all important "NOT", and should have read "do NOT have a legal right to anything".
In the PM he also mentioned the relevance of using the periodic element "Kr", as well as the word "Kryptonite" as disqualifying a company from using either as part of a trademark. The trademark laws are complicated because they are specific to a competitive market. Two companies can actually share the same words in their trademark, but it is the product, brand, or intellectual property that is relevant. Several hundred companies currently use the word "Kryptonite" as part of their trademark or word marks, 511 to be precise. Ravens Moon Productions / Kryptonite Vapors do not happen to be one of them.
A company can also trademark a phrase, for example IBM owns a trademark on the phrase "Race to Zero", Nike owns "Risk Everything". This means that another company in their competitive space can't use those phrases in any of their product literature or advertising without recognizing them as the owner of the trademark, which generally defeats the purpose of trying to use them...
The bottom line is that even though it seems logical, getting irritated of the claim of a common name, even one widely known to be a real downer on Superman's day, isn't worthwhile. The real issue is that these guys and/or company handled themselves and their complaints in a really bad way and did more to damage themselves than help.
As an interesting note... if Ravens Moon / Kryptonite Vapors actually did not authorize this incident, then they probably have some legal recourse themselves against the idiots who did it...
Bill
Midniteoyl
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Wrong...
Is registration of my mark required?
No. You can establish rights in a mark based on legitimate use of the mark. However, owning a federal trademark registration on the Principal Register provides several advantages, e.g.,
- constructive notice to the public of the registrant's claim of ownership of the mark;
- a legal presumption of the registrant's ownership of the mark and the registrant's exclusive right to use the mark nationwide on or in connection with the goods and/or services listed in the registration;
- the ability to bring an action concerning the mark in federal court;
- the use of the U.S registration as a basis to obtain registration in foreign countries; and
- the ability to file the U.S. registration with the U.S. Customs Service to prevent importation of infringing foreign goods.
When can I use the trademark symbols TM, SM and ®?
Any time you claim rights in a mark, you may use the "TM" (trademark) or "SM" (service mark) designation to alert the public to your claim, regardless of whether you have filed an application with the USPTO. However, you may use the federal registration symbol "®" only after the USPTO actually registers a mark , and not while an application is pending. Also, you may use the registration symbol with the mark only on or in connection with the goods and/or services listed in the federal trademark registration.
http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/register.jsp
InMyImage
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Don't necessarily want to start a debate about the legal implications of owning a legal registered trademark, but I'm not sure how posting info that supports my statements make me wrong...?
Note that Ravens Moon / Kryptonite Vapors also does not claim any non-registered marks using "TM" either.
Bill
InMyImage
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
The way the word and it's derivitives were used in connection with the protection properties of "Kryptonite":
"Kryptonite Corp. was using kryptonite and other words containing "krypto" to confuse consumers into believing there was a connection between its products and Superman..."
Bill
InMyImage
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Hopefully to complete the discussion here is info from the USPTO on the topic of using the same trademark for brands in completely different market spaces:
While researching trademark names for a new product, I found several companies with live and dead trademark names that are identical. First, what is the difference between a live and dead trademark name? Secondly, can I still trademark my name if the product is in a different category ( i.e. computer goods versus clothing)?
A live trademark registration means that the registrant has filed all necessary maintenance documents and the trademark remains viable. A dead trademark registration means that the registrant has not filed the necessary documents and the registration has lapsed. It does not necessarily mean that the trademark owner is no longer using the mark - it's simply not registered.
To answer your second question, similar trademark registrations can co-exist on the register so long as the goods or services identified in the registration are adequately different so as not to raise a likelihood of confusion in the purchasing public. That means, the public wouldn't think that those goods and services are emanating from or sponsored by the same commercial entity. The class has no impact on this - it's the actual goods or services recited in the registrations that control this determination.
Please note, I am not an attorney and anyone who finds this info applicable to their business use should consult with an attorney experienced in trademark law. I have managed a law office as well as working directly with the legal team responsible for trademark registrations and protections to analyze potential conflicts for IBM, which is where my experience in this area comes from.
Bill
While researching trademark names for a new product, I found several companies with live and dead trademark names that are identical. First, what is the difference between a live and dead trademark name? Secondly, can I still trademark my name if the product is in a different category ( i.e. computer goods versus clothing)?
A live trademark registration means that the registrant has filed all necessary maintenance documents and the trademark remains viable. A dead trademark registration means that the registrant has not filed the necessary documents and the registration has lapsed. It does not necessarily mean that the trademark owner is no longer using the mark - it's simply not registered.
To answer your second question, similar trademark registrations can co-exist on the register so long as the goods or services identified in the registration are adequately different so as not to raise a likelihood of confusion in the purchasing public. That means, the public wouldn't think that those goods and services are emanating from or sponsored by the same commercial entity. The class has no impact on this - it's the actual goods or services recited in the registrations that control this determination.
Please note, I am not an attorney and anyone who finds this info applicable to their business use should consult with an attorney experienced in trademark law. I have managed a law office as well as working directly with the legal team responsible for trademark registrations and protections to analyze potential conflicts for IBM, which is where my experience in this area comes from.
Bill
Midniteoyl
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Read you're post about how you MUST register a Trademark, and then read mine where it say's 'No, you dont'..
InMyImage
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Well, I didn't actually use the word "MUST" but I guess I did word my statement a bit too strongly and should have said "Registered Trademark" as well as conceding that using a non-registered TM can provide some legal recourse under certain conditions, but nowhere near the protections of using a registered TM, and are much harder to establish and protect because you get into first use determinations as well as "common word" examinations and determinations.
However, the fact that one company can use another companies in their own advertising to compare their product to another is true, and use TM has to be clearly claimed prior to another companies use of the term in the context of the same product in a competitive market space. Unfortunately, it is difficult in a forum to avoid using detailed and complete legalese to discuss issues related to law and the protections afforded by them because the devil is in the details, especially when dealing with trademarks, registered or not.
I do enjoy the discussion though, it's been a long time since I've delved into this particular space.
Midniteoyl
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Ya.. TM and SM are used you believe that your mark is unique and/or you are the first user of it in the market. A ® says the same AND that the USPTO believes so too.
Did anyone read there FB Page and the comments.
https://m.facebook.com/KryptoniteTanks?_rdr
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://m.facebook.com/KryptoniteTanks?_rdr
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
cheetodog
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Hey now! Meeting you was the closest i ever got to meeting a celebrity. Dont crush my dreams!!!!
InMyImage
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Thanks for posting this, and just read it. The other point that I had not quite picked up on is the accusation of the products being "counterfeit". Counterfeiting and cloning are not the same. Counterfeiting involves making a product and reproducing the details of it and then attempting to sell it as the original authentic product. Cloning is simply the act of making something the "the same as" and then selling it as your own product, although possibly with competitive comparisons or references to the original authentic product.
If this was truly a case of counterfeit products being sold, the police should have been sent over, not a C&D order.
Bill
vapingunited
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
The very content of your post actually solidifies the point that Bill was making previously. Ravens Moon / Kryptonite Vapors does NOT claim non-registered marks in any of their marketing or correspondence, thus limiting and/or eliminating their protection with regard to Trademark violations, the very subject of the letter "served".
Last edited: