Chicago Restaurant tells Hawaiians to stop using Aloha!

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

However, they are asking these other restaurants, for what I gather from the OP, to use ''aloha'', which mind you, it's a generic Hawaiian greeting.



I can understand if they don't want other restaurants to use the restaurant's trademarked name of Aloha Poke, but ''aloha''? Really?

That piece is probably over reach on the part of aloha pokes attorneys. But the basic concept isn't OMG CORPORATE AMERIKA big business crushing the little guy, and raping native culture again, As it has been portrayed many times in this thread.
It's basic trademark law. As an aside, From what I have read these other aloha poke places predate the Chicago shop which is a cause to vacate the award of the trademark, but that's not the topic of the OP.

I haven't talked about big business or corporate America so eh. I just find the premise of wanting to make other places stop using ''aloha'' rather ridiculous (overreach or not).

As for the other, if Aloha Poke trademarked that first, even those stores that predate it can't do much about the cease and desist. They would need to abide by it. I think the law would be on the side of Aloha Poke. But yes, that's not the issue of the thread.

[Ethel mermania]

That piece is probably over reach on the part of aloha pokes attorneys. But the basic concept isn't OMG CORPORATE AMERIKA big business crushing the little guy, and raping native culture again, As it has been portrayed many times in this thread.
It's basic trademark law. As an aside, From what I have read these other aloha poke places predate the Chicago shop which is a cause to vacate the award of the trademark, but that's not the topic of the OP.

I haven't talked about big business or corporate America so eh. I just find the premise of wanting to make other places stop using ''aloha'' rather ridiculous (overreach or not).

As for the other, if Aloha Poke trademarked that first, even those stores that predate it can't do much about the cease and desist. They would need to abide by it. I think the law would be on the side of Aloha Poke. But yes, that's not the issue of the thread.

I don't think the law is on the side of aloha poke, but it would take money to make it so. Trademark law is another lucrative field, so for all you kids out there. ..

[Shofercia]

The motoring industry has been trademarking place names (like Bel Air, Biscayne, Capri, Monaco, Granada etc.) or common words (Escort, Sierra, Continental, El Camino, Corvette, Suburban, etc.) for ages, and it hasn't been a problem.

The motoring industry also limits those trademarks, afaik, to motoring. I can set up a Sierra Escort business, without having to worry about being sued by BMW.

Do they not realize that they're suing for saying the equivalent of "Hey, yo, I'm selling raw fish!" in Hawaiian? How the fuck does this stuff get trademarked? What's next, is someone going to trademark rounded corners?

Target sues retailers that call themselves target, and it's a fairly generic term

Yeah, but if a business was to say "we sell hunting targets here" would Target still sue? Aloha Poke means "Hey, yo, I'm selling raw fish!" in another language. Can someone copyright "La Liga" in the US, and then demand that all other soccer organizations seized and desist using that name, while in the US, without paying them? "Real Madrid's top scorer, Owen Goal, of a league that shall remain nameless, due to copyright infringement, just scored against Loris Karius!"

Do they not realize that they're suing for saying the equivalent of "Hey, yo, I'm selling raw fish!" in Hawaiian? How the fuck does this stuff get trademarked? What's next, is someone going to trademark rounded corners?

There does need to be a bit more common sense in terms of what can be copyrighted and what cannot. I mean, I know it is possible to challenge copyrights in court, but what average small business has the time, resources, or money to do that?

Exactly! And if you name your business something common, like "Aloha Poke" - stop whining about others using the name. You made the choice to name your business after a common expression heard all over Hawaii; you don't get to suddenly claim that as a copyright.

[Ethel mermania]

The motoring industry has been trademarking place names (like Bel Air, Biscayne, Capri, Monaco, Granada etc.) or common words (Escort, Sierra, Continental, El Camino, Corvette, Suburban, etc.) for ages, and it hasn't been a problem.

The motoring industry also limits those trademarks, afaik, to motoring. I can set up a Sierra Escort business, without having to worry about being sued by BMW.

Target sues retailers that call themselves target, and it's a fairly generic term

Yeah, but if a business was to say "we sell hunting targets here" would Target still sue? Aloha Poke means "Hey, yo, I'm selling raw fish!" in another language. Can someone copyright "La Liga" in the US, and then demand that all other soccer organizations seized and desist using that name, while in the US, without paying them? "Real Madrid's top scorer, Owen Goal, of a league that shall remain nameless, due to copyright infringement, just scored against Loris Karius!"

There does need to be a bit more common sense in terms of what can be copyrighted and what cannot. I mean, I know it is possible to challenge copyrights in court, but what average small business has the time, resources, or money to do that?

Exactly! And if you name your business something common, like "Aloha Poke" - stop whining about others using the name. You made the choice to name your business after a common expression heard all over Hawaii; you don't get to suddenly claim that as a copyright.

1. No target would not sue, as we make targets is not the trademarked name, or cause confusion in the marketplace

2. Whatever it means doesn't matter, a shop can't call itself aloha poke. However a shop called putin poke can put up a sign that says

Aloha, we have poke.

[Aclion]

Alohawe havePoke

[Katganistan]

It doesn't seem especially likely that people will confuse Aloha Poke restaurant in Chicago with Aloha Poke restaurant in Anchorage or with Aloha Poke restaurant in Honolulu.

Maybe if one of these companies establishes themselves as a nationwide franchise there'd be a problem.

That's probably what he's angling for, tbh. Franchising and spreading into those markets.

[Katganistan]

Reminder that when TSR had the Indiana Jones RPG they slapped (TM) on their cardboard representations of generic Nazis. Not specific characters created by Lucasfilm, mind you.

That was an urban myth gone wild. As per Sean K. Reynolds.

I actually HAD the game, and they actually slapped it on the cardboard counters. I did NOT say they trademarked the name Nazi.

Please read more carefully.

[Gig em Aggies]

It seems someone bought the Fine Brothers guide to screwing yourself over.

[The Black Forrest]

Reminds me when Oracle was suing everybody over Java. You can't use that word Starbucks! You can't use Java! Why Javac is my name!

This is why trademarks are a bad thing.

[Yagon]

"Today Jeff Sessions announced a joint operation between the Justice Department and the Department of Defense to sue the Apache nations of North America for infringing on the name of the Army's helicopter weapons platform, the (real) Apache. Simultaneously, Boeing released completely unrelated plans to develop soon to be available land for research and development testing of weapons systems. Jesus wept."

-Tomorrow + N days...

[Zanera]

Is this almost like that gaming company that's trying to say that they came up with the concept of frying pans as weapons in video games first and are trying to trademark it or something?

Anyway, I'm going to trademark the word 'the' and I'm going to make a suing campaign so big the economy will break.

[Ethel mermania]

And now one of my favorite web sites jumps in.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180 ... poke.shtml

[Ifreann]

Is this almost like that gaming company that's trying to say that they came up with the concept of frying pans as weapons in video games first and are trying to trademark it or something?

Anyway, I'm going to trademark the word 'the' and I'm going to make a suing campaign so big the economy will break.

I long ago concluded that most people deliberately refuse to understand what trademarks actually are, because that way it's easier for them to roll around the internet going "not allowed to be king because burger king ololololo"

[Ethel mermania]

"Today Jeff Sessions announced a joint operation between the Justice Department and the Department of Defense to sue the Apache nations of North America for infringing on the name of the Army's helicopter weapons platform, the (real) Apache. Simultaneously, Boeing released completely unrelated plans to develop soon to be available land for research and development testing of weapons systems. Jesus wept."

-Tomorrow + N days...

The apache have a pretty good claim of prior usage, I am thinking they should get the helicopters as damages.

[Ifreann]

"Today Jeff Sessions announced a joint operation between the Justice Department and the Department of Defense to sue the Apache nations of North America for infringing on the name of the Army's helicopter weapons platform, the (real) Apache. Simultaneously, Boeing released completely unrelated plans to develop soon to be available land for research and development testing of weapons systems. Jesus wept."

-Tomorrow + N days...

The apache have a pretty good claim of prior usage, I am thinking they should get the helicopters as damages.

Chinook, Black Hawk, Comanche, Kiowa, Iroquois, Cheyenne, Lakota...

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

The apache have a pretty good claim of prior usage, I am thinking they should get the helicopters as damages.

Chinook, Black Hawk, Comanche, Kiowa, Iroquois, Cheyenne, Lakota...

They should Sioux.

I'll get my coat

[Ethel mermania]

The apache have a pretty good claim of prior usage, I am thinking they should get the helicopters as damages.

Chinook, Black Hawk, Comanche, Kiowa, Iroquois, Cheyenne, Lakota...

Certainly put a new and far more menacing bite to the "I am an attack helicopter" meme.

[Torrocca]

Alohooow in the fuck were they able to fucking trademark Aloha? This is just pure absurdity, plain and simple.

[Ifreann]

Alohooow in the fuck were they able to fucking trademark Aloha? This is just pure absurdity, plain and simple.

They trademarked "Aloha Poke", and were able to do so because that's the name of their company.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Alohooow in the fuck were they able to fucking trademark Aloha? This is just pure absurdity, plain and simple.

They trademarked "Aloha Poke", and were able to do so because that's the name of their company.

Well, yes, but the attorneys were also asking these other food joints to stop saying ''aloha''.

Now however the company lawyers have decided to send cease and desist letters to other food outlets around the US who use the words Aloha Poke including to stores in Hawaii or owned by native Hawaiians. The letter read. “We therefore request that you immediately stop all use of ‘Aloha’ and ‘Aloha Poke.’”

Ethel pointed out that this is probably overreaching by the attorneys but yeah, it's not the trademark only.

[Torrocca]

Alohooow in the fuck were they able to fucking trademark Aloha? This is just pure absurdity, plain and simple.

They trademarked "Aloha Poke", and were able to do so because that's the name of their company.

That's utterly stupid. They're ruining my RP potential of having an antagonistic Hawaiian character named the Aloha Poker who ends people's lives by saying, "Aloha!" and then poking them. It's pure capitalist discrimination, I tell you.

[Thermodolia]

They trademarked "Aloha Poke", and were able to do so because that's the name of their company.

That's utterly stupid. They're ruining my RP potential of having an antagonistic Hawaiian character named the Aloha Poker who ends people's lives by saying, "Aloha!" and then poking them. It's pure capitalist discrimination, I tell you.

You can still copyright that. There’s a one letter difference between the two

[Shofercia]

The motoring industry also limits those trademarks, afaik, to motoring. I can set up a Sierra Escort business, without having to worry about being sued by BMW.




Yeah, but if a business was to say "we sell hunting targets here" would Target still sue? Aloha Poke means "Hey, yo, I'm selling raw fish!" in another language. Can someone copyright "La Liga" in the US, and then demand that all other soccer organizations seized and desist using that name, while in the US, without paying them? "Real Madrid's top scorer, Owen Goal, of a league that shall remain nameless, due to copyright infringement, just scored against Loris Karius!"




Exactly! And if you name your business something common, like "Aloha Poke" - stop whining about others using the name. You made the choice to name your business after a common expression heard all over Hawaii; you don't get to suddenly claim that as a copyright.

1. No target would not sue, as we make targets is not the trademarked name, or cause confusion in the marketplace

2. Whatever it means doesn't matter, a shop can't call itself aloha poke. However a shop called putin poke can put up a sign that says

Aloha, we have poke.

1. When you choose a name like Aloha Poke - you are asking to cause confusion in the market place. Aloha Poke is a common, Hawaiian phrase. The equivalent would be someone attempting to trademark Beinvenido Turista

2. Actually, thus far there are numerous shops calling itself Aloha Poke, and the owner might end up losing the trademark battle. Especially if social media rallies against him, fundraises, and donates quite a bit to the other side of the fight.

[Sick Jumps]

https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/fil ... cFacts.pdf

Strong v. Weak Marks

In addition to selecting a mark that is not likely to be confused with any pre-existing marks, it is in your best interest to select a mark that is considered “strong” in a legal or trademark sense, i.e., a mark that will most easily allow you to prevent third-party use of your mark. Some marks are easier to protect than others and these are considered “strong” marks.

On the other hand, if a mark is “weak,” it most likely is descriptive and others are already using it to describe their goods or services, making it difficult and costly to try to police and protect. Weak marks should be avoided; they simply do not have the same legal protections of a stronger and more distinctive mark.

Generally, marks fall into one of four categories: fanciful or arbitrary, suggestive, descriptive, or generic. The category your mark falls into will significantly impact both its registrability and your ability to enforce your rights in the mark.

The strongest and most easily protectable types of marks are fanciful marks and arbitrary marks, because they are inherently distinctive. Fanciful marks are invented words with no dictionary
or other known meaning. Arbitrary marks are actual words with a known meaning that have no association/relationship with the goods protected. Fanciful and arbitrary marks are registrable and, indeed, are more likely to get registered than are descriptive marks. Moreover, because these types of marks are creative and unusual, it is less likely that others are using them.

Examples of fanciful and arbitrary marks:
Fanciful: BELMICO for “insurance services”
Arbitrary: BANANA for “tires”

Suggestive marks suggest, but do not describe, qualities or a connection to the goods or services. Suggestive marks are registrable and are also considered “strong” marks. If you do not choose a fanciful or arbitrary mark, a suggestive mark is your next best option.

Examples of suggestive marks:
QUICK N’ NEAT for “pie crust”
GLANCE-A-DAY for “calendars”

Descriptive marks are words or designs (e.g., depiction of a television for “television repair services”) that describe the goods and/or services. Such marks are generally considered “weaker” and therefore more difficult to protect than fanciful and arbitrary marks. If the USPTO determines that a mark is “merely descriptive,” then it is not registrable or protectable on the Principal Register unless it acquires distinctiveness-- generally through extensive use in commerce over a five-year period or longer. Descriptive marks are considered “weak” until they have acquired distinctiveness.

Applicants often choose (frequently at the suggestion of marketing professionals) descriptive marks for their goods and/or services, believing that such marks reduce the need for expensive consumer education and advertising because consumers can immediately identify the product or service being offered directly from the mark. This approach, while perhaps logical marketing advice, often leads to marks that cannot be easily protected, i.e., to extremely weak trademark rights. That is, a descriptive mark may not be registrable or protectable against later users of identical or similar marks; therefore, adoption of a descriptive mark may end up costing more money in the long term, either due to higher costs to try to police and enforce such a mark, or because it may be legally necessary to stop using the descriptive mark and select a new mark.

Examples of descriptive marks:
CREAMY for “yogurt”
WORLD’S BEST BAGELS for “bagels”

Generic words are the weakest types of “marks” (and cannot even qualify as “marks” in the legal sense) and are never registrable or enforceable against third parties. Because generic words
are the common, everyday name for goods and services and everyone has the right to use such terms to refer to their goods and services, they are not protectable. Be aware that if you adopt a generic term to identify your goods or services, you will not be able to prevent others from using it to identify potentially competing products or services. In addition, even a fanciful mark that is very strong can, over time, become generic if the owner either starts using the mark in a non- trademark manner (see ESCALATOR and ASPIRIN examples, below) or fails to police use of
its mark properly and take appropriate action. Without proper policing over time, the original owner of a mark could lose any trademark rights it has in the mark.

Examples of generic marks:

Applied-for trademarks that would be considered generic at the time of filing because they are the name of the good or product offered by the service:
BICYCLE for “bicycles” or “retail bicycle stores” MILK for “a dairy-based beverage”

Trademarks that eventually became generic because of long-term widespread, non- trademark use:
ESCALATOR for “moving staircases,” ASPIRIN for “pain relief medication”

Other Potential Grounds for the USPTO to Refuse Registration

The USPTO will also refuse registration of a proposed mark for many other reasons, including but not limited to the mark being: a surname; geographically descriptive of the origin of the goods/ services; disparaging or offensive; a foreign term that translates to a descriptive or generic term; an individual’s name or likeness; the title of a single book and/or movie; and matter that is used
in a purely ornamental manner. While some of these refusals are an absolute bar to registration, others may be overcome by evidence under certain circumstances. For more information about these and other possible refusals, see Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure (TMEP) Chapter 1200 at http://tess2.uspto.gov/tmdb/tmep.

Based on this, I'd say their mark is fairly weak, and their attempts to enforce their mark are going to be largely fruitless.

[Risottia]

The motoring industry has been trademarking place names (like Bel Air, Biscayne, Capri, Monaco, Granada etc.) or common words (Escort, Sierra, Continental, El Camino, Corvette, Suburban, etc.) for ages, and it hasn't been a problem.

The motoring industry also limits those trademarks, afaik, to motoring. I can set up a Sierra Escort business, without having to worry about being sued by BMW.

I would guess that having a "Aloha Poke Bookshop" would be fine. Just like a "McDonald's Tyres" or an "Apple Vegetables".