Monster Energy Corporation vs. MonsterFishKeepers.com
- Thread starter C L O W N K N I F E
- Start date
I read this post when it was new and my husband and I stopped buying Monster immediately. We both USED to be loyal customers. Rockstar Punched is my main energy beverage. Even now, when I see monster energy I say: what a bunch of aholes.
This is so ridiculous it pisses me off that the courts will even waist their time with such a ridiculous case what a waste of time and money
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Hi,
I'm sure no patent lawyer, but if you look at the trademark database details, MFK certainly appears to have: a) had first use of the mark, b) has the priority filing date, and c) has stated the relevant list of goods and services while Monster Energy has not. Here are the two relevant trademark records from the USPTO (sorry if someone else has already stated this):
MFK mark:
http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=doc&state=4808:wrva48.5.31
Monster Energy mark:
http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=doc&state=4802:684a9x.2.102
Even in Canada, Monster Energy did not list the correct wares in their trademark:
http://www.cipo.ic.gc.ca/app/opic-c...92&extension=0&startingDocumentIndexOnPage=41
This action looks like a bully tactic which is trying to knock MFK off by expending its resources ($$). Those legal students likely took this case on because they see a high probability of winning since the fields of use for the trademarks are so different (fishkeeping vs selling bad drinks). If the Patent Office reviews this, it seems like they should dismiss the case. The important thing will be to last Monster Energy out---don't give up and eventually they will start to look silly and drop the issue. What we need is for this topic to turn up on some national comedian's TV program so that Monster Energy becomes a public joke over it all--you'd see this case dropped the next day.
I'm sure no patent lawyer, but if you look at the trademark database details, MFK certainly appears to have: a) had first use of the mark, b) has the priority filing date, and c) has stated the relevant list of goods and services while Monster Energy has not. Here are the two relevant trademark records from the USPTO (sorry if someone else has already stated this):
MFK mark:
http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=doc&state=4808:wrva48.5.31
Monster Energy mark:
http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=doc&state=4802:684a9x.2.102
Even in Canada, Monster Energy did not list the correct wares in their trademark:
http://www.cipo.ic.gc.ca/app/opic-c...92&extension=0&startingDocumentIndexOnPage=41
This action looks like a bully tactic which is trying to knock MFK off by expending its resources ($$). Those legal students likely took this case on because they see a high probability of winning since the fields of use for the trademarks are so different (fishkeeping vs selling bad drinks). If the Patent Office reviews this, it seems like they should dismiss the case. The important thing will be to last Monster Energy out---don't give up and eventually they will start to look silly and drop the issue. What we need is for this topic to turn up on some national comedian's TV program so that Monster Energy becomes a public joke over it all--you'd see this case dropped the next day.
There probably isn't much follow up on the forum due to the nature of the legal process. All parties involved are normay required to be tight lipped on the subject or case.
You've basically got a huge company with many branches/departments and hundreds or thousands of employees.
I would not be surprised if this was a half assed effort at scaring many smaller organizations. "Throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks"
Does this necessarily represent the motivation of the entire corporation as a whole? or is this just one employee in an office charged with copyright issues - sitting on google searching for small companies to strong arm and coerce into rebranding their name?
Who knows.
That being said f... monster energy drinks. Energy drinks are a joke and so are these pseudo legal scare tactics. I expect better from small town cops. In the immortal words of Walter Sobcheck "F.....g amateurs, dude"
Sent from my SCH-R950 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
You've basically got a huge company with many branches/departments and hundreds or thousands of employees.
I would not be surprised if this was a half assed effort at scaring many smaller organizations. "Throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks"
Does this necessarily represent the motivation of the entire corporation as a whole? or is this just one employee in an office charged with copyright issues - sitting on google searching for small companies to strong arm and coerce into rebranding their name?
Who knows.
That being said f... monster energy drinks. Energy drinks are a joke and so are these pseudo legal scare tactics. I expect better from small town cops. In the immortal words of Walter Sobcheck "F.....g amateurs, dude"
Sent from my SCH-R950 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
