If You Value The Reputation Of Your Restaurant, Maybe You Should Stop Serving Cops

Furnished content.


Cops lie. This is a fact. As a business owner, it is in your best interest to oust known liars from your premises, if only for liability reasons. Sure, this will result in backlash from cop supporters, but so will the alternative.Cops have placed themselves on a plateau of humanity far above their fellow citizens. Any perceived slight becomes a reason to drape themselves in an appropriated American flag and decry the masses for failing to show them the respect they feel they have no duty to earn.There have been several reports of low-wage fast food employees saying and/or doing mean things to cops in their restaurants. Sometimes, these things have actually happened. What officers fail to understand is that most employees of restaurants have zero respect for a majority of their customers. Add a blue uniform and an air of sanctimoniousness, and cops can easily fly up the ranks of the disrespected.But cops don't help their own case by lying about things that happened. And even if they're not outright lies, they're severe miscontruals of the actual events. In April of 2016, an officer claimed he was drugged by a Subway employee who supposedly spiked his soda as he went through the drive-thru. Drug tests of the drink and the cop cleared Subway and its employee of any wrongdoing. It also netted the accused teen -- who was arrested and charged -- a $50,000 payout from the city of Layton, Utah.Roughly a year after that, a Raleigh (NC) police union's Facebook post -- accusing a local restaurant of serenading officers with N.W.A.'s "Fuck tha Police" -- went viral. A review of the restaurant's CCTV footage showed this never happened. An employee apparently mouthed the words at an officer from 25 feet away. That employee quit when the investigation began. The backlash only halted when the police department itself stepped up to say the union's post was full of shit.

Raleigh Police Department Chief Cassandra Deck-Brown [...] released a statement Wednesday concurring with the owner, David Harris, and his attorney Mark O’Mara.[...]On Wednesday, Deck-Brown said two officers saw one employee make eye contact with them and mouth the words “F--- the Police.”“There was no singing. There were no other employees involved,” Deck-Brown said. “Because of the subtle nature of this act, it was not witnessed by anyone else in the store.”After looking at video, Harris and O’Mara and others could find no evidence that employees were singing at the police or even speaking with them during the nearly half-hour they were in the restaurant.

A police officer's complaint that a fast food burger he ordered came sprinkled with dirt created a flame-broiled Facebook sensation Wednesday before an investigation found that a seasoning mix was the likely culprit.Fort Myers police Officer Tim McCormick posted on Facebook about a meal he was recently served at the Burger King on Cleveland Avenue at Winkler Avenue. He said that the burger looked like it had dirt on it but didn't notice it until he was down to the last bite. He then tossed the sandwich.

0 comments, click here to add the first

Shipyard Brewing Loses Its Lawsuit Over Ships and The Word 'Head'

Furnished content.


Roughly a year ago, Shipyard Brewing Co. launched its bid for title holder of the single dumbest trademark lawsuit in the beer industry. The lawsuit against Logboat Brewing came as a result of two concerns. First, both breweries have the word "ship" on some packaging and include images of ships on that packaging as well. Lost on Shipyard appeared to be Logboat's use on its Shiphead brand was that of a woman with hair that somehow was a ship, whereas Shipyard merely had ships in water. That made the trade dress and trademarks fairly distinct. That may be the reason Shipyard coupled that concern with a second, namely that both breweries used the word "head" in their respective brands, with Shipyard having trademarks on brews such as "pumpkinhead" and "applehead." The theory, I guess, was that these two factors that on their own were not valid trademark complaints combined to form one that was.This is where the narrator would jump in and say: "That theory was wrong." The judge presiding over the dispute didn't buy into Shipyard's claims and completely rejected Shipyard's claims in a very thorough ruling. Let's start with the trade dress issue. Do you think these cans look similar?

In fact, the cans look very different from each other. Shipyard's can is beige with a redbar at the top and bottom. Logboat's can is white, with a black band towards the top and towardsthe bottom. SHIPYARD appears in an arc of blue letters of fairly uniform size, in a clean,straight font, outlined in white with a dark shadow. SHIPHEAD appears in wavy black lettersoutlined in white, with the first and last letters significantly larger than the rest, and the last threeletters in the words SHIP and HEAD sloping downward in keeping with the triangular spacebetween the sails of the pictured hairdo. The S in Shiphead has the tail of a marine animal. Prominent on the Shipyard can is an image of a ship in water. Prominent on Logboat's can is animage of a woman carrying three cans of beer in one hand, with fish to one side, and with herdark hair styled in the form of a ship. No reasonable person viewing either can could confuseone for the other.

Shipyard argues that its SHIPYARD mark and Logboat's SHIPHEAD GINGERWHEAT mark look and sound alike because they share six out of eight letters. But noreasonable juror could conclude that the terms yard and head independently are similar inlook or sound, outside of the negligible fact that they both end with the letter d. The only realsimilarity between SHIPYARD and SHIPHEAD GINGER WHEAT is the term ship, andShipyard has admitted that ship is a generic term, not subject to trademark protection....Shipyard refers to a place where ships were built and repaired, a physical space. Theterm has been used in the English language since at least 1647. See Merriam-Websterdictionary, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shipyard (last accessed April 26,2018). The term Shiphead, on the other hand, is not part of the English language. SeeMerriam-Webster dictionary, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionarysShiphead. The termwas invented by an artist, a friend of the Logboat founders, to describe a fanciful vision of awoman with hair coiffed in the shape of a ship.

Shipyard submitsdeposition testimony indicating that it has expended more than $1 million in advertising inyears past. ... However, Shipyard claims to have been usingthe SHIPYARD mark since 1992.... Yet, Shipyard does not direct the Court to any evidence indicating when, during the26 years it purports to have been doing business, it spent dollars on advertising....Nor does Shipyard explain what the nature of the advertising was, or where it was directed.There is no evidence in the record indicating that Shipyard directed any advertising efforts atMissouri consumers.

Yet, although Shipyardinitiated this action in May 2017, Shipyard has supplied evidence of sales from only 2016 and2017.... (Shipyard has sold thousands of cases of beer in Missouri.)(... which state that Shipyard sold 1,247 cases of beer in Missouri in 2016,and fewer than 1,000 cases of beer in Missouri in 2017); ...(ZEROREZ's market share has increased from 3% in 2006 to roughly 20% at the time theComplaint was filed.). Thus, even assuming that Shipyard made all of the referenced 2017sales before it brought this action, the record at best shows that Shipyard has sold fewer than2,250 cases of beer in Missouri. Shipyard has not provided any evidence suggesting that this is asizable number. Furthermore, Shipyard has supplied no evidence of sales from outside ofMissouri.

The fact that, by July 2015 (when Shipyard apprised Logboat of its infringementsuspicions), Logboat was referring to the grassy area in front of its taproom as The Shipyard,and the fact that the founders thought the name fit with the theme of [their] brewery does notamount to evidence of intent to confuse customers looking to purchase SHIPYARD beer. Thefact that, for a limited time, a grassy area in front of the taproom was described as a yard isunremarkable, and the fact that a brewery named Logboat called an adjacent patch of grass theShipyard is not evidencedirect or indirectof intent to confuse customers of Shipyard beerinto purchasing Logboat beer instead. Indeed, Logboat had ceased describing the yard as theShipyard by January 2016, and thereafter called it The Park insteadwhich evidences adesire to avoid confusion. As discussed above, shipyard is a word in the English language,and the use of the term in reference to a space adjacent to a taproom, rather than in relation toany product purportedly competing with Shipyard, does not constitute even indirect evidence ofintent to confuse.

Finally, Shipyard's contention that Logboat's limited sales of Raspberry Shiphead GingerWheat beer and Jasmine Shiphead Ginger Wheat beer are in direct competition and overlapwith Shipyard's HEAD flavored beers, thereby knowingly expanding its use and intentionallyamplifying the likelihood of confusion, is unconvincing. Logboat did not co-opt Shipyard'sHEAD branding style. It did not call the beers Rasberryhead or Jasminehead. Instead,Logboat added a descriptive element to its own properly registered mark to reflect what Shipyarditself describes as a unique flavor profile . . . . . Accepting Shipyard's argumentwould require precluding Logboat either from adding any new flavors to its ginger wheat beer, orfrom accurately describing any new flavors it adds to its ginger wheat beer. In other words,Shipyard's proposed prohibition against adding any terms descriptive of flavor or aroma to theShiphead Ginger Wheat beer would prevent Logboat from experimenting and innovating withthe beer itselfan unreasonable and untenable result for an action to protect a trademark.

“We still feel it’s an infringement and the judge didn’t,” said Fred Forsley, the founder and president of Shipyard Brewing. He said he plans to call the owners of Longboat Brewing to see if the two companies can work out an arrangement to avoid any confusion in the future.

0 comments, click here to add the first