Hormel starts sueing over use of SPAM word

[dmcowen674]

From the Hormel site on Trademark of SPAM

5. Trademark Information. The following trademarks used or which are planned to be used in this site, whether registered or unregistered, are owned by Hormel Foods: SPAM; HORMEL; SPAMBURGER; SPAMTASTIC and any other SPAM-derived terms.

spamarrest LLC Tells Hormel Foods Corp To Can It's Trademark Challenge

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Allan Priaulx, 212-687-1765
press@spamarrest.com


SPAMARREST LLC TELLS HORMEL FOODS CORPORATION TO CAN ITS TRADEMARK CHALLENGE
SEATTLE -- (June 30, 2003) -- SpamArrest LLC, a fast-growing Seattle Internet company, says the Hormel Foods Corporation is challenging the trademark on its popular system to fight email spam.

SpamArrest LLC filed two trademark applications in early 2002 for the term Spam Arre....

e cases are pending before the Trademark Trial and Appellate Board. Hearings have not yet been scheduled. Further information about the case is available at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Website (www.uspto.gov).

ABOUT SPAMARREST
SpamArrest LLC is a Seattle-based company that has developed an efficient, simple and inexpensive system that stops spam. The company has been growing at a rate of over 20% per month. There is no software to install and the system is not intrusive. After a sender's first message to a SpamArrest subscriber is verified, there is no further interaction. Subscribers may also pre-authorize senders. SpamArrest continually monitors automated junk email techniques and upgrades automatically as necessary to protect its subscribers. For more information visit www.spamarrest.com or email press@spamarrest.com.

NOTE TO EDITORS: For interviews with Brian Cartmell and Derek Newman, please contact press@spamarrest.com or call Allan Priaulx, 212-687-1765.

Edited for Fair Use excerpt Guildelines

Post Discalimer: All the facts are not here for review and debate as you will have to purchase your own copy (which you are really only renting) from the Copyright Holder in order to fully review and debate the matter at hand."

 

[Alistar7]

They are just mad because the software tastes better than their product........

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
They are just mad because the software tastes better than their product........

I hope there is a quick resolution such as spam arrest simply having to add clearly on their main front page of their website a disclaimer that they are not related to the Food Company in any way with a SPAM link back to the Hormel site.

 

[Tom]

Spamarrest should lose. They have no right to copyright the word. And the whole notion of companies trying to profit from spam, they deserve to go bankrupt and become homeless.

 

[Dudd]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
Spamarrest should lose. They have no right to copyright the word. And the whole notion of companies trying to profit from spam, they deserve to go bankrupt and become homeless.

Um, did you read the article? Hormel, who makes the "food" Spam, is sueing a software company for using the word Spam as part of their name, SpamArrest. Hormel is the one who wants exclusive use of the word Spam, not the software company.

 

[Tab]

LOL! Thats pretty sad, anyway. I wonder how this will happen.

 

[burnedout]

With annoying, early-60s cocktail music relentlessly blaring in the background, the SPAM homepage (www.spam.com) reminds me of twisted humor straight out of some old MAD or Cracked magazines.

 

[Alistar7]

Should be interesting considering the term "spam" has founds it place in the computer world and is fairly universal, is it the association that bothers them?

"SpamArrest is both our corporate name and an arbitrary trademark. We are not claiming the right to use the generic term spam alone, but we will protect the name of our of our company and the brand of our product."


The real sad part of this story, people are obviously still buying and eating spam, we are all to blame for this.........

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Anyone ever been to the SPAM museum in Minnesota?

Sorry if this is offtopic

CkG

 

[Alistar7]

can we rename the term "thread crap" to Spam please, it seems so appropriate.......

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: Dudd

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
Spamarrest should lose. They have no right to copyright the word. And the whole notion of companies trying to profit from spam, they deserve to go bankrupt and become homeless.

Um, did you read the article? Hormel, who makes the "food" Spam, is sueing a software company for using the word Spam as part of their name, SpamArrest. Hormel is the one who wants exclusive use of the word Spam, not the software company.

Yea I read it. They are trying to put a claim on the word spam as it's used in the computer world. Their denial is pathetic, I'm sure they would claim that something like spamcop, spambuster, spamcondom, would all violate their copyright.

And my main comment is they are trying to profit from spam, which puts them in the same category as spammers, to me.

 

[Alistar7]

how are they trying to profit by Spam?

"SpamArrest is both our corporate name and an arbitrary trademark. We are not claiming the right to use the generic term spam alone , but we will protect the name of our of our company and the brand of our product."

did you miss that?

 

[Alistar7]

Spam costs companies a ton of money and generally are a major nuisance in high volume networks. There is a market for products that eliminate spam, they profit by blocking spam, not promoting or facillitating it in any way.

They are the answer to spam, the anti-spam so to speak.

 

[Tom]

No I didn't mis it. I responded to that in my last message.

They charge money for their service. It's the same thing as having to pay the phone company for some service that reduces the number of telemarketing calls, I don't like it.

And there are plenty of free ways to block or manage spam, they are looking to profit off the average person's lack of knowledge.

 

[Michael]

Hormel needs to sue to protect their trademark. If they don't sue when a company takes commercial advantage of the name, they'll lose the trademark.

Michael

 

[Linflas]

I don't see that Hormel is wrong in this. They have held the copyright on this name since the 1930's. They don't have a problem with the generic use of the term spam for unsolicited email but they have to take action when a company begins to use the term or they risk losing their copyright. There is a difference between the public using trademarked names such as Kleenex, Xerox, or spam as generic terms and other companies using these terms in their product names.

 

[Tom]

"We are not claiming the right to use the generic term spam alone"

this is legalese, translation, if anyone uses the word spam, alone or in combination with another word, to market a product that manages e-mail spam, we will sue their as$ to the moon !!

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
"We are not claiming the right to use the generic term spam alone"

this is legalese, translation, if anyone uses the word spam, alone or in combination with another word, to market a product that manages e-mail spam, we will sue their as$ to the moon !!

Funny, ever court I ever went to had a judge who presided and made the final decision, I did not realize they would just go in there, say one, and then do another in flagrant violation, thanks for pointing that out.

If their corporate name is SpamArrest, all one word, should they have to change that as well. Are they using the term "spam" to make people think of Hormel's product or the generic term associated with what their product actually targets. It would be another thing if they had a can of "meat", and I use that term very loosely, that said it was "SPAMalicious".....

"And there are plenty of free ways to block or manage spam, they are looking to profit off the average person's lack of knowledge."

Why are you sitting here, virtually every fortune 500 company would love to know how to do that for free......

 

[Alistar7]

speaking of Spam, I know many members here think it is funny to sign up people they disagree with here for major amounts of spam. The last resort of the feebleminded.
I have had this happen to me. I display my profile because I deal in the FS/FT forum and it is a requirement. I never use the email listed in my profile. I switch ISP's too much and have always used my one Yahoo email account. This is the only place that email is known, and since I am never logged into that account when surfing I know this is where the spam has come from.

Other members have been banned for doing this, one very recently. It is not too difficult to track down the IP that signed up for the spam, the companies themselves have gladly given out this information. Your IP will also glaldy confirm this information and some have even taken action against the user, either way the mods will match it with your IP addy when you log in here. I have not bothered to track this person down as it seems they only signed me up for 2 or 3 sites.

This is a warning to whoever it was or anyone thinking about doing this in the future. It is not difficult to have the spam stopped, and you will only wind up getting yourself banned in a quick manner so continue at your own risk.......

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Michael
Hormel needs to sue to protect their trademark. If they don't sue when a company takes commercial advantage of the name, they'll lose the trademark.

Michael

They already lost control over the trademark. The widespread commercial and public use of the word to describe junk email has rendered their Trademark irrelevant and this court case should just reinforce that.

 

[jjones]

Originally posted by: Linflas
I don't see that Hormel is wrong in this. They have held the copyright on this name since the 1930's. They don't have a problem with the generic use of the term spam for unsolicited email but they have to take action when a company begins to use the term or they risk losing their copyright. There is a difference between the public using trademarked names such as Kleenex, Xerox, or spam as generic terms and other companies using these terms in their product names.

I tend to agree with this. I don't think there's legal standing on using a trademarked name just because it has been adopted and widely used amongst the general public as a generic term.

On the other hand, I agree with Alistar7, "The real sad part of this story, people are obviously still buying and eating spam, we are all to blame for this........."

 

[Michael]

Actually, I think they'll win. Xeroxing was used for photocopying for years (as was Kleenex instead of tissue paper). Both trademarks are still valid but I remembetr from my business law courses that both companies had to go to court a few times to prove that they wanted to protect and maintain their trademark.

I guess we'll find out who's right when it goes to court. The judge could easily say that "spam" in this context is not related to the food business and a consumer would never confuse the two. It still is in Hormel's best interest to sue as it builds the case that they do care who uses "spam" in a commercial context.

Michael

 

[Tom]

"Funny, ever court I ever went to had a judge who presided and made the final decision, I did not realize they would just go in there, say one, and then do another in flagrant violation,"

That's the point. If you read what they said in their statement carefully you would see the word "generic". They did not say they wouldn't attempt to stop use of the word "Spam" in the way I described.

 

[JellyBaby]

Either way I found this statement jovial:

"Hormel is acting like a corporate crybaby and ought to can it," said Brian Cartmell, President and CEO of SpamArrest LLC

Hmmm, "Cartmell" is phonetically similar to "Hormel". He'd best never leave the company.

 

[Nitemare]

Odd, I did not see them sueing when the word SPAM became associated with junkmail. However, I do remember seeing people wearing SPAM T-shirts and caps.