The Little Abbotsford Craftbrewery
- Reaction score
yeah but al u need is one patent lawyer with 100hrs of cmmunity service for being caught with a bad coke habit and they will take the case on probono. or if they smell free publicity in it for them if there is a snifter of taking a big company such as SAB down.I wish them luck, the practice of running 1,000 cans through every 3 years to retain the trademark should not be considered a valid effort at production. However, sabMiller have very deep pockets and lawyers love deep pockets like sea gulls love a chip.
Looks like a publicity stunt to me.
Joe Drinker couldn't care less about these old brands. He buys what makes him look cool to the chicks, and not-gay to his mates. Old brands from 1920 will do neither of these things.
well could be that i got lawyers doing the publicity instead of thunder road. either way it cant be bad for craftbeer......or if they smell free publicity in it for them if there is a snifter of taking a big company such as SAB down.
This is still be produced. It's on tap at the pub down the road...not how he'll go there.Other brands in his sights include Cairns Draught, Brisbane Bitter, Kent Old Brown, NQ Lager and Carlton Malt Ale.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/res...l#ixzz1wyuGzq9e
...what he said.Hate to sound like a naysayer but i tend to agree with the spokesperson from CUB. Taking someone else's intellectual property (even if its just a TM name) and reviving a product under the false pretence that it is the beer that was produced several decades ago now by another brewery for profit is pretty sneaky.
The only benefit I can see coming out of this is CUB wake up to the direction beer is heading in this country treat these historical brands with some dignity and try and push historical examples out as seasonal releases every now and then. Rather than relabelling a slightly adjusted (or not at all) recipe of VB as Ballarat Bitter etc.
Unless the new TM holders have access to the recipes and have the ability to reproduce a historically accurate example of that beer, "let sleeping dogs lie" IMO.
The idea of taking CUB's TM to protect it as an Australian 'identity' is utter rubbish. Especially when its being taken up by another profitable organisation. If it was secured by a not for profit or a craft brewers association ran by a collection of industry people for the industry it would sit better with me.
Rather than injecting money into taking CUB's brands, why are they not focusing further on getting their 6 million dollar investment off the ground? With an investment that grand, I'd be wanting to make a little more headway than what they currently have since launch.