Don't gun companies have more serious things to worry about?

[Monkeyleg]

Gun and gun accessory manufacturers are a PITA. They seem to be so focused on the trees that they miss the entire forest. Take, for example, this email I received today. It's actually from a law firm that represents Glock.

Name: Julianna Orgel
E-mail: jorgel@renzullilaw.com
Telephone: 914-285-0700

Comment: Re:   Product Descriptions Utilizing GLOCK’s Intellectual Property

Dear Sir or Madam:

   Our office represents GLOCK, Inc. and GLOCK Ges.mbH (collectively referred to as “GLOCK”). GLOCK, Inc. owns all rights, titles, and interests in its valuable trademarks and patents (“GLOCK’s intellectual property”), which boast global recognition. GLOCK has several federally registered trademarks in connection with a variety of goods and services, including registration numbers 1,691,390, 1,381,064 and 2,807,747.  GLOCK’s intellectual property cannot be used without GLOCK’s express written authorization.

Over the years, GLOCK’s intellectual property has achieved widespread recognition, goodwill, and fame.  Its well-known history and popularity continues to result in an extensive demand for GLOCK-related products.  Consequently, GLOCK will take every step necessary to prohibit the unauthorized use of its intellectual property and proprietary rights.

   It has come to our attention that your website uses GLOCK’s intellectual property in a manner that is likely to cause confusion or mistake as to the source, sponsorship, or affiliation of the services and products offered by your company. Upon visiting your website, lensandlasers.com, we noted that your company offers for sale and is selling several aftermarket parts for GLOCK pistols, including “Pearce Glock 20/21 Plus 2 Magazine Extension,” “Meprolight Glock Tru-Dot Night Sight-TD Fixed G23 & G27 Set,” and “Trijicon Glock RMR Pistol Mount.”

By describing your products in this manner, you are suggesting that they are associated with or endorsed by GLOCK - which they are not.  To avoid any consumer confusion, we ask that you modify the descriptions on your website for GLOCK aftermarket parts to read “for Glock” or “fits all Glocks.”  This alerts consumers to the fact that your products are to be used with GLOCK pistols, but are not manufactured by GLOCK. Regarding the above mentioned products, they could instead read “Pearce Magazine Extension Plus 2 for Glock’s 20/21,” or “Trijicon RMR Pistol Mount Fits Glock Pistols.”

Further, if you offer any factory or OEM products for sale, we request that you label them as such in your product descriptions so that they read “Factory GLOCK…” or “GLOCK OEM…”

In light of the above, we ask that you contact us by August 22, 2014 and confirm that you have done the following:

1.   Revise the aftermarket product descriptions for GLOCK pistols on lensandlasers.com to comport with the above suggested format;

2.   Label any factory or OEM GLOCK products as such in your product descriptions; and

3.   Add the following disclaimer in at least 10 point font on your website:

DISCLAIMER: “GLOCK” is a federally registered trademark of GLOCK, Inc. and is one of many trademarks owned by GLOCK, Inc. or GLOCK Ges.mbH.  Neither Lens & Lasers, nor this site are affiliated in any manner with, or otherwise endorsed by, GLOCK, Inc. or GLOCK Ges.mbH.  The use of “GLOCK” on this page is merely to advertise the sale of GLOCK pistols, parts, or components.  For genuine GLOCK, Inc. and GLOCK Ges.mbH products and parts visit www.glock.com.

We work with numerous aftermarket parts companies to help protect GLOCK’s intellectual property and look forward to working with Lens & Lasers as well. We appreciate your anticipated cooperation in this matter.

Very truly yours,

RENZULLI LAW FIRM, LLP

Julianna E. Orgel"

How much time and money is going into this, and what do they expect to achieve?

I just got through jumping through hoops Trijicon set up, and now Glock sends these stupid demands. I expect Trijicon to bug me again in another few weeks.

Mother jumpers.

[AJ Dual]

Not that it really helps, but it might make you feel a little better...

To a degree it's not "personal" between you/LensAndLasers and Glock's Legal dept. Part of keeping or maintaining a trademark, registration, or claim of "trade dress" is that you actively defend it.

Kind of like adverse possession with land, where you fix the neighbors fence and mow the grass for 20 years or whatever, you can claim it's now yours in court, if someone registers a trademark, but then never defends it and lets everyone walk all over them they eventually won't be able to win in court if they ever do someday decide to try and defend it or prevent others from using it.

Still picayune in your case. 

[Monkeyleg]

Oh, I know it's not personal. It's just aggravating. I don't think that anyone is going to think that GLOCK is making the Trijicon night sights for the Glocks, nor the Pearce grips for the Glocks.

These ball washers are no doubt sending this same email to thousands of retailers, who will have to spend tens of thousands of man hours changing text on millions of website pages. This at a time when the retailers are spending all their time trying to just stay afloat. Why not give them some busywork?

It almost makes me wonder if the attorneys--who may themselves be slow--didn't say to Glock, "hey, you know there's a lot of internet retailers who are using the Glock name with products not made by Glock. Want us to take care of that? Yeah? Okay. That'll be $150,000 for us to send out the emails."

[brimic]

Not certified mail? Ignore.
You'll get more messages one way or another but why not make them pay to be, pardon the term, dicks?

[AJ Dual]

Not certified mail? Ignore.
You'll get more messages one way or another but why not make them pay to be, pardon the term, dicks?

Good point.

Change nothing. Or at least wait and see what happens to a sampling of the verbiage of Glock accessories on MidwayUSA, Brownell's, Amazon, OpticsPlanet etc.

Also, it could also be a quasi-scam, the way the lawyers just refer/sell/collect class action lawsuit participants around to each other, or are just glorified debt-collectors who just happen to belong to the state bar.

Just a WAG, but it could even be some sort of deal where the law firm wasn't directly retained by Glock, but they get paid somehow if they see you changed the wording. Or even more likely, some web crawler/script does it for them.

[Brad Johnson]

Don't ignore lest they DO send you a certified letter... which will undoubtedly contain something much higher up the legal food chain than an official-o-gram.  Nip it in the bud while it's still an easy an cheap fix.  Ignoring it will likely get you on some junior attorney's hit list, making you their ticket to Getting Noticed.  At the least a huge-er inconvenience, and likely drawn out and expensive.  Play the good guy now and keep the See I Play Nice bridge open.

Don't feel bad. Most large companies have (sometimes overly) aggressive trademark protection plans.   Simply change the descriptions to read "Manufacturer, Product Name and Part#l: fits Glock Model".  Send the proposed change to Miss I. Am TehLaw and get an approval. Once you have the agreement and keep to it they can't hammer you with any more nastrygrams without some significant legal maneuvering on their part.

Brad

[brimic]

Don't ignore lest they DO send you a certified letter... which will undoubtedly contain something much higher up the legal food chain than an official-o-gram.  Nip it in the bud while it's still an easy an cheap fix.  Ignoring it will likely get you on some junior attorney's hit list, making you their ticket to Getting Noticed.  At the least a huge-er inconvenience, and likely drawn out and expensive.  Play the good guy now and keep the See I Play Nice bridge open.

Don't feel bad. Most large companies have (sometimes overly) aggressive trademark protection plans.   Simply change the descriptions to read "Manufacturer, Product Name and Part#l: fits Glock Model".  Send the proposed change to Miss I. Am TehLaw and get an approval. Once you have the agreement and keep to it they can't hammer you with any more nastrygrams without some significant legal maneuvering on their part.

Brad

Do you change your behavior everytime skme random weirdo sends you an officious sounding email?

[KD5NRH]

:%s/Glock/XDv0.5b

[Brad Johnson]

Do you change your behavior everytime skme random weirdo sends you an officious sounding email?

Ever hear of a phone? They can, and sometimes have, been used to verify the validity of things like the message above.  A quick call to Glock America would get the question answered.

Besides, the message has none of the hallmarks of a "random wierdo" like asking for money, making strange offers, or having unprofessional/odd grammar and sentence structuring.  It also addresses what are legitimate trademark concerns and comes from an easily verifiable US address/firm.  Ignoring it outright when it's so easy to verify would be the height of business irresponsibility.

Brad

[Monkeyleg]

I'll call Glock. Chances are nobody will know anything, except for the person who: a) has a full voicemail box or; b) is out of town until after Labor Day.

The manufacturers almost make it as difficult to do business as do the weirdo customers.

Trijicon was hassling me again about showing below-MAP prices. So, I changed the site to show MAP prices, but then had "save $XXX by entering coupon code TRJT-xxx in the Discount box at checkout." This satisfied Trijicon, but I told the woman I was dealing with there that I wouldn't get another Trijicon sale. People are just too wary. If it's anything out of the norm, they run like hell.

I sold an ACOG on the morning of June 24th. I put up the MAP prices and coupon codes that afternoon. I didn't sell another Trijicon product at all after that. None. Nothing from 6/24 to 8/5.

Finally frustrated, I changed the price files back to the non-MAP prices over the weekend, and got rid of the coupon codes. I uploaded the new price files on Monday. On Tuesday I sold three ACOG's, and yesterday sold two.

Trijicon will probably contact me in a few weeks, and I'll go through it all again. If they threaten me, I'll just stop selling their brand. Why bother with updating their prices, models and photos  if I'm not going to sell any of their product?

[Tallpine]

Do you have any GLOCK mocassins 

[Marnoot]

You mean these aren't all official GLOCK components?

[vaskidmark]

As has been said, protecting a trademark means precisely that.

You might get around the TM announcement if you added the appropriate (TM) symbol to every word "GLOCK" that referred to one of their products, and changed your other descriptors to "xx for GLOCK(TM) <insert appropriate product name/model if not universal fit>.  Or you may have to add the banner regardless of how you revise the product descriptions.

Yes, it is a lot of work.  But then so is defending yourself in a losing court battle.

Why is GLOCK(TM) doing this?  Because Kimberly-Clark did not protect kleenex and Xerox likewise did not protect their product, allowing them to become generic descriptors of a whole line of like/similar products.

And speaking of moccasins - what features do the GLOCK(TM) ones have that the others do not?  Does GLOCK(TM) offer the same warranty as on their firearm products?

stay safe.

[Monkeyleg]

Why is GLOCK(TM) doing this?  Because Kimberly-Clark did not protect kleenex and Xerox likewise did not protect their product, allowing them to become generic descriptors of a whole line of like/similar products.

Do you know how desperately some companies try to have their brands become generic descriptions of similar products? Yes, somebody buying another brand of tissue may call it Kleenex, but when people think of facial tissue, the name Kleenex comes to mind. Kleenex immediately has a leg up on the competition.

[Boomhauer]

Oftentimes issues crop up in the firearms world due to airsoft copies (particularly accessories such as optics, parts, sights, and when I say copy, I mean clone with identical markings being passed off as legit OEM product). That is probably what Glock is most concerned about, and they are just covering their bases.

[onions!]

Some years back General Motors cracked down pretty convincingly on copyright infringers.

People were selling LOTS of knockoff restoration parts,garage accessories(lamps,clocks,swag),clothing,and stuff I don't remember.

The point is that some of the stuff was quality.It upheld the brand standard.
Lots of it was cheap crap that harmed GMs reputation.

I'd either comply fully or stop selling the stuff.Simple.
Keeping up the status quo and planning on doing nothing unless you're facing legal action is foolish.

Price of doing business.

[K Frame]

Or would cost them a lot more if they were to ignore it and lose the mark as a result.

Ignoring Pepsi for 30 years is how Coke lost exclusive rights to Cola.

[Brad Johnson]

Think Glock is being stiff? Be glad you aren't in the computer accessory (Apple) or gaming (Xbox/Playstation) business.

Brad

[CNYCacher]

they could instead read “Pearce Magazine Extension Plus 2 for Glock’s 20/21,”

The apostrophe makes baby jesus cry.

But seriously, GLOCK^TM has to do this. If they don't they run the risk of GLOCK^TM becoming genericalized^{c 2014 CNYCacher}.

If they don't send these notices out religiously, eventually someone will challenge them on the name and they might lose it.

[Monkeyleg]

If they don't send these notices out religiously, eventually someone will challenge them on the name and they might lose it.

They've already lost it. How many journalists call shotguns, revolvers, and derringers "Glock"?

[vaskidmark]

Do you know how desperately some companies try to have their brands become generic descriptions of similar products? Yes, somebody buying another brand of tissue may call it Kleenex, but when people think of facial tissue, the name Kleenex comes to mind. Kleenex immediately has a leg up on the competition.

What makes you believe that?  Kleenex(TM) lost their leg up when it stopped being a brand and became a generic descriptor.  Hardly andbody goes shopping for Kleenex(TM) - instead they cruise the aisles for the lowest priced box of kleenex.  Don't know if you are old enough to remember when K-C came out with their Kleenex(TM) brand and all the hoopla over how superior it was to other facial tissues.  They were after brand recognition and brand loyalty, and lost both.

They've already lost it. How many journalists call shotguns, revolvers, and derringers "Glock"?

They go after them, too.  Sully the reputation of the product means less sales means less income.  It may seem a losing battle, but again if they don't fight it they lose.  When they fight it they may not win outright, but they do build ammunition for the day when they do sue some journalist.

Have you registered your website under all/some of the most common extensions (.net, .bus, .whatever) or are you willing to take the chance that someone will not come along and steal business away?  If you have, you are like GLOCK(TM); if you have not you are like Kimberly-Clark.

stay safe.

[Tallpine]

Would it really take all that much more time to change your web text than to complain about it on APS ?   

[lee n. field]

trademark protection

---delete, already covered-----

[lee n. field]

Would it really take all that much more time to change your web text than to complain about it on APS ?   

Do both!

[K Frame]

They've already lost it. How many journalists call shotguns, revolvers, and derringers "Glock"?

Journalism doesn't count. It's considered a fair use exception under the Lanham Act.

You MIGHT be able to claim a comparative advertising fair use, but I think that's a huge stretch as you're not comparing firearms from different manufacturers.


"The apostrophe makes baby jesus cry."

The apostrophe as used in that sentence is correct.



"Do you know how desperately some companies try to have their brands become generic descriptions of similar products?"

The vital distinction is that they try do so at the EXPENSE of the other company, NOT at the expense of losing their own trademark!

Xerox may well have become the "unofficial official name" for photostatic copying, but Xerox did so by dominating the market and crushing competition for the better part of 30 years. And it wasn't competitors using Xerox that killed the Xerox mark -- it was an antitrust suit by the US Government that FORCED Xerox to relinquish many of it patents, leaving the market wide open to competitors.