Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: MPAA forces brewery to change the name of their beer

This is topic MPAA forces brewery to change the name of their beer in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=007269

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 01-30-2015, 01:20 AM:

original article

quote:

Threatened by Hollywood's MPAA, the Minneapolis beer brewery 612 Brew has decided not sell its popular "Rated R" beer anymore. The Hollywood group demanded a name change as it owns the "Rated R" trademark, so the brewery chose to brand its beer "Unrated" instead.

The MPAA is best known for its efforts to protect the rights of the major movie studios. However, the group also has some intellectual property of its own to defend.

A few weeks ago the MPAA sent a cease and desist letter to Minneapolis beer brewery 612 Brew, who’re known for their tasty beers including the popular “Rated R” brand.

The movie industry group pointed out that the company was using the “Rated R” trademark without permission and urged the beer maker to drop the name to avoid confusion.

The MPAA registered “Rated R” at the trademark office in the eighties as a certification mark, indicating that a movie is rated unsuitable for children under 17, unless they’re accompanied by an adult.

While movie ratings have nothing to do with beer, the MPAA took offense at the name after the brewery filed their own trademark application. According to 612 Brew co-founder Kasak, the MPAA didn’t want the beer makers to use any of the “Rated” variants.

“[Our beer] could have been PG, PG-13 or R. It didn’t matter. As long as it contained the word ‘rated’ it would still get flagged,” Kasak told Minneapolis / St. Paul Business Journal.

An MPAA spokesperson confirmed that the group sent a cease and desist letter but further details are not available.

The brewery first responded to the demands by arguing that the Rated R name can be used as they clearly operate in a different industry. The MPAA wasn’t convinced though, so 612 decided that it was easiest to change the name.

The trademark specifically notes that the MPAA doesn’t have an exclusive right to the word “rated,” but 612 Brew decided to go for a different variant.

Starting this year the name of “Rated R” beer was changed to “Unrated,” which isn’t trademarked by the MPAA. While the change is a setback for the brewery it’s co-founder doesn’t believe it will harm business in the long run.

“It’s going to take some time for people to get used to it, but it will be OK. It’s a great beer and they’ll drink it regardless of the name,” Kasak notes.

The brewery now has to hope that the “unrated” name won’t cause any headaches in the future. A quick search reveals that there’s an “unrated” trademark application in progress by a “yoga pants” outfit, so fingers crossed.

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 01-30-2015, 07:58 AM:

The ratings are trademarked and the MPAA has always protected that trademark with an iron fist. That's why TV and Video games had to come up with their own That's why they aren't law. Anytime a state legislature tries to codify the ratings, or make them enforceable, the MPAA's attorneys will be on them with a cease and desist notice.

We had a thread somewhere about a few of the laws that tangentially mention the ratings, but they won't mention them by name. They are also of questionable legality anyway.

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 01-30-2015, 09:21 AM:

Rated X was not trademarked, which is why they changed it NC-17 which is trademarked.

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 01-30-2015, 09:33 AM:

I think if the brewery had fought it, they would have won. A trademark applies to your industry only. That is why there can be a "Delta Airlines" and a "Delta Faucets" or "AMC Theatres" and the "AMC Channel."

Trademarks are pretty narrow. Copyrights are broad.

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 01-30-2015, 10:04 AM:

I thought AMC was a trademark of the American Motors Corporation, which built such quality cars like the Rambler, Pacer, and the aptly named Gremlin, which made them the force in the automobile industry that they are today. [Smile]

Actually, they did make one hot car, a 2 seat muscle car called the AMX.

Chrysler bought them for their Jeep division. They briefly renamed the car division "Eagle" before shutting it down.

Posted by Rick Raskin (Member # 1561) on 01-30-2015, 10:42 AM:

quote: Lyle Romer
I think if the brewery had fought it, they would have won.

Yeah, but at what cost?

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-30-2015, 12:15 PM:

Looks like they used not only the wording but also the "format" of the ratings box, although with different fonts. I can see where the MPAA would take offense. Like, I don't think I could paint my theater red, put a wavy white stripe across it and call it the "Coca Cola Theater" and get away with it. (Plus the Pepsi people would be PISSED!) [Big Grin]

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 01-30-2015, 01:04 PM:

It's my understanding that there is a difference between a Trademark and a Famous Mark, though Famous Marks are still litigated under trademark law..

If I have a business named "Good Socks" that makes socks, I can trademark that name and nobody else can call their sock-making business "Good Socks". It's not "famous", though, so someone else could use the same name in a different industry and make "Good Paintbrushes" without infringing on my trademark.

Coca Cola is a "famous mark" so I can't make Coca Cola socks, even though Coca Cola isn't in the business of making socks.

The International Trademark Association has a good write-up about Famous Marks here:

http://www.inta.org/TrademarkBasics/FactSheets/Pages/FamousWellKnownMarksFactSheet.aspx

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-30-2015, 01:53 PM:

Some of this stuff is getting pretty goofy. The "Rated R" thing from 612 Brewery has very little resemblance to the MPAA's own "Rated R" thing (the design of which the MPAA badly goofed up recently). The arrangement isn't the same. The typefaces aren't the same. The term "rated R" is the only slight similarity, but honestly the MPAA's doohickey says "R Restricted." There is no "RATED" stated anywhere.
[Roll Eyes]

What's really funny is the MPAA picking on this small brewery when other instances of lifting the "R" thing have apparently gone unnoticed by the MPAA. For example, check out the album cover of Rated R by Queens of the Stone Age:

The larger problem is the US government is now a freaking joke when it comes to managing patents, trademarks and copyrights. Recently the Seattle Seahawks football team applied for trademarks on the number "12" and the word "boom." Amazingly the Texas Tech Red Raiders already had a trademark on the number "12". Maybe I need to apply for a trademark on the word "black" so I can get paid much dollars whenever it is mentioned.
[Roll Eyes]

Combine this with the fact our legal system, both in the criminal and civil aspects, are heavily stilted to giving victory to whoever has the most money ("war chest" is the term I often hear used). You might have to wait a while just getting a patent case heard with the way Apple and Samsung keep jamming up the court system with odd bullshit that somehow gets patents. A finger gesture to the right, even if it is pointed at a woman or a bottle of aspirin or telling someone the location of a bathroom (¿Donde esta el Banjo?) -dammit Apple owns that patent you law-breaking SOB! Pay us! $16 billion wasn't enough last quarter!

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 01-30-2015, 04:32 PM:

I don't think anyone seeing a product named "Rated R" would assume anything other than it being a play on the movie ratings system. Ridiculous or not, the MPAA has an obligation to defend their trademarks or they risk them becoming generic names. This is the same reason Coca-Cola would want to defend against any usage where "coke" were used in a generic in place of soda or pop. Similarly, Kleenex is nearly a generic name for facial tissue, despite still being an active brand name.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 01-30-2015, 06:21 PM:

quote: Mitchell Dvoskin
, a 2 seat muscle car called the AMX.

(Not to drift topic here, but add comments the Rambler/AMC side topic) In 1972, I about bought an AMX 390, but went with the Gremlin X with the 304-V8.

I ripped off the smog junk, played with the timing and muscled out 15 more HP out of that motor. Had the 3.91 on the rear end with that three speed, and gave Chevs a good chase for the money back then.

AMC's were much better built that any Chev or Ford could muster out, but the Big Three just had the market for popularity.

When AMC introduced the Eagle (a rebadged Hornet sedan built to handle the 4x4 driveline setup), it was definitely a workhorse with that bulletproof 258CID straight six.

The Pacer, designed for the GM Wankel motor, which flopped to cause the vehicle to take on the 258 straight six, was fun to drive being it was wide and handled well on the road, but a nightmare for motor maintenance.
True, the Ace-in-the-Hole for AMC was the JEEP Division and that is what Chrysler went after in 1987.

The Eagle Division had it's little gem called the Eagle Talon, which was the same vehicle as the Plymouth Laser and the Mitsu Eclipse, but dressed up in an AWD chassis and turbocharged 2.0L motor. I own the Turbo Laser version of this vehicle.

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 01-30-2015, 08:09 PM:

I've always wanted one of those Eagle Talons.