El Presidente Posted February 24, 2015 Posted February 24, 2015 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/centralamericaandthecaribbean/cuba/11432048/US-supreme-court-sides-with-Cuba-over-cigar-company-standoff-with-US-rival.html
Habana Mike Posted February 24, 2015 Posted February 24, 2015 Interesting. Aside from the Cohiba brand mentioned in the article I imagine this would probably extend to Bolivar, HdM, LGC, Partagas, Punch and Sancho Panza as well. Up early today Rob?
Charley Posted February 24, 2015 Posted February 24, 2015 That's very interesting. I assumed we were going to see some long drawn out lawsuits pertaining to this issue.
ShortFatHokie Posted February 24, 2015 Posted February 24, 2015 What's interesting is, I haven't seen it reported by any US source yet...of course, our media tells us what they want us to hear... 3
Scroats Posted February 24, 2015 Posted February 24, 2015 This should be an interesting battle. I think it remains to be seen if older brand names will also be released back to habanos sa, ones that the original owners claimed they owned when emigrating from Cuba.
FLB03TT Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 That's very interesting. I assumed we were going to see some long drawn out lawsuits pertaining to this issue. Your assumption remains intact. Stay tuned for "some long drawn out lawsuits pertaining to this issue."
johndalton44 Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Interesting. Aside from the Cohiba brand mentioned in the article I imagine this would probably extend to Bolivar, HdM, LGC, Partagas, Punch and Sancho Panza as well. Up early today Rob? This particular case only applied to General's Cohiba trademark, as it has a troubled past in the USPTO regarding continued use and registration, leaving it vulnerable to attack. I think the Fed Cir ruling that this SCOTUS denial of petition of Writ of certiorari now (essentially) upholds does make an interesting argument that Cubatabaco has an interest in canceling TMs that can cause confusion. I wrote a bit more about it here: http://www.friendsofhabanos.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=121911#entry571890 Best place for SCOTUS info: http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/general-cigar-co-inc-v-empresa-cubana-del-tabaco-dba-cubatabaco/
Popular Post canadianbeaver Posted February 25, 2015 Popular Post Posted February 25, 2015 Get it? It's an angry Red Dot!!! 7
earthson Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Ho-lee sheepshit! The decks are cleared! Whether the US is doing this to destabilize Russia's influence in the Western hemisphere or not, it seems that the intention is heard loud and clear... That's very interesting. I assumed we were going to see some long drawn out lawsuits pertaining to this issue. Your assumption remains intact. Stay tuned for "some long drawn out lawsuits pertaining to this issue." Unless General Cigar gets crafty by dreaming up new reasons to sue, the US Supreme Court is the end of the line. They declined to hear it. General Cigar's abhorrent cigars fade into oblivion and perhaps we have writing on the wall....
FLB03TT Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Roll out the barrel! and we'll have a barrel of fun... 1
Geaux Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Get it? It's an angry Red Dot!!! This actually made me chuckle. And not the fake 'lol' type....
aaron878 Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 Ho-lee sheepshit! The decks are cleared! Whether the US is doing this to destabilize Russia's influence in the Western hemisphere or not, it seems that the intention is heard loud and clear... Unless General Cigar gets crafty by dreaming up new reasons to sue, the US Supreme Court is the end of the line. They declined to hear it. General Cigar's abhorrent cigars fade into oblivion and perhaps we have writing on the wall.... The "win" today had to do with granting Cuba the right to sue, not deciding the trademark issue. The case has been sent back down to discuss the actual issue at hand. Nothing settled yet.
earthson Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 The "win" today had to do with granting Cuba the right to sue, not deciding the trademark issue. The case has been sent back down to discuss the actual issue at hand. Nothing settled yet. Why would Cuba be worried about the right to sue? Their use of the brands/logos/etc predates General Cigar's efforts, plus most - if not all - of the brands in question have been sold in the US before.
aaron878 Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 Why would Cuba be worried about the right to sue? Their use of the brands/logos/etc predates General Cigar's efforts, plus most - if not all - of the brands in question have been sold in the US before. It's legally technical but Cuba has sought to challenge General on the Cohiba brand. In order to legally challenge someone you have to have "standing" to bring the suit. General successfully argued in a lower court that Cuba didn't have standing to challenge the trademark use in the US because of the embargo. This decision was overturned by the Supreme Court so now the actual lawsuit can begin.
earthson Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 It's legally technical but Cuba has sought to challenge General on the Cohiba brand. In order to legally challenge someone you have to have "standing" to bring the suit. General successfully argued in a lower court that Cuba didn't have standing to challenge the trademark use in the US because of the embargo. This decision was overturned by the Supreme Court so now the actual lawsuit can begin. Ah, I see! That should be interesting, considering that Cohiba wasn't created as a brand until after the embargo. Clearly, not all of the brands in question have been sold in the US before! Still, General Cigar seems to be playing a losing hand - for one, their cigars suck, and for two, they plagiarized their trademark. Embargo or not, with the US pushing international trade agreements, I don't think it would turn out favorably for them. Good riddance!
laficion Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 Hi all, Frist, The Red Dots are not Worth It. Second. They are only for the U.S.A. market. I have not seen any around here . Third. They're REALLY bad for things that are not real cigars. If It were not for the name,"COHIBA", who would care ? Guy
CaptainQuintero Posted February 27, 2015 Posted February 27, 2015 Guy makes a thundering statement on the legal future of the NC versions after the embargo ends; the NC versions simply do not exist outside of the US. They only exist currently because of the legal protection the embargo has given the NC companies against legal action. Outside of the US they either has to change their name or simply not sell their product. NC RyJ or LGC exists in the UK but under a completely different brand name, I cant remember what off the top of my head though. 1
PaulP Posted February 27, 2015 Posted February 27, 2015 More information http://halfwheel.com/supreme-court-denies-general-cohiba-case/80198
JohnS Posted February 27, 2015 Posted February 27, 2015 Guy makes a thundering statement on the legal future of the NC versions after the embargo ends; the NC versions simply do not exist outside of the US. They only exist currently because of the legal protection the embargo has given the NC companies against legal action. Outside of the US they either has to change their name or simply not sell their product. NC RyJ or LGC exists in the UK but under a completely different brand name, I cant remember what off the top of my head though. Well, we all know now where these trademarks are headed then, now that the easing of the embargo has begun.
CaptainQuintero Posted February 27, 2015 Posted February 27, 2015 NC Hoyo de Monterrey is called Excalibur for the non-US Market The La Gloria Cubana NC brand are known as El Credito Both General Cigar company owned Nothing else, eg NC Partagas, Sancho Panza, RyJ, Montecristo, Cohiba etc etc are allowed in their current form and they haven't been rebranded, so simply are not available.
Hunter1974 Posted February 27, 2015 Posted February 27, 2015 I have smoked red dots and theyre dog rockets !!! whats really gonna be funny is when cigar A magazine gets called out on their crappy reviews
wabashcr Posted February 27, 2015 Posted February 27, 2015 I'm not so sure this is fait accompli for the other General NC brands. Obviously General's Cohiba was a blatant rip off of a post-Revolution Cuban brand. But regardless of what General is doing with the other brands now (which none of us favors), they can at least trace ownership back to the original owners of the brands pre-Revolution. Did those owners have the right to keep using their brand names and trademarks after fleeing Cuba and restarting their businesses in other countries? If so, and those owners have chosen to sell their brands, don't the new owners have some legitimate claim to them? I don't know the answers to these questions, but I think they'd have at least some relevance in US court. Of course the Cuban government has demonstrated they have the wherewithal to carry the legal battle on until they win. And then you have the issue of Altadis, invested in Habanos SA and also owning some conflicting NC brands. To me the most logical resolution would involve an agreement, either via merger/acquisition or other financial arrangement between Altadis and General, to re-brand their competing NC lines. At some point I'd have to think that would make the most sense for all parties involved, as opposed to seemingly never ending legal battles.
CaptainQuintero Posted February 27, 2015 Posted February 27, 2015 You have a very good point, there will probably be deals struck. Then again it depends how the US courts act. I think in legal terms the nationalisation of a company or business is completely a black and white issue and always sides with the nation as nationalisation is just one of those fair/unfair acts that a nation can do as and when it pleases with no legal ramifications. The repercussions are usually market based ie companies do not wish to invest in a nation which might confiscate its business, like in Argentina. As far as I can know there has been no legal action or cases outside of the US as the cases would get thrown out, hence the way the NC versions have zero market penetration outside of the US. I reckon itt really does go down to how much the judges in the US courts follow legal precedents or political bias
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now