Judge Has Some Fun Denying Injunction Requested By One Brewery For Another Over Trademark Suit

from the for-the-lulz dept

While I write about a great many trademark disputes in these pages, there are certain stories that pique my interest above others, or otherwise become more fun. Writing about trademark issues in the alcohol industries has been something of a passion of mine, for instance. It's also fun to highlight when the courts get trademark questions right, since far too often the opposite occurs. And, when you have a judge who chooses to embed some humor in their rulings, that gets pretty fun as well.

And then sometimes you run into a trademark story that combines all three of the above. Such is the case in a trademark dispute between two South Carolina breweries. Low Tide Brewing has sued Tideland Brewing for trademark infringement over its name. As part of that suit, Low Tide Brewing went so far as to seek a preliminary injunction against Tideland to keep it from using that name while the suit plays out.

In ruling on the injunction, the judge was simply not having it.

“Low Tide has not made a clear showing of its likelihood to succeed on the merits of its trademark infringement claim. Without that showing, Low Tide is up the creek,” U.S. District Court judge David C. Norton concluded in his April 12 opinion. “Accordingly ... Low Tide’s request for an injunction (is) dead in the water.”

It's not Dave Chappelle level comedy, but it's pretty fun as far as these rulings go. And that wasn't the only part of the decision that incorporated a bit of humor into it. Though, given what the judge's reasoning for denying the injunction was, it seems likely that Low Tide isn't yucking it up alongside the judge.

As Norton noted in his ruling, a preliminary injunction is “an extraordinary remedy” that penalizes the defendant before the case is heard. Consequently, a trademark holder seeking a preliminary injunction must satisfy all parts of a four-prong test. One of those prongs involves demonstrating that consumers are likely to be confused about who made the product they’re enjoying. Norton agreed that Low Tide’s trademark is valid and distinctive, but found it wasn’t strong enough to cause customer confusion.

“The instances of third-party use of the word ‘tide,’ locally and within the relevant industry, are enough to take the wind from Low Tide’s sails,” Norton wrote. “As such, Low Tide’s endeavor to wash away the prevalence of the word ‘tide’ in coastal commerce holds little water.”

Furthermore, Norton ruled the two names aren’t so alike that consumers would struggle to tell them apart. “The marks are, at best, somewhat similar, meaning that Low Tide, now swimming upstream, has failed to demonstrate that the factor tilts the inquiry in its favor,” he wrote.

It doesn't end there. Norton went on to comment on Low Tide's submissions for what it calls actual customer confusion. That submission consisted of a single instance in which one of Low Tide's own employees called Tideland to ask if they were part of a Low Tide expansion. To that, Norton wrote in the ruling that "The court declines to take the bait."

All of which is a puntastic way for the judge to let Low Tide know that, while the trademark case will indeed go on, the court isn't looking too fondly on Low Tide's side of the equation. At this point, it might be time for Low Tide to find a way to bow out of all of this as gracefully as it can muster.

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: david norton, humor, trademark
Companies: low tide brewing, tideland brewing


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    LACanuck (profile), 19 Apr 2021 @ 8:57pm

    Perhaps, given the hour, I'm at a low ebb mentally, but I was over the moon with all the puns. And that's even taking the gravity of the lawsuit into consideration. I understand why trademarks might tug at you. I feel the pull of the topic as well. But that's probably just the syzygy of complex legal concepts with infantile humor.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Pixelation, 19 Apr 2021 @ 9:38pm

    Low Tide?

    Isn't that laundry detergent?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Annonymouse, 19 Apr 2021 @ 10:07pm

    Funny question but is the beer actually any good and not that overly hopped IPA the kids seem to think they should like?

    Does either taste like the laundry detergent by the same name? That would be a problem for consumers confusion.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Toom1275 (profile), 19 Apr 2021 @ 10:09pm

    It seems only Shipheads sue over beer trademarks.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    David, 20 Apr 2021 @ 5:03am

    Saw that coming.

    Low tide is best if you want to go pound sand.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 Apr 2021 @ 5:57am

    "But, but, but," quivered out_of_the_blue, "Nobody would ever brew or drink alcohol if trademark law didn't exist! Besides, only filthy pirates, gamers and criminals consume alcohol! Ooooooh!"

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Upstream (profile), 20 Apr 2021 @ 8:49am

    I am not sure Low Tide Brewing as a beer trademark is worth defending. While those who grew up along the shore may find the mental images and smells of low tide reminiscent of home and carefree youth, much the same way some people raised on farms think of barnyard images and smells, many (most?) people find the look and smell of seaweed and other shoreline detritus putrefying in the sun at low tide to be nauseating. I think it is mostly hydrogen sulfide, sulfur dioxide, and methane, none of which are generally considered appetizing.

    Maybe they are intentionally trying to limit their market appeal to locals only?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.