Don't Shoot the Bike Messenger!

[e-RICHIE]

Fixed, et al,
This looks like a raw deal:

http://www.movingtargetzine.com/article/lances-people-kill-skidstrong

http://checkoutmyskidmark.blogspot.com/2005/11/no-7-vol-1-lancey-pants_30.html

I think i'll navigate through the sites and make a donation.
e-RICHIE©™®

[Dustin]

Whatever one may think of the cease-and-desist letter, you have to admit that the new name is a lot better.

[Fixed]

bro stuff like that i.m.h.o. is why a lot of people don't like L.A. cheers :beer:

[e-RICHIE]

bro stuff like that i.m.h.o. is why a lot of people don't like L.A. cheers :beer:

http://www.cdvideo.info/cdvs/randynewman_ill1.jpg
NOT

[Big Dan]

$$$$$$$$$$$$$

that's what is all about............. :p

[e-RICHIE]

$$$$$$$$$$$$$

that's what is all about............. :p


sad.
he has enough, no?
if this touches you, donate to the bmef.

[Kevan]

Where do Lance and his peeps draw the line? Is Lance even driving this truck of his? Skidstrong might have been an acceptable breach due to its cause, but what then do you do when other organizations/individuals try to take advantage of a market name, possibly with a product or service less than appropriate? Unfortunately, these days, a crack leads to a leak which leads into something much more.

Lance takes cancer seriously, he's going to protect what's been built.

[e-RICHIE]

are these guys taking money out of his pocket?

[Kevan]

it ain't the money directly, it's the name that draws the money. They want to protect the name on which his cancer foundation is built. Pockets suggest a more personal connection, no?

I'm with Dustin, I too like the new name. Anyway, both are good causes.

[harlond]

Another devil's advocate here. As I understand trademark law, the failure of a trademark owner to protect the mark--that is, to prevent infringing uses--can result in the mark having no protection. Then anyone can use it for good or ill. In this case, the consequences of protecting the mark are regrettable, but I don't believe the law permits a mark owner to distinguish between "good" infringing uses and "bad" infringing uses. And given the time, effort, and money the LAF has put into developing this mark, I think it's understandable they would want to protect it.

Of course, none of this would ever happen if (1) the LAF had not been so successful in developing and publicizing this mark and (2) people did not want to take free advantage of the LAF's success. From everything I read, LA is NOT a nice guy, and this may well be more evidence of that fact, but that doesn't make the people trying to profit from his efforts blameless.

[e-RICHIE]

Another devil's advocate here. As I understand trademark law, the failure of a trademark owner to protect the mark--that is, to prevent infringing uses--can result in the mark having no protection. Then anyone can use it for good or ill. In this case, the consequences of protecting the mark are regrettable, but I don't believe the law permits a mark owner to distinguish between "good" infringing uses and "bad" infringing uses. And given the time, effort, and money the LAF has put into developing this mark, I think it's understandable they would want to protect it.

Of course, none of this would ever happen if (1) the LAF had not been so successful in developing and publicizing this mark and (2) people did not want to take free advantage of the LAF's success. From everything I read, LA is NOT a nice guy, and this may well be more evidence of that fact, but that doesn't make the people trying to profit from his efforts blameless.



this, from the website, says it all to me.
as far as i can discern, they began at the
same time, yet one party went bigger
and further with it than the other. here:

Businesslike explanation:
We started using the name Skidstrong back in May 2004, the same time that the LAF came out with their wristbands. A local customer saw our yellow-rimmed wheels in the window, and said "Cool wheels! They remind of those new yellow bands! You should call them Skidstrong!" So we did.

The LAF didn't copyright the name Livestrong until August 2005, unbeknownst to us or anyone else. In fact, the copyright hasn't been officially finalized yet, according to their attorney. No one, once, has commented on the Skidstrong name sounding like Livestrong. So when we were served papers a few weeks ago, it was literally news to us.

There's no anti-Lance vibe cultivated; we just laid out the facts on our website. We're also not into hero-worship over Lance like most of the folks in this country, but we're not losing sleep over this. We've moved on. The sole purpose of this effort is to create awareness and raise funds for the Bicycle Messenger Emergency Fund, and that's what we're doing. We don't need to hitch our wagon to any celebrity to do this, just offer good products made in the USA whenever possible. Our FISSO bikes have been well received, and we'll continue providing good products and services.

[harlond]

this, from the website, says it all to me.
as far as i can discern, they began at the
same time, yet one party went bigger
and further with it than the other. here:

Businesslike explanation:
We started using the name Skidstrong back in May 2004, the same time that the LAF came out with their wristbands. A local customer saw our yellow-rimmed wheels in the window, and said "Cool wheels! They remind of those new yellow bands! You should call them Skidstrong!" So we did.

The LAF didn't copyright the name Livestrong until August 2005, unbeknownst to us or anyone else. In fact, the copyright hasn't been officially finalized yet, according to their attorney. No one, once, has commented on the Skidstrong name sounding like Livestrong. So when we were served papers a few weeks ago, it was literally news to us.

There's no anti-Lance vibe cultivated; we just laid out the facts on our website. We're also not into hero-worship over Lance like most of the folks in this country, but we're not losing sleep over this. We've moved on. The sole purpose of this effort is to create awareness and raise funds for the Bicycle Messenger Emergency Fund, and that's what we're doing. We don't need to hitch our wagon to any celebrity to do this, just offer good products made in the USA whenever possible. Our FISSO bikes have been well received, and we'll continue providing good products and services.
Well, if that's true, sounds like they could have told them to take a hike, or at least explained why theirs might not be an infringing use. Often bad business for a mouse to litigate with an elephant, of course. I'm still not sure the LAF could safely ignore them, but I'll concede they might be ogres after all.

[MartyE]

Does LA even know about this?
Sounds like some would make it a personal issue
when there is no evidence that LA said go get em.
I think the machine (LAF) has gotten much bigger than
the head (LA) and acts on its' own in it's own self
interest.
That said it still sucks.

marty

[Ginger]

Hmmmnm.... Are the LIVEWRONG guys still selling their bands?

[djg]

Another devil's advocate here. As I understand trademark law, the failure of a trademark owner to protect the mark--that is, to prevent infringing uses--can result in the mark having no protection. Then anyone can use it for good or ill. In this case, the consequences of protecting the mark are regrettable, but I don't believe the law permits a mark owner to distinguish between "good" infringing uses and "bad" infringing uses. And given the time, effort, and money the LAF has put into developing this mark, I think it's understandable they would want to protect it.

Of course, none of this would ever happen if (1) the LAF had not been so successful in developing and publicizing this mark and (2) people did not want to take free advantage of the LAF's success. From everything I read, LA is NOT a nice guy, and this may well be more evidence of that fact, but that doesn't make the people trying to profit from his efforts blameless.

Yep. Trademark rights are basically use 'em or lose 'em rights. If the LAF does not act to protect the integrity of its trademarks, then the Foundation may lose its right to exclude others from using them at will. If the LAF winks at a bike shop/builder/e-tailer, it has to be prepared to wink at lots of folks, individual and corporate alike. There are wrinkles to this--if you want to know the details you can hire an IP attorney--but that's the gist of it.

Once the LAF became an organization of any financial significance, it acquired all sorts of obligations. You don't need attorneys and accountants to run a bake sale, but you do need them if you mean to raise millions of dollars for cancer research. A not-for-profit really does have to operate as a business, and it really does have to operate under the law, just as profit-seeking enterprises do. And if Lance Armstrong the person has a lick of sense, he will frequently defer to his attorneys and accountants on the details of this.

I don't know Lance Armstrong personally and I don't know whether I'd enjoy his company or find him to be a "nice guy," were I to meet him. Frankly, it doesn't seem to be a pressing issue for me and I don't much care. But the Gaansari/Fissio/Whatever folks just seem like whiners on this one. They wanted to make a buck--that's fine. They want to support a worthwhile cause too--excellent. They thought they could make some hay by a winking reference to the Livestrong brand and it didn't occur to them that there might be some legal sense in which this was problematic, even if they kinda meant well, even if they were being, you know, like ironic or something, even if they conceived themselves as small time, and even if one of them bills himself as a "cycling evangelist." So now they know. Sheesh--they haven't been beaten or imprisoned, they've received a cease and desist letter. Having read it, they should accept the lesson and move on. Lance Armstrong has not wronged these folks. Armstrong's foundation's lawyers have taken a standard step to protect the integrity of their charitable enterprise.

[nicrump]

I certainly hope this is a case where the body is acting without the head.

Although the upside could be that Skidsrtong gains increased awareness and support as a result of the LAF bad press.

[e-RICHIE]

Although the upside could be that Skidsrtong gains increased awareness...



skidstrong is gary b at gaansari, a nice guy
with few equals in the industry. regardless
of the coincidence, i hardly doubt he had
any insidious motivation wrt to all this.
http://www.gaansari.com/

[manet]

armstrong
strongarm

wriststrong

[Kevan]

from me at least, I think Lance's own legal woes, on and off the bike, both professional and personal have probably hardened his outlook on life and business. From dealings with slander, divorce, drug testing, book writing, charity foundation building, and Lord knows what else, it's probably difficult for he and his legal team to offer anyone an inch.

He'll continue through life protecting his yellow jersey.

[Serpico]

I'm still gonna Live Wrong (http://www.livewrong.net/) ...

http://www.livewrong.net/images/livewrong_t.jpg

http://www.livewrong.net/images/livewrong_shirt_t.jpg

[Big Dan]

I'm still gonna Live Wrong (http://www.livewrong.net/) ...

http://www.livewrong.net/images/livewrong_t.jpg

http://www.livewrong.net/images/livewrong_shirt_t.jpg


Bro..check your mailbox..you are next..... :p

:bike:

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . could successfully be defended as parody, which enjoys wide legal protection. I have also seen situations where the "offending" party simply posted a caution that their organization had no connection to the original and things went fine.

Additionally, any organization or company always has the option of lending their support to charities they approve of. I fail to see how this guy ever would have raised any amount of money that LA could have legitimately claimed would have gone to his charity instead. AND I would be willing to bet that the LAF paid their attorneys far more to write and serve this letter than this guy ever would have raised poaching off LA's name--assuming you buy their claim that this is indeed infringement.

Whoever initiated this action from the LAF--no matter who it was--may have considered the legal aspects of the case, but they have obviously totally botched it as far as the cost efficiency and particularly the PR aspects of the whole situation. This action may be legally perfectly justified, but it comes across as petty and p*ss-ant to the cycling public at large, and since LA's name is on the organization, it's he who will pay the PR price, regardless of whether he's a "nice guy" or not.

I certainly think cancer is an awful disease and would donate money to an organization to defeat it, but I wouldn't donate it to the LAF anymore. Perhaps if he sees this he can ask his people to stop sending me those endless fake "personal" letters from LA appealing for my dollars and instead send the money they save to their legal thugs--or to this guy's messenger charity.

BBDave

[nicrump]

skidstrong is gary b at gaansari, a nice guy
with few equals in the industry. regardless
of the coincidence, i hardly doubt he had
any insidious motivation wrt to all this.
http://www.gaansari.com/


I definitely wasn’t implying that

[e-RICHIE]

I definitely wasn’t implying that


i know.

[Fixed]

bro maybe L.A. thought the skid ment something inside the shorts i.m.h.o. cheers

[manet]

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.themorningnews.org/images/yellow_jersey_art4.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.themorningnews.org/archives/in_the_city/no_yellow_jerseys_here.php&h=331&w=500&sz=183&tbnid=4F0IshwEe5cJ:&tbnh=84&tbnw=127&hl=en&start=3&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dbike%2Bmessenger%2Brace%26svnum%3D10% 26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DG

[ergott]

Fixed, et al,
This looks like a raw deal:

http://www.movingtargetzine.com/article/lances-people-kill-skidstrong

http://checkoutmyskidmark.blogspot.com/2005/11/no-7-vol-1-lancey-pants_30.html

I think i'll navigate through the sites and make a donation.
e-RICHIE©™®

The skid strong name sucked anyway. I do love the cause and when I first heard about it in BRAIN I said "that's my next SS bike". Since that isn't going to happen anytime soon, I'm definetly putting a donation in and I don't want no stinkin wrist band!

[bluesea]

I wonder if LA is related to Steve Jobs? Same law firm?

[shinomaster]

should I take off my black "live wrong" rubber bracelet?

[Too Tall]

Looks like I'll have to sack the pre-school startup "kidstrong" sigh :rolleyes:
Disney gets a little twitchy at times also.
Twizzler thanks for adding to the collective cultural awareness, great people.