It really makes me so sad to see what has happened to this company since the actual Trader Joe died. Don’t know if it’s his family, stockholders, etc., but the place has really gone downhill. My entire time as an undergrad had my diet based around this place because I lived like 2 blocks away. Now I don’t know if I want to keep going.
Trader Joe’s has been owned by Aldi* since 1979. The fact that they managed to maintain the image of a wholesome company as long as they have is astounding.
(there are actually two different Aldi companies from Germany, owned by two brothers who split from the original company to make Aldi Nord (North) and Aldi Sud (South), that go by different names depending on the country they’re in. Aldi Nord is Trader Joe’s in the US, and Aldi Sud just goes by Aldi in the US)
Stoly spent a really long time as an undergrad.
“Defend it or lose it” isn’t the law, but the fact that you let infringement slide in some cases and prosecuted others can weaken a case. It’s not the slam dunk that corporations want you to think it is though.
I mean some of the union gear does have the companies name in a font relatively close to their logo.
And it’s a trademark so they have to defend it or lose it.
https://www.lodhs.com/blog/defend-your-trademark-or-you-could-lose-it/
The Actual Union logo is just different enough.
No, that’s a bullshit excuse. A grocery store and a union are entirely different categories and a trademark for one doesn’t apply to the other.
“Oops, I accidentally went to the union to buy milk,” said nobody ever.
Sorry, Still gotta defend it. doesn’t matter if it’s an ice cream stand. almost all the stuff on their page is fine, but using that font is a no no.
Eh, there’s enough overlap in the two orgs that I could see an argument of statements of the union trying to look like official tj releases. Overall, I would agree that a union shouldn’t be allowed to use a company’s logo.
That said, their logo here looks distinctly different. Basically the only similarity is the name itself, which would be absurd to bar a union of that very company from using. I hope the courts keep throwing out these appeals because it’s clearly bullshit.
Overall, I would agree that a union shouldn’t be allowed to use a company’s logo.
You’re just being antilabor. This is already a thing:
How am I “antilabor”? I literally said the lawsuit/appeal is bullshit.
You might be surprised to know that basically all unions do this sort of thing. It’s not an issue or it would have been blocked decades and decades ago. This is just TJ’s being evil for no particular reason. Please don’t bootlick for the corporations, your identity as a separate person is more valuable.
At the risk if angering the union brigade I’ve already pissed off, that’s not how trademark law works, and all your anger at the man doesn’t change that.
The intent of the trademark was that no one could pass their wares off as yours. But over the years, the legal standings have changed it into something else. If someone uses something close to your trademark, and you let them, someone else can come along and use it as well. When you take the second use to court, they’ll cite that you didn’t protect it from the first use, and trademarks are lost that way.
They can totally use the name, they can kinda form it in the way that the company does it. But when they start matching the font and shape of the trademarked logos, shit gets messy. There’s a fine line between vaguely recognizable and protected which comes down to them fighting off trademark trolls. The non-fonted stuff they can’t do shit about, but when they pretty much stole the font with the funky serifs and wrapped it on those bags, it’s a bigger deal.
That said, they likely should have just licensed it to the union for very specific uses and called it a day. They’re burning through more bad PR and legal fees than is anywhere near necessary.
The case was dismissed, you being an internet lawyer isn’t going to change anything.
