Caerus Posted December 8, 2013 Share problem is, there is way too much prior art to justify roubaix being spesh's intellectual property. it's not even american or english! or Canadian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikkelz Posted December 8, 2013 Share Selling all my Specialized bikes and equipment as I'm typing this message... Let's Ride 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thug Posted December 8, 2013 Share I don't think it's good business sense from Specialized but it's storm in a tea cup, it will blow over and wont effect Spez's profitability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slowbee Posted December 8, 2013 Share Right. Evil flourishes when good people look the other way.There must be separate issues here. One, Spez, has a right to defend the trademark. Spez feels it should defend the trademark, or others will start to push more and more boundaries on what is and what is not trademark. So it has to draw a line somewhere. In this case it is a shop. Two, should Spez have done this ? According to them yes, according to us, no. Dusty 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caerus Posted December 8, 2013 Share Selling all my Specialized bikes and equipment as I'm typing this message... Still not seeing anything in the classifieds, especially the roubaix? Jacques Viljoen 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caerus Posted December 8, 2013 Share There must be separate issues here. One, Spez, has a right to defend the trademark. Spez feels it should defend the trademark, or others will start to push more and more boundaries on what is and what is not trademark. So it has to draw a line somewhere. In this case it is a shop. Two, should Spez have done this ? According to them yes, according to us, no.Maybe I should trademark Durban or Cape Town for that matter and take the city to court for it? Spez themselves have stolen a name, right or wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoLefty!! Posted December 8, 2013 Share Thanks to SH*t like this I will NEVER buy any Specialized products. I guess Epic Bike Shop would be their next target.Heaven help anyone who can spell Specialised correctly.. **** bike anyway Over hyped corporate trinket Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoftTail Posted December 8, 2013 Share  There must be separate issues here. One, Spez, has a right to defend the trademark. Spez feels it should defend the trademark, or others will start to push more and more boundaries on what is and what is not trademark. So it has to draw a line somewhere. In this case it is a shop. Two, should Spez have done this ? According to them yes, according to us, no. Yes and yes. But Specialized management are no fools. They can see that this issue is damaging their brand. To them this is a brand OTB. They will fix it. Look out for a press release from them early next week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoLefty!! Posted December 8, 2013 Share Maybe I should trademark Durban or Cape Town for that matter and take the city to court for it? Spez themselves have stolen a name, right or wrong? They also stole the Horst link then patented it and now defend it for all they're worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capricorn Posted December 8, 2013 Share There must be separate issues here. One, Spez, has a right to defend the trademark. Spez feels it should defend the trademark, or others will start to push more and more boundaries on what is and what is not trademark. So it has to draw a line somewhere. In this case it is a shop. Two, should Spez have done this ? According to them yes, according to us, no. If spesh had done this to fuji, then sure. Consistency helps the argument. Granted, there might be things we the internet are not privvy to regarding Fuji, spesh, and the roubaix name. But until that's laid bare, it's lack of consistency from the current perspective. Added to that, to go after a corner shop. Bullying at best. They would not have lost anything meaningful, if at all, had they just looked the other way, or approached the guy with some sort of deal. Instead they blast him with a cease and desist, the costs of which no doubt he has to fork out for. I love the fact the internet is raging about this. I hope the PR disaster is massive, massive enough to equal the stupidity of the trademark as well as Spesh's lack of tact in the matter.  edit: i'm surprised derp hasn't shown up yet. Normally quick to fire from the hip on just about anything. Edited December 8, 2013 by Capricorn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoLefty!! Posted December 8, 2013 Share There must be separate issues here. One, Spez, has a right to defend the trademark. Spez feels it should defend the trademark, or others will start to push more and more boundaries on what is and what is not trademark. So it has to draw a line somewhere. In this case it is a shop. Two, should Spez have done this ? According to them yes, according to us, no.  How can Roubaix be a trademark? Perhaps only in North America. The name Rouboaix has existed long before Specialised started selling bikes through Target and Walmart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capricorn Posted December 8, 2013 Share They also stole the Horst link then patented it and now defend it for all they're worth. not sure if they stole it, or worked around it same way Orbea wiggled around ABP and Split pivot patents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoLefty!! Posted December 8, 2013 Share They stole it. They were given the design to use in a frame design and then patented it. They sued former employees for starting a bike company. They have sued any company for coming up with designs that even remotely resembles a horse link (name intentionally change to avoid patent infringement) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
River Rat Posted December 8, 2013 Share How can Roubaix be a trademark? Perhaps only in North America. The name Rouboaix has existed long before Specialised started selling bikes through Target and Walmart My guess is that Spez regsitered it as a trademark in Canada in all things related to cycling which is normal practice. It would be interesting to know whether Fuji sell their Roubaix in Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoLefty!! Posted December 8, 2013 Share My guess is that Spez regsitered it as a trademark in Canada in all things related to cycling which is normal practice. It would be interesting to know whether Fuji sell their Roubaix in Canada.  That should not stand up in a court of law. The name Roubaix is not a proprietary name since it existed long before the bike company came into being. This is Specialised after something else. Like maybe the property the Cafe Roubaix is situated in so they can open one of those gharstly concept stores Cellar 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I am not SomeBloke Posted December 8, 2013 Share   Figure it out boet. Because they can does not mean they should. Actually, just the opposite. It would count against them if they ever tried to sue for the name in a different instance since it could be pointed out that they had not legally tried to protect the name on this occasion. The way the trademark and patent laws are structured, not suing someone can act as a precedent. Blame the laws, not the company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now