The Empire Strikes Back: Specialized Sues A Bike Shop Over Name

[Caerus]

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

[mikkelz]

Selling all my Specialized bikes and equipment as I'm typing this message...

[Thug]

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.

[Slowbee]

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.

[Caerus]

Selling all my Specialized bikes and equipment as I'm typing this message...

Still not seeing anything in the classifieds, especially the roubaix?

[Caerus]

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?

[GoLefty!!]

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

[SoftTail]

 

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.

[GoLefty!!]

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.

[Capricorn]

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

[GoLefty!!]

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

[Capricorn]

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.

[GoLefty!!]

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)

[River Rat]

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.

[GoLefty!!]

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

[I am not SomeBloke]

 

 

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.