Re: [CH] Re: Evil corporate types

Rael64 (z42dkm@yahoo.com)
Tue, 3 Jun 2008 16:31:14 -0700 (PDT) 

Oops.  I fergot this:  Many of those name-specific wines, cheese, etc. are given such protective status to ensure not only authenticity but, unlike a trademark, a limitation of production (which, I assume, keeps prices high).  Only a certain amount of a specific wine (chianti, for example) is allowed.  Extra grapes/juice, etc. must be left to rot, mixed, or whatever, and anything above and beyond the limit cannot be called 'chianti.'  Limiting a product to production of a certain grape, chile, etc. grown *only* in a certain region (or country) limits too (parmesan).

That would probably prevent you from dominating the world with your hot sauces (which probably would, in fact, make you an Evil Corporate type; you'd have to go on my 'list').

But as said, I'm all for ensuring that something calling itself a "tabasco hot sauce" is in fact made with tabasco chiles; I just dislike that someone/entity has found a means (the legality is irrelevant) to prevent everyone else from using the chile name "tabasco" in a product made from tabasco chiles.

Peace, Hendrix, and Chiles.......
Rael64


--- On Tue, 6/3/08, Rael64 <z42dkm@yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Rael64 <z42dkm@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [CH] Re: Evil corporate types
> To: chile-heads@globalgarden.com
> Date: Tuesday, June 3, 2008, 5:46 PM
> Ah, but is more along the sense of 'truth in
> advertising,' as I mentioned (Coke), meaning that if a
> hot sauce calls itself a 'tabasco hot sauce' it
> should have tabascos in it.  Of course, any other poor slob
> using tabasco chiles in a hot sauce cannot, I gather, use
> the term 'tabasco'.  This essentially sets up a
> sort of monopoly (wrong word; exclusive use? something like
> that) regarding the use of the chile, in a sense, which
> I'm sure the Tabasco (FU) folks are happy about. 
> I'm sure tabasco chiles are used in various hot sauce,
> salsa, etc. concoctions, but the point is that
> 'tabasco' cannot be used in the name.
> 
> Dislike of the tabasco brand hot sauce aside, my point is
> only that the granting of this trademark was a bad call. 
> It gives someone an unfair advantage over a commodity:
> tabasco chiles.
> 
> 
> Peace, Hendrix, and Chiles.......
> Rael64
> 
> 
> --- On Tue, 6/3/08, jim@wildpepper.com
> <jim@wildpepper.com> wrote:
> 
> > From: jim@wildpepper.com <jim@wildpepper.com>
> > Subject: [CH] Re: Evil corporate types
> > To: "Rael64" <z42dkm@yahoo.com>
> > Cc: chile-heads@globalgarden.com
> > Date: Tuesday, June 3, 2008, 4:39 PM
> > RE:  But for me, what's always been bothersome is
> that
> > the tabasco chile
> > is owner, as it were, of the name "tabasco",
> > 
> > Well- this isn't uncommon though in food, and
> there are
> > a myriad of
> > other examples, some closer to the 'mark' (!)
> and
> > others not.  Hmmm....
> > nearly all of them I can think of come from the wine
> world.
> >  I suppose I
> > ought to get my head out of the bottle a bit more :-)
> > 
> > "Champagne" can only be applied to that
> sparkling
> > wine made in that
> > region of France, no matter where I grow the champagne
> > grapes.
> > 
> > Make a wine with the Sangiovese grape and you have an
> > outstanding full
> > bodied red wine.  Make it in a certain region of Italy
> and
> > it will be
> > called "Chianti".
> > 
> > "Bordeaux" might be a closer example.  You
> can
> > grow those grapes
> > anywhere, but if you do, don't try calling it by
> that
> > name :-)
> > 
> > Although I can't think of them at the moment, I
> belive
> > there are also
> > examples in the cheese world as well as other segments
> of
> > the food
> > industry.  The drive to take a regional product out
> into
> > the world,
> > market it, and protect it based on some sense of
> it's
> > supposed
> > uniqueness, is not limited to Tabasco and they are
> hardly
> > the first. 
> > I'm not defending them as to the particulars of
> any
> > given case, only
> > pointing out that they are simply playing by the
> > established rules of
> > the game.  I know firsthand that they've had to
> > withdraw a marketing
> > campaign because it was pointed out to them that they
> were
> > stepping on
> > someone else's mark.  As this was/is a guy who
> > hasn't sold as much sauce
> > in a lifetime as Tabasco has in a day, the Trademark
> law
> > served him
> > well.  It works both ways.  It's a bit
> hypocritical to
> > celebrate the law
> > working for the little guy, but NOT when it works for
> the
> > 'big guy'. 
> > That's why Justice wears a blindfold ;-)
> > 
> > Again- the law REQUIRES us as business owners to
> protect
> > the mark to the
> > fullest extent of our abilities or we lose it.  Some
> just
> > have more
> > resources and abilities than others ;-)   
> > 
> > -Jim
> > http://www.StepUpforCharity.org