Forum menu
Trek shut down Lemomd for his anti Lance position.
I think trek shut down Lemond because his bikes werent selling or more accurately Trek saved Lemond from being run into the ground but even they couldnt make money out of it.
As for boycotting specialized concept stores and their products, you arent hurting specialized, you are hurting the store owner, another little guy like the guy you are accusing Specialized of bullying
Much ado about nothing IMO. The fella who opened the shop was either incredibly naïve and didn’t even do a cursory trademark check before branding. Or he did the check, knew Spesh held the trademark and took the gamble that he would get away with it. He hasn’t, and now he’s crying about it on social media. He could easily have contacted the TM holder in advance and avoided all of this hastle but he chose not to. I honestly don't see how Specialized are being painted as the big bad wolf here.
Exactly this. His words were he "assumed" it would be ok. He then got called out & went public about it.
The Facebook 'outrage' is hilarious. People posting pictures of helmets they have smashed up in disgust, plenty of pictures of bikes with stickered over logo's, etc. Still - Makes it obvious to know who to avoid if you see one out.
Except specialiszed don't own the trademark they licence it from someone else and they don't licence it for cafees or wheels. Realy poor thinking on specialized part. Even the we had to defend or lose the rights argument is wrong.
I love that the real owner of the trademark is saying that Specialized breached the licence that they hold to use the name by registering it in Canada in the first place.
I can't wait to see what Specialized say about all of this once they finally decide to release a follow up statement.
“We are in the process of notifying Specialized that they did not have the authority, as part of our license agreement, to stop Daniel Richter … from using the Roubaix name,” Cunnane said in an email to BRAIN. “While ASI does have the authority to object to Mr. Richter’s use of the name and while we at ASI understand the importance of protecting our bicycle model names, we believe that Mr. Richter did not intend for consumers to confuse his brick-and-mortar establishment or his wheel line with our Roubaix road bike. And we believe consumers are capable of distinguishing his bike shop and wheel line from our established bikes.”According to the Canadian Intellectual Property Office, Specialized registered the Roubaix name in 2007 for use on “Bicycles, bicycle frames, and bicycle components, namely bicycle handlebars, bicycle front fork, and bicycle tires.”
But Cunnane said that registration was “inappropriate.”
“Like many trademark owners, ASI does not register its trademarks in every country and never tried to register the mark in Canada. ASI only recently learned of Specialized’s registration of the Roubaix trademark in Canada and ASI’s position is that Specialized’s registration of the mark in Canada was inappropriate under the terms of their license agreement. ASI has used the mark in Canada for well over 10 years, giving it first-use trademark rights in Canada.”
In a phone call, Cunnane noted that ASI has been able to reach amicable agreements with several other brands over trademarks. For example, ASI owns the U.S. rights to the name Gran Fondo for use on bicycles, while BMC owns the rights in Europe. The two brands have a co-existance agreement to share the name in both markets.
From the bicycle retailer story.
Seems like game, set and match to Mr Richter right there.
Haha, Specialized got pwned.
And to the S-apologists - yes I have also crossed Trek off my list for new bike purchases following Dave Weagle's ABP allegations (and personal experience of dealing with the company).
It's pathetic to say "let's allow them to be aggressive bullies becuase at least they're not as bad as xyz".
chakaping - MemberAnd to the S-apologists - yes I have also crossed Trek off my list for new bike purchases following Dave Weagle's ABP allegations (and personal experience of dealing with the company).
Best cross Giant off too, Weagle claims Maestro appeared after he collaborated with them about using DW-Link but they chose not to go with him
Specialized's management are currently hiding under the duvet, hoping the whole horrible mess goes away.
Best cross Giant off too, Weagle claims Maestro appeared after he collaborated with them about using DW-Link but they chose not to go with him
but giant aren't being dicks about it, at worst they're ignoring an extremely vague patent.
and as for the DW link / Giant maestro hoo-ha, Edge bikes got there before either of them.
This what happens when you act like a dick. Now spesh won't be selling Roubaix bikes in Canada.
Happy days. Eat shit spesh!
Best cross Giant off too
Yes indeed.
Absolutely AHWiles, Dave Weagle blows anyway
Specialized's management are currently hiding under the duvet, hoping the whole horrible mess goes away.
More likely they are busy negotiating how to handle it and discovering that they probably can't licence the name to the bike shop because they don't have that right. My guess is that in the end they do a deal where the shop gets to keep it's name and they pay to rebrand the wheels as that makes it look like the public have won. Then, in the end, they gain from a bit of publicity (their facebook likes have gone up since this started) and it's business as usual 🙁
[quote=irelanst said]Much ado about nothing IMO. The fella who opened the shop was either incredibly naïve and didn’t even do a cursory trademark check before branding. Or he did the check, knew Spesh held the trademark and took the gamble that he would get away with it.
Or maybe he assumed, as is reasonable and as is actually the case that it wasn't registered as a trademark for a bike shop.
I don't think that Fuji/ASI actually have the right to stop him calling his shop Roubaix either, but at least they have the decency to be nice about claiming their supposed rights, so I doubt anybody would actually object to them claiming the moral high ground in the way they have.
I honestly don't see how Specialized are being painted as the big bad wolf here.
Maybe it's because they were being bullies (something for which they have plenty of history). Do you not realise that the legal basis for their C&D wasn't actually valid and that they only hoped to win due to him backing down over the cost of him defending it - which is standard legal practice for Specialized. I'm quite pleased to see that Specializd's litigious practices have got wider publicity due to this.
What impact would one fatal incident resulting from a catastrophic failure of a Café Roubaix wheel or bike have on Spesh sales?
Er, probably zero. Because they're not actually branded as Specialized, something which anybody who isn't completely stupid would notice. Specialized are suggesting that us bicycle consumers are stupid.
[quote=leffeboy said]My guess is that in the end they do a deal where the shop gets to keep it's name and they pay to rebrand the wheels as that makes it look like the public have won. Then, in the end, they gain from a bit of publicity (their facebook likes have gone up since this started) and it's business as usual
You guess wrong. Fuji/ASI have swept away that way of backing down and coming out of this looking good - it seems Specialized's only option is to simply admit they are arses, along with possibly losing what trademark rights they do have in Canada, as it appears ASI object to their registration there (despite what I posted earlier it seems Fuji still own the trademark in the US and Specialized license it rather than the other way round).
Have people really been liking Specialized on FB? I successfully posted on their wall without doing so.
Sometime people 'like' a page so that they can receive the updates
I don't think that Fuji/ASI actually have the right to stop him calling his shop Roubaix either, but at least they have the decency to be nice about claiming their supposed rights, so I doubt anybody would actually object to them claiming the moral high ground in the way they have.
Seems easy enough to understand this but many people seem to still be missing the point.
Have people really been liking Specialized on FB?
They're waiting for the humiliating climbdown.
I bet the shop is doing well though.
I bet the shop is doing well though.
When the story first broke, they had about 100 followers on Twitter. They're now at just over 3000!
Yesterday somebody found that roubaix.ca was a free web name, registered it and then redirected it to caferoubaix.ca 😀
Indeed, profiting quite nicely from his own naiveity/stupidity, whodathunk it?
Searching for roubaix bicycle on google.com now returns www.caferoubaix.ca on the first page.
I just hope for Mr. Richter's sake that with all the extra sympathy / support / stickin it to "the man", sales it appears he's made last few days, for tees and jerseys etc., that his business doesn't fail through over trading ! Unlikely, I know with PayPal type sales and money up front etc. Here's to him anyway, whatever the outcome.
Northwind - Member
So do you boycott Trek (or Pivot, pick either)? Shimano? Cane Creek? Or moving away from trademarks, how about Chris King?
While we're here, what have those companies done?
To quote a tweet : Peter In Roubaix @PeterInDevon
The funniest part of the #roubaix bullying scandal is that @iamspecialized lost the password to their twitter account at the same time!
[quote=shermer75 said]Sometime people 'like' a page so that they can receive the updates
Ah - I just keep checking the page for an update. I suppose I'm increasing their page view count.
When the story first broke, they had about 100 followers on Twitter. They're now at just over 3000!
Wow, their profits must be through the roof with that....! 😉
I'd agree that there are bigger, much more important things to get wound up about in the world, but that doesn't mean you can't disapprove and decide to comment on or go as far as boycotting SBC, Cyclists are bound to care about "cycling issues" and the behaviour of cycling businesses, and probably get more animated over those issues than others (perhaps going beyond what is reasonable in some cases), I think it is important that as companies like SBC get bigger they remember that their customers perception of the brand, and what it stands for is extremely important for their continued success.
A "Brand" is more than just the Names, Logos and colour schemes, consumers are attracted to brands they feel they can identify with, that reflect their beliefs and aspirations, when it comes to "Brand management" enforcing an, apparently flawed, trademark registration is actually far less important than your potential customers thinking you are a bunch of lawyered up Dicks...
TBH, rather cynically, I don't think this little episode will really affect SBC all that much, they'll buy themselves a few more glowing reviews in MBR etc and the worst they'll feel will be a minor 2014 Q1 sales blip...
I don't think SBC are some cartoonish, Evil, Mega-corp, but I think in the process of growing from a Garage outfit to a multinational corporation over the last 30 odd years they've lost their way a little, become a little bit mono-cultural and started to think more about how to dominate cycling rather than be part of it, I think they maybe need a bit of a minor "ethical realignment" they might not be chopping down rain forests or rotting baby's teeth, but they are showing form for bullying smaller businesses over the last couple of years, its behaviour that in the long run will hurt their brand...
Intersting how none of the flamers have a repost to the argument that under Canuck law, Specialized could lose the Roubaix trademark if they don't take steps to enforce it (puts them in a no-win situation)
the fundamental argument is whether there was an actual infringement of the trademark in the first place, surely? Not whether they were right/wrong to try enforcement?
Several lawyers have said they think it was a fairly shakey claim in the first place. This is why people are upset - Specialized waving a big stick at someone on dubious grounds knowing they'll never have to contest their claims in court.
the fact they broke their own licence to use the 'Roubaix' trademark when registering it is the icing on the cake.
Intersting how none of the flamers have a repost to the argument that under Canuck law, Specialized could lose the Roubaix trademark if they don't take steps to enforce it (puts them in a no-win situation)
They don't have to enforce it, they can grant permission instead. But... it turns out they don't actually own it anyway and have just been granted permission to use it themselves.
Contrast ASI's pretty reasonable response with that of Specialized (Canada). Anyway I now have a T shirt heading over the Atlantic for Christmas 😀 . Reading Cafe Roubaix FB, he already has the offer of a Trademark lawyer pro bono (talk about getting in there!).
Intersting how none of the flamers have a repost to the argument that under Canuck law, Specialized could lose the Roubaix trademark if they don't take steps to enforce it
i did think about this a couple of days ago. They could have reached an agreement (assuming specialised and not Fuji hold the rights for Canada) All they had to do was contact the bike shop owner and say we believe that you're inappropriately using our trademark, whilst we doubt there will be any confusion between our brands under Canadian law we do need to enforce our trademark therefore would you be willing to to license the name for $1.
Compromise all round.
He gets to keep his shop name.
Specialized get to protect their (or more likely Fuji's) trademark.
And the story either gets no press or it might even deliberately leak out as a good news piece about global mega corp supporting the little guy.
[img] 
[/img]
Fair point wwaswas, but what do you mean by this?
the fact they broke their own licence to use the 'Roubaix' trademark when registering it is the icing on the cake
And also this...any evidence?
5thElefant - Member
But... it turns out they don't actually own it anyway and have just been granted permission to use it themselves.
cynic-al - read james-o's post on the previous page from the actual owners of the trademark.
[quote=cynic-al said]Intersting how none of the flamers have a repost to the argument that under Canuck law, Specialized could lose the Roubaix trademark if they don't take steps to enforce it (puts them in a no-win situation)
You mean apart from all the responses to that argument which had already been given before your post:
1) Specialized could have done what ASI have done and agreed that the cafe could use the name.
2) That they don't have to go after every use of the trademark (in situations which the trademark doesn't directly cover) in order to protect it http://redkiteprayer.com/2013/12/the-explainer-because-i-ing-hate-bullies/ http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/notices/TrademarkLitigationStudy.pdf
3) That the shop name isn't actually infringing the trademark at all as it doesn't cover bike shops and there is no real likelihood of confusion - this isn't a valid legal case and simply relies upon a small business not having the funds to fight it.
4) Finally that their registration of the trademark isn't valid according to the owners of the trademark in the US.
...off you go to read the thread, where you'll find all of those already mentioned. I particularly recommend reading the redkiteprayer article - one by a real lawyer with experience of this sort of stuff - where he debunks the notion that Specialized had to do this. I'll quote from that article for you:
Specialized is using the old “defend it or lose it” argument, saying that it must assert its “rights” to “their” trademark of Roubaix or risk losing it.It’s a weak argument and one that I, quite uncomfortably, had to try and make myself many years ago (more on that later). It’s basically an argument that can be summed up as — and forgive me for using another technical legal term here — ”bullshit.”
OK ta, I'd not realised there had been updates in recent hours.
aracer - Member
4) Finally that their registration of the trademark isn't valid according to the owners of the trademark in the US.
Odd...this relates to a Canadian dispute? -
BTW what do you mean by this?
one by a real lawyer with experience of this sort of stuff
[quote=cynic-al said]OK ta, [s]I'd not realised there had been updates in recent hours.[/s] I didn't bother to read the thread before posting.
Odd...this relates to a Canadian dispute?
Except there is a link between the US and Canadian legal systems, and the article suggests there were conditions relating to the licensing of the trademark in the US.
BTW what do you mean by this?
one by a real lawyer with experience of this sort of stuff
Er, that the article was written by a real lawyer with experience of trademark disputes. Why what else did you think I meant?
Again, cynic-al - all the answers have been provided. Why not just read?
Christ, like neither of you have missed updates on a thread in the preceding hours before you posted?
🙄
crossed Trek off my list for new bike purchases following Dave Weagle's ABP allegations (and personal experience of dealing with the company).
I'll tread very carefully here having had some direct experience of that. I wouldn't regard Trek as doing much wrong with axle pivots and IP relating to it. Or no more than anyone else.
I'm aware of the danger of judging before a verdict has been reached. DW's claim looked quite damning though.
Fortunately Trek have also ruled themselves out for me as a contender for new bikes by shamelessly weaseling out of warrantying their product when required.
Still bought a secondhand Stache though. Does that make me a hypocrite?