DaveS January 6, 2014 Share January 6, 2014 So I was looking at the the product description of the new ORA Shortcake Acro. Here is their official website and description: http://www.orafarm.com/products/hardcoral/acropora/shortcake/ Description: The ORA Shortcake is an impressive Acropora with luminous white and green branches accented by pink and red corallites and polyps. The base is dark red with matching red corallites and polyps. We have found the ORA Shortcake to be highly adaptable in regards to lighting and flow conditions, but best color is achieved under moderate lighting. The ORA Shortcake grows slower than most of the other Acropora corals we grow but it has proven to be very hardy through the years it has taken us to bring it to market. We acquired this specimen as a wild Australian colony from LiveAquaria.com way back in 2009 making it one of the very few ORA corals that was not originally started from captive grown fragments. Much like our Mind Trick Montipora, the name of this familiar coral was truncated to avoid trademark infringement. Three things jumped out at me: 1) They say: "We acquired this specimen as a wild Australian colony...making it one of the very few ORA corals that was not originally started from captive grown fragments." So doesn't all coral come from the wild? Even the "captive grown fragments" came from a wild colony at some point right? Nothing was created in a petri dish. I guess they are saying they directly purchased a wild colony as opposed to getting a frag from some guy and farming the heck out of it. 2) Right off the bat I was thinking- what's the difference between this and the Strawberry Shortcake Acro we have all seen and is even given away for free here on SWAP? It sounds like there is no difference and it is the same coral we have all seen before, just with the ORA name behind it. Granted there are plenty of places where people will incorrectly sell a coral as something else- yes, fake designer corals like Rolex Watches and Gucci Purses... Here you can get the real ORA version of the coral- at least until you buy a frag of it from someone else who may or may not be giving you the real thing. I guess if you only buy it as a frag from an authorized ORA dealer, on the original black plug, you can be sure it's the real thing. And possibly the same thing we give away here for free. 3) ORA is now changing the name of corals they get before they sell them to avoid a trademark infringement? Has someone really registered Strawberry Shortcake Acro or Jedi Mind Trick Monitopora as a trademark? Is there really THAT much money in coral frags that one name is worth all that money, much less the cost/expense to litigate an infringement suit??? Thoughts from the peanut gallery? Note: this isn't meant to bash anyone- especially our LFS who carry these corals. They are all great and offer excellent communications about industry developments. This is more an industry/hobby wide discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wade January 6, 2014 Share January 6, 2014 I doubt there are trademarks, however! There is law pertaining to intellectual property and the use of names that could be taken up by someone unscrupulous as a baseball bat to get money from a larger business. I totally get why they did that, even if the threat is low. Eg, someone has been selling strawberry shortcake for years and they claim ORA infringed on their market by using the same name. They then hire a lawyer and go after ORA hoping to make some cash. The ugly realities of today's US marketplace. Just like Starschmucks going after some tiny little brewery for a third party using a name in conjunction with their beer on an independent website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveS January 6, 2014 Author Share January 6, 2014 Sure but if the issue is perceived confusion, why even call it Shortcake then? If they are truly concerned about market confusion (either being the victim or perpetrator) why not call it something completely different? Victor's Secret has been bouncing up and down between the Supreme Court and lower Circuit Court's for over 10 years on that issue. Dunno, I guess this what you get when you combine lots of hype, a small industry and the American legal system... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davelin315 January 6, 2014 Share January 6, 2014 The implication that they are using a cartoon character that is a trademarked name is what I believe is at issue. I would not mess with building a name up only to lose it. The business that they do is significant enough to warrant damages should a court find against them rather than a simple cease and desist. Under the same token, messing with Lucas Films on the Jedi stuff is asking for a Death Star to orbit your planet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lnevo January 6, 2014 Share January 6, 2014 The implication that they are using a cartoon character that is a trademarked name is what I believe is at issue. I would not mess with building a name up only to lose it. The business that they do is significant enough to warrant damages should a court find against them rather than a simple cease and desist. Under the same token, messing with Lucas Films on the Jedi stuff is asking for a Death Star to orbit your planet... +1 I'm pretty sure these are the trademarks referred to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wade January 6, 2014 Share January 6, 2014 I totally missed the implications on the toy. What does that say about Dave?? A closet Orange Blossom fan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveoutlaw January 6, 2014 Share January 6, 2014 I wonder if I can trademark "Outlaw Stew Palys"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davelin315 January 7, 2014 Share January 7, 2014 I totally missed the implications on the toy. What does that say about Dave?? A closet Orange Blossom fan? Uh, Wade, you are the one naming the girl who wears orange and has a citrus orchard - wait, I mean who is that and what are you talking about?!?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveS January 7, 2014 Author Share January 7, 2014 The implication that they are using a cartoon character that is a trademarked name is what I believe is at issue. I would not mess with building a name up only to lose it. The business that they do is significant enough to warrant damages should a court find against them rather than a simple cease and desist. Under the same token, messing with Lucas Films on the Jedi stuff is asking for a Death Star to orbit your planet... Haha ok, now I get it. Totally overlooked how they want to avoid being sued by the Hasbro and Lucas, not Tyree and World Wide Corals. Now that makes more sense. I totally missed the implications on the toy. What does that say about Dave?? A closet Orange Blossom fan? It says that Dave has four daughters... Still think its funny how ORA is releasing a coral we give away for free here. Just another example of the awesomeness of WAMAS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocko918 January 7, 2014 Share January 7, 2014 Still think its funny how ORA is releasing a coral we give away for free here. Just another example of the awesomeness of WAMAS. Woah woah, lets not go crazy here, I think it was only offered once. Mad props to Jason for that. Also just a thought, might be awesome for wamas members but it kills our LFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaddc January 7, 2014 Share January 7, 2014 Dunno, I guess this what you get when you combine lots of hype, a small industry and the American legal system... 100% correct. If you don't preemptively protect yourself in this country, then big business will come down hard on the little guy as soon as there is money to be made. I'm guessing the fine line between wild caught and captive grown is a result of the same system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Rhoads January 8, 2014 Share January 8, 2014 Woah woah, lets not go crazy here, I think it was only offered once. Mad props to Jason for that. Also just a thought, might be awesome for wamas members but it kills our LFS. Thanks for the shout out I also did consider that I would potentially be taking a sale away from our LFSs when I chose to SWAP the coral. but, in the end, I figured that with the growth rate on this coral it would not do any damage to local stores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zygote2k January 9, 2014 Share January 9, 2014 When people here sell "ORA X coral" and it's not on an ORA plug, couldn't ORA potentially see these "fake" corals and initiate a lawsuit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaddc January 9, 2014 Share January 9, 2014 Yes, they could. They have the right to ask for licensing fees as well. Fortunately, I think they realize that that decision would go over as well as suing a 14 year old for downloading an MP3 without paying for it. 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 in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now