# backcountry.com Sues Anyone Who Uses "Backcountry" in Name



## MNichols (Nov 20, 2015)

Oh my, this is just wrong. And the saddest thing is the lawyers getting rich over litigation.... 



Why the courts even entertain this sort of nonsense is beyond me.


----------



## NoCo (Jul 21, 2009)

Goats should sue them for using their likeness on their stickers.


----------



## NoCo (Jul 21, 2009)

They just went the way of amazon for me. Another retailer i dont use.


----------



## Di (Apr 26, 2006)

I can buy my gear from a hundred other places - will never buy from them again. Their Facebook page has hundreds of scathing comments - feel sorry for their employees, but they deserve to pay for this BS predatory behavior.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

OK, this is total BS. I've been a customer and have bought a lot of gear from them over the years. I've just deleted the Steep and Cheap bookmark from my browser.

EDIT - just spoke with a rep at the company, and asked her to pass on my displeasure at this. She said she'll send an email address to send comments to management. In the meantime, their # is 800.409.4502

-AH


----------



## Will Amette (Jan 28, 2017)

I reckon I won't be their customer anymore either. Oh well.


I also won't be using Geartrade either -- an affiliate company that they bought.



Steep and Cheap? Same thing.


Thanks for sharing this disappointing news.


----------



## Roddy (Sep 8, 2011)

*Big Business BS*

I hate seeing this, to me this is similar to trademarking "Breckenridge" or "Park City" by a certain ski area operator. Big business doing big business kinds of things.


----------



## Utah78 (Apr 28, 2018)

Indeed, very disappointing. Instead of being a company that could use their potential to unite people around their love of the outdoors, they have chosen a corporate-driven "winner takes all no matter what the cost approach". All this at a time when there are lots of threats against outdoor access and other issues, they choose to go after other companies and cannibalize the other brands and any goodwill that could exist.


----------



## John_in_Loveland (Jun 9, 2011)

I just joined the Facebook Group "Boycott Backcountry.com"

Sent from my SM-G970U using Mountain Buzz mobile app


----------



## griz (Sep 19, 2005)

They’ll have to do a BOGO sale on some Aire Lynx II’s this winter to see my cash again.  

A shame. Now they can sit right next to Ebay for companies that had a good thing once but lost their way in greed.


----------



## jamesthomas (Sep 12, 2010)

Kind of like good ole America in general. Greed is one of the seven deadly's just so you know. My old man used to say " there is such a thing as a moral profit." He was a preacher by the way. What happens when you go beyond "moral profit"? Your soul is at risk, according to him. Hmmmmm?


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

The BC.com rep never emailed me the email address to send complaints to, however I saw the address she mentioned on the Facebook Group "Boycott Backcountry.com"

[email protected]

If you send a message, please be polite, professional, and brief but firmly express your opinion and state any action you plan to take. Remember that the person who reads the email will be some low-level customer service rep in their 20s, not the CEO or one of the vultures that's filing the lawsuits. 
Here's the email I just sent:



> No more Backcountry.com gear for me
> 
> To Backcountry.com Management,
> 
> ...


----------



## yesimapirate (Oct 18, 2010)

Man, I've spent thousands of dollars with them. I have hundreds of SAC, tramdock, whiskeymilitia, and goat stickers. I was kinda proud of having them. Not so proud anymore. I'm not going to say I'll NEVER buy from them or their subsidiaries, but I will most definitely put them at the bottom of the list. I will pass on the $150 coat for my wife that's been sitting in my "cart" for the last week.


----------



## Electric-Mayhem (Jan 19, 2004)

This is one of the insidious aspects of the trademark system.

Basically, if you have a trademark on something...in this case the word Backcountry... you are legally obligated to defend and pursue infractions against that trademark or you risk losing it.

That said...there are good ways and bad ways to go about it...and it appears that they are doing it the bad way.

I agree that, until they stop this behavior, publicly apologize, and go out of their way to make amends with the companies they have sued... I can't say I'll be doing business with them either.


----------



## k2andcannoli (Feb 28, 2012)

Don't hate the player, hate the game. I'm gonna file this in the "things that don't matter to me" folder. Trademarks aren't that hard to get...any of those other manufacturers could have filed for the TM but didn't.


----------



## Electric-Mayhem (Jan 19, 2004)

k2andcannoli said:


> Don't hate the player, hate the game. I'm gonna file this in the "things that don't matter to me" folder. Trademarks aren't that hard to get...any of those other manufacturers could have filed for the TM but didn't.


Several of the companies that Backcountry.com is suing DO hold Trademarks for their brand name. Backcountry has applied and registered the trademark but have been repeatedly turned down for official status.

They are suing companies who have had a trademark or who have been in business since before BC.com was a thing. Essentially...they are taking the crappy morally questionable but legal route of attacking small businesses that hold a Trademark for their name but aren't as aggresive with defending it or businesses that use the term Backcountry...often times for longer then BC.com has been around. They are also convieniently leaving other larger corporations who have the financial and legal resources to fight back (Backcountry Access being a notable one....they make Avalanche gear and have a large parent company backing them similarly to BC.com).

The trademark system is REALLY shitty and for many small businesses is beyond the scope of what they are able to handle. If you apply and are awarded a trademark, you are basically required to have a legal team pursue action when other companies use the term. For most small businesses, that is just not feasible.

The argument most people are making is that the word "Backcountry" is so widely and generically used that no one should be able to hold a trademark on it. It's hardly the first time something like this has happened though... seems like every year or two we hear a similar story and it all comes down to some larger company sending lawyers after a tiny company and the tiny company not being able to afford to fight it and losing...making them have to remove the "trademark" word out of their business name.


----------



## k2andcannoli (Feb 28, 2012)

" Back Country" there I fixed it for the little guys.


----------



## Electric-Mayhem (Jan 19, 2004)

k2andcannoli said:


> " Back Country" there I fixed it for the little guys.


haha... the article talks about one of the companies that got sued changing their name to Backcou eBikes...so you aren't far off.

For some reason I don't think adding a space alone will be enough for the lawyers.

Maybe just remove the "O" so its deeply offensive to some people.


----------



## codycleve (Mar 26, 2012)

I wonder what will happen when they go after someone with actual funding. Backcountry hunters and anglers comes to mind. This is an organization that every member most likely has done business with backcountry.com. 

I have done a lot of business with backcountry.com but that will be changing.


----------



## codycleve (Mar 26, 2012)

Just looked at the list of lawsuits.. looks like they are also suing pretty much anyone with a goat emblem. One agains barstool sports owned 5th year, pecos outdoors.
also has a lawsuit against costa del mar for their built for the backcountry emblem. also goat tape.. 

Costa and barstool have to have some coin to go to bat.


----------



## k2andcannoli (Feb 28, 2012)

Mayhem for the win!!!


----------



## theusualsuspect (Apr 11, 2014)

codycleve said:


> Just looked at the list of lawsuits.. looks like they are also suing pretty much anyone with a goat emblem. One agains barstool sports owned 5th year, pecos outdoors.
> also has a lawsuit against costa del mar for their built for the backcountry emblem. also goat tape..
> 
> Costa and barstool have to have some coin to go to bat.


Essilor parent company of Costa. Revenue of 4.39B


----------



## sarahkonamojo (May 20, 2004)

I made a comment to my "gear advisor" or whatever and requested that I be removed from their mailing list. Maybe someone is paying attention. Response below:


"Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts on this matter with us. Your voice is important to us and we will certainly share your feedback with our Leadership team. While we would be really disappointed to lose your business, we understand and appreciate your perspective. Please know that we will continue to be here for you, ready to support your outdoor pursuits should you ever need us.

This has been a very complicated matter, and I hope that strength in numbers can help it reach a much needed conclusion."


----------



## co_bjread (Oct 26, 2004)

I sent an email to the customer service email address today, and got pretty much the exact same form letter. It ended by talking about snow, and having a good winter. Makes me wonder how much flack they are getting for it, and if it makes a difference. I also found it interesting today to see the Backcountry.com wiki page. At the bottom, it mentions the backlash on social media.


----------



## MNichols (Nov 20, 2015)

Along the same WTF lines...
_Startup insurance provider Lemonade is trying to make the best of a sour situation after T-Mobile parent Deutsche Telekom claimed it owns the exclusive rights to the color magenta. New York-based Lemonade is a 3-year-old company that lives completely online and mostly focuses on homeowners and renter's insurance. The company uses a similar color to magenta -- it says it's "pink" -- in its marketing materials and its website. But Lemonade was told by German courts that it must cease using its color after launching its services in that country, which is also home to T-Mobile owner Deutsche Telekom. Although the ruling only applies in Germany, Lemonade says it fears the decision will set a precedent and expand to other jurisdictions such as the U.S. or Europe. 

"If some brainiac at Deutsche Telekom had invented the color, their possessiveness would make sense," Daniel Schreiber, CEO and co-founder of Lemonade, said in a statement. "Absent that, the company's actions just smack of corporate bully tactics, where legions of lawyers attempt to hog natural resources -- in this case a primary color -- that rightfully belong to everyone." A spokesman for Deutsche Telekom confirmed that it "asked the insurance company Lemonade to stop using the color magenta in the German market," while adding that the "T" in "Deutsche Telekom" is registered to the brand. "Deutsche Telekom respects everyone's trademark rights but expects others to do the same," the spokesman said in an emailed statement to Ad Age._ The report says Lemonade has complied with the ruling by removing its pink color from marketing materials in Germany. It's also trying to open up a larger discussion on the legal matter by using the hashtag "#FreeThePink," although it's gained little traction thus far. 

Lemonade also filed a motion today with the European Union Intellectual Property Office, or EUIPO, to invalidate Deutsche Telekom's magenta trademark, and they released a color chart with which it asserts are the hues at issue.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

Dear Gawd....

I can't help but wonder if somewhere there's a guy trying to figure out how he can get a patent on oxygen and then charge everyone to breathe.


----------



## elkhaven (Sep 11, 2013)

Andy H. said:


> Dear Gawd....
> 
> I can't help but wonder if somewhere there's a guy trying to figure out how he can get a patent on oxygen and then charge everyone to breathe.


That would be photosynthetic organisms.... and they ARE revolting by burning themselves to ash all over the world rather than give us evil humans any more O2..... No more humans, no need for litigation and the side benefits are astronomical!


----------



## RogueGuide (Oct 25, 2019)

Andy H. said:


> Dear Gawd....
> 
> I can't help but wonder if somewhere there's a guy trying to figure out how he can get a patent on oxygen and then charge everyone to breathe.


 It's not like Nestle, Pepsi, and Coke did that with water........ right?........ oh wait...


----------



## 50119 (Jan 17, 2016)

Andy H. said:


> Dear Gawd....
> 
> I can't help but wonder if somewhere there's a guy trying to figure out how he can get a patent on oxygen and then charge everyone to breathe.


Damn............you beat me "to the punch"! I was thinking AIR.

Perninent to the rafting community - then AIRE would be in jeopardy


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

Apparently they released a statement today. Someone posted this annotated version to the Boycott Backcountrydotcom FB group so we can read between the lines (click to embiggen):










Among the comments was this nugget:



> I work with crisis management and brand protection. They have bad advisors. They did a mistake, we all do, but when we learn that it was wrong we have to take full responsibility and do everything possible to minimize damage for 3rd parties first.
> The letter shows that he have listened, but that they really don't understand what they did wrong. And that they focus on the damage they have created on themself instead of the damage they have created on others.


----------



## Conundrum (Aug 23, 2004)

Andy H. said:


> Dear Gawd....
> 
> I can't help but wonder if somewhere there's a guy trying to figure out how he can get a patent on oxygen and then charge everyone to breathe.


It’s not too far off in the future.


----------



## co_bjread (Oct 26, 2004)

Well, they are feeling the pressure, and have started to respond to the issue.

https://www.snewsnet.com/gear/backcountry-ceo-breaks-silence-over-trademark-blowup

I'm not in marketing, but I would be interested to see what their sales charts are doing.

It mentions loss of 11,000 customers, which also makes me wonder how large their customer base is.


----------



## k2andcannoli (Feb 28, 2012)

#FreeThePink hopefully this catches on with the ladies. Social media may once again become enjoyable.


----------



## dirtbagkayaker (Oct 29, 2008)

I hate this thread.... It made be google "backcountry" and now everything time I log on FB all I see is "backcounrty" ads and all my friends that like and support "backcountry!" 

All this creates an internal struggle. I think I'll just go stick my head in the sand.. Blue pills anyone???


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

dirtbagkayaker said:


> I hate this thread.... It made be google "backcountry" and now everything time I log on FB all I see is "backcounrty" ads and all my friends that like and support "backcountry!"
> 
> All this creates an internal struggle. I think I'll just go stick my head in the sand.. Blue pills anyone???


So here's what you can do:

First share the Boycott Backcountrydotcom FB group with any friends that are still listed as "liking" the retailer,

Then select "hide ad" up in the top right corner of the ads and suggested posts. Unfortunately on the "why?" there's not an option for "scumsucking assholes" but that's OK, you can pick something else...

Gimmie that red pill!


----------



## theusualsuspect (Apr 11, 2014)

co_bjread said:


> Well, they are feeling the pressure, and have started to respond to the issue.
> 
> https://www.snewsnet.com/gear/backcountry-ceo-breaks-silence-over-trademark-blowup
> 
> ...


Thanks for the read, interesting. The link in the comment section shows all the litigation filed on behalf of corporate. Worth a perusal quickly just to see how many petitions they have filed. 

USPTO TTABVUE. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Inquiry System

Looks like they've been doing it for years, the world just picked up on it for whatever reason. I personally don't like any part of it and wrote an kindly worded email.


----------



## Dave Frank (Oct 14, 2003)

I sent them this:

Your greed with this law suit has just cost you my business.

I’ve purchased at least a few things from you every year since about 2007.

I’m not sure you’d get my business back by dropping the suit, but its worth a shot.

Former customer, Dave

SAC, deleted

Gear trade, deleted.

Backcountry.com boycotted.


----------



## Sparks1000 (Jul 5, 2018)

I will be very curious what they do with Backcountry Access. They have been around decades longer than Backcountry.com and they are a significant supplier.


----------



## NoCo (Jul 21, 2009)

Sparks1000 said:


> I will be very curious what they do with Backcountry Access. They have
> been around decades longer than Backcountry.com and they are a significant supplier.


They are going to have to sue everyone cause its sure looking like its going to be there only source of income.


----------



## co_bjread (Oct 26, 2004)

I found it interesting that the backcountry access guys traded a shovel to the backcountry.com guys for the backcountryaccees.com domain way back in the day. Mentioned in the colorado sun article posted earlier. That is how the community rolls, and what makes it great.

I am bummed by this because I really liked backcountry, bought a couple boats from them, paddles, pfds and other camping gear over the years. Once had my gearhead call me out of the blue to see how I was liking a purchase, and he nearly invited me on a Hells Canyon trip. It was a fun conversation.

What they are doing now isn't cool, and I let them know how I felt. I am definitely taking a break from giving them money, but I hope they can pull their heads out, and fix this. Granted, to me fixing this would involve restoring the small companies to their status before backcountry lawyered up on them, and I'm not sure how feasible that is.

Grrrrrrr.


----------



## jalthage (May 11, 2006)

This private equity firm is more than likely who's behind this mess to begin with. They own BCDC.

TSG Consumer Partners

Take a quick tour of their "Team" and you'll quickly realize that they don't give a shit about your concerns. I doubt any of them have ever slept in a tent, paddled a boat or climbed a hill.


----------



## theusualsuspect (Apr 11, 2014)

There is an online petition that was just launched addressed to the CEO. 

https://www.ipetitions.com/petition...sOWqb2Etk9xdSd7Zvk5hQnLRGa0KrpydaC3VeT5u9vNWg


----------



## MNichols (Nov 20, 2015)

Seems the backlash really hit them hard, in todays paper


“We have heard your feedback and concerns and understand we fumbled in how we pursued trademark claims recently,” Backcountry.com CEO Jonathan Nielsen wrote in an open letter posted on the retailer’s website, noting his company was dropping a federal lawsuit filed against the founder and sole operator of Marquette Backcountry Ski. “We made a mistake.”


Full story:
https://coloradosun.com/2019/11/06/backcountry-apology-jonathan-nielsen-trademark-lawsuits/


----------



## Canyon Country (Apr 23, 2012)

I've really liked Backcountry.com because of their past support for public lands. And they've always gotten the lion's share of my gear budget. But I hate to spend $$ anywhere that acts unethically. I've unsubscribed from their newsletters and sent a message to "my gearhead". 

Got the form message as above including the information that: "we have severed ties with the outside council who has been litigating our trademark disputes, paused all outstanding litigation on trademark cases and are working to repair relationships we’ve damaged over the last 2-years...." 

But I've gotta see that. I'm not "boycotting". I'm just choosing how to spend my $$.

BTW. NOTHING about this posted on their website. I can wait.


----------



## okieboater (Oct 19, 2004)

Having worked many years in the retail industry, I followed this thread with a lot of interest.

I can attest to the fact that no company wants or can handle a vocal and long term revolt from their customers.

Nothing hurts worse than loosing long term customers especially if they post in the media exactly what drove them away. Return customers are like free sales without the advertising costs to entice people to buy. 

My bet is the CEO probably did not pay much attention to this entire deal until (again most likely) the Sales V/P and/or Advertising V/P had a face to face discussion of customer feedback. Either or both loss of sales or prospective loss of sales. Sales are a primary part of most executive bonus plans therefore most executives follow sales numbers pretty intently. Feedback that put the company in a terrible situation as far as retaining sales or getting new sales makes a difference in company actions.

Bottom line to me is when message board like the Buzz showcase just how upset customers are and showcase ways to get feedback to that company that is public. Executives usually take corrective action.

I often see posts that say the Buzz is dead or posts stuff that are not very important.

However, in this case I applaud the Buzz and it's members by making the public aware of just how crazy the company was using a word like 
backcountry that is pretty much in the public domain to create havoc in the market place.

Bottom Line: Way to go Buzz members --- Good Job!!1


----------



## Electric-Mayhem (Jan 19, 2004)

okieboater said:


> Having worked many years in the retail industry, I followed this thread with a lot of interest.
> 
> I can attest to the fact that no company wants or can handle a vocal and long term revolt from their customers.
> 
> ...


Totally agree. I think there was a backlash on some other outdoor forum sites that are even bigger then Mountainbuzz plus all over facebook too. I'm sure the customer service and "gearheads" have been getting an earful too.

I think it was less then obvious, at least to me, before this that they were some big corporate company though now that I say that it should have been. They definitely had accomplished the feel of being a close knit enthusiast owned company that had good deals and sent stuff quickly.

I think that image is well and truly gone for me. The curtain has been pulled as it were...and I'm not sure it will be able to close. Its correlates them closer in my mind to Walmart or Dick's Sporting Goods or the like and that makes me less willing to do business with them. I still buy stuff from those companies on occasion...but only as a last resort or if they have such crazy lower prices that I can't justify getting it somewhere else (though I'm still prone to avoiding buying something if that is the case).

There are other places to find good decently priced gear... not sure there will be anything to get me to buy from Backcountry again regardless of how they handle all of the litigious trademark bullshit they got caught doing.


----------



## theusualsuspect (Apr 11, 2014)

Been almost two weeks since they posted to Twitter or Instagram which isn’t the norm for them at all. On top of that there are thousands of comments with people voicing their displeasure. I’m sure they’ve heard. Interesting to see what they do next. Black Friday right around the corner, I’m guessing we see some significant response. Time will tell what it is.


----------



## k2andcannoli (Feb 28, 2012)

They keep those great sales going in combination with 8-15% cash back via ibotta and nothing will stop buying their crap.


----------



## cdcfly (Jul 28, 2013)

I recently got an NRS frame from moosejaw. The price was great and so was the customer service. I'm hoping they aren't owned by the same parent corporation.


----------



## cdcfly (Jul 28, 2013)

A quick search reveals Wal-Mart owns them. Damn, I gotta start researching this kind of thing. It explains why I saw a steal of a deal on Cataract blades last summer on WalMart.com. I couldn't understand how Wal-Mart could carry those blades and fulfill the order.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

*Washington Post Article*

Hey Folks, it'd be a bummer if some of us spaced out and logged onto BCDC to do Christmas shopping when this company so greatly deserves to be boycotted through retail's biggest season.

Also, the co-founder and reporter at the Colorado Sun got the article into the WAPO so here's the read:

As Backcountry.com discovered, outdoor-recreation fans are joining together

Shop locally,

-AH


----------



## Electric-Mayhem (Jan 19, 2004)

I'd be interested to find out the real world impact this has had for them. I hope it is profound and that others in the outdoor industry have taken note. 

I can't help but think that it might just be a momentary setback or that it only made a modest difference to their sales. I always think these are a much bigger deal then they turn out to be and that the average user ether doesn't care or never knew about it in the first place.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

Yeah, Josh, it's hard to gage what's going on outside the world of MB and a Facebook group. Right now all we really know are:


BCDC's fired their outside attorneys, as if the law firm was going rogue and doing this stuff without knowledge and approval of the highest levels of management (which is absurd), 
Lots of folks have made their disapproval very evident and there's a Boycott BCDC FB group that's 22,500+ strong,
Now that they've been caught and there's a backlash, BCDC has issued a public apology for the stuff they've been doing for the last two years (see post #31 above),
BCDC filed suit or sent cease and desist orders to over 50 entities that had "Backcountry" in their names, some went out of business because of it, gag rules were standard in these so no one can talk about what was done to them without serious repercussions.
BCDC has also made some partnership agreements with several of the small businesses they bullied and that were mentioned in the original article.

I'm sure knowledge of this has made it to other outdoor recreation groups but don't know the extent of what's going on outside MB and the FB group. 

It's likely that BCDC, with their PR firm, is hoping they can just wait this out, saying they hear the uproar, and that they'll change. The kind of corporate narcissists that run the company, and the equity firm that owns BCDC, only change when they're forced to by very painful experiences, and even then the change is only what's needed to appease enough customers they can continue making a profit. BCDC is counting on their former customers to forget about it and start buying again in a month or two, if not in time for Christmas.

-AH


----------



## SherpaDave (Dec 28, 2017)

Keep in mind this applies to their outlet site “SteepandCheap.com”.
Maybe next they’ll go after any company with “Cheap” in the name [emoji849]


----------



## Down River Equipment (Apr 12, 2006)

Andy H. said:


> Hey Folks, it'd be a bummer if some of us spaced out and logged onto BCDC to do Christmas shopping when this company so greatly deserves to be boycotted through retail's biggest season.
> 
> Also, the co-founder and reporter at the Colorado Sun got the article into the WAPO so here's the read:
> 
> ...


After all this, I guess we won't be trade marking "Down River" anytime soon.


----------



## Sparks1000 (Jul 5, 2018)

Just go for “river.” Think of all the money you would get from all the hard working small businesses! Gold mine!


----------



## studytime (Oct 4, 2010)

*Does anybody remember when Specialized bicycles did the same thing?*

Does anybody remember when Specialized bicycles did the same thing?

https://www.velonews.com/2013/12/bi...ase-is-unnecessary-to-defend-the-brand_310878


I am surprised Backcountry didn't remember this. It was a disaster and it was only one little Canadian shop.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

studytime said:


> Does anybody remember when Specialized bicycles did the same thing?
> 
> https://www.velonews.com/2013/12/bi...ase-is-unnecessary-to-defend-the-brand_310878


Thanks for the article. One question: If, as the article states:



> Specialized holds trademarks for Epic and Stumpjumper and all the rest;


How come they haven't sued Vail Resorts over the Epic Pass and Epic everything under the sun? 

Somehow I've got a feeling it's because VRI could fight back.

Sorry, I'm a little grumpy and cynical tonight...

Screw BDCD!


----------



## BrianK (Feb 3, 2005)

If you want trademark protection this is unfortunately what you need to do or you'll lose any protection afforded by the trademark. They spent money to get the trademark - it makes sense they would try to maintain it. 

Ultimately what they did is 100% advice from their lawyer. The advice is also completely valid from a legal perspective - it just doesn't take into account the PR backlash. 

It's honestly a really hard line to straddle, and there are legitimate reasons why a business would want trademark protection. 

Obviously in this case it was a bad business decision, but I think it's a step short of evil. That's just my opinion. 



> How come they haven't sued Vail Resorts over the Epic Pass and Epic everything under the sun?


Trademark protection relates to consumer confusion - would a consumer of your products be confused as to the source of a different product. For that reason it only applies to the goods/services you offer - e.g. bikes and bike components for Specialized. Specialized wouldn't have any protection for ski passes. FWIW - I gave it a quick search - Vail has a registered trademark for Epic Pass. (There's a lot of bad information out there on trademarks - just want to keep you guys informed).


----------



## codycleve (Mar 26, 2012)

BrianK said:


> Trademark protection relates to consumer confusion - would a consumer of your products be confused as to the source of a different product. For that reason it only applies to the goods/services you offer - e.g. bikes and bike components for Specialized. Specialized wouldn't have any protection for ski passes. FWIW - I gave it a quick search - Vail has a registered trademark for Epic Pass. (There's a lot of bad information out there on trademarks - just want to keep you guys informed).


Like backcountry babes that sued? They offer womens focused avalanche safety courses. i'm not sure how product confusion would fall in line here.


----------



## BrianK (Feb 3, 2005)

Likelihood of confusion is the standard they would have to prove to a jury to win on trademark infringement at trial. (There are other claims you could bring in a trademark suit but those are much harder to establish)

I'm guessing they filed these lawsuits with the belief that backcountry babes wouldn't fight it and would never get to trial. Trademark lawsuits are pretty expensive. 

All things being equal I think backcountry babes would probably win at trial, but there are a lot of things I don't know. At some point, someone at backcountry was convinced this was a good idea. They might have actual examples of customers thinking that those courses were put on by or endorsed by backcountry.com or maybe they're just assholes - i don't know. 

I don't want to defend backcountry.com - this is clearly a mistake - I just wanted to say that trademark law kind of forces businesses into these decisions. US Trademark Law incentivizes being litigious, and I think it should be reconsidered. Source - I'm a lawyer who works for a company that owns trademarks and I regularly have to make decisions about potential infringement of those trademarks. (I hope I can make better decisions than backcountry.com did in this case).


----------



## jeffro (Oct 13, 2003)

BrianK - I'm aware that trademarks can be a defend it or lose it situation. Can they not be licensed? Then the owner is still protected and you don't have the bad press of suing people like backcountry babes. In cases where there is actual potential for product confusion then I'm all for defending best you can.


----------



## Electric-Mayhem (Jan 19, 2004)

IMHO... that trademark should not have been awarded to them in the first place. Maybe thats not how it works...but the term "Backcountry" has been in the popular lexicon for decades and is basically the most used generic term for wilderness areas and recreating in them.

At the end of the day...they decided to go after small businesses that couldn't afford to defend themselves against a huge law firm. They didn't go after equally sized companies like Backcountry Access (avalanche gear)... which is MUCH more likely to be confused with backcountry.com's retail business. BCA is also backed by a huge parent company with lawyers...so why aren't they suing a bunch of small businesses too?

They decided to hire a huge law firm that was sue happy (no surprise) and when they got caught it backfired on them.


----------



## BrianK (Feb 3, 2005)

jeffro said:


> BrianK - I'm aware that trademarks can be a defend it or lose it situation. Can they not be licensed? Then the owner is still protected and you don't have the bad press of suing people like backcountry babes. In cases where there is actual potential for product confusion then I'm all for defending best you can.


Yes, you could license it and protect your mark. Another solution is to enter a coexistence agreement where the other group recognizes your rights in your trademark and agrees to only use the trademark in certain circumstances that you both agree on - like offering avalanche classes. You could do either without fees or with a nominal fee. Some attorneys would argue that both of these options dilute the power of the trademark - but in this situation a coexistence agreement would have been a much better choice. 


Electric-Mahem - they probably shouldn't have gotten the mark, but it's really easy to get a trademark at the USPTO. Part of the reason that they are being aggressive is likely because they realize their mark is unlikely to stand up to court scrutiny. If the can show concrete examples where they have enforced their trademark it would help in a future lawsuit against a bigger group like BCA.


----------



## paulk (Apr 24, 2006)

*erroneous information*

Briank, 

While I respect your input from a "legal" stance, I do want to point out your history of flip-flopping on information. 

Case in point, you have stated that this last spring, you styled all of the rapids on the grand in your 13 foot boat. However, there is undeniable proof on the youtubes that you flipped in Lava. Which is it? 

While I recognize this has very little to do with backcountry.com, your history as an unreliable source is irrefutable.


----------



## koster (Oct 7, 2015)

Thanks for that info. I can and will do without this kind of corporation.
I just had a chat with a sales rep at Backcountry, poor thing, sounded overworked, underpaid, and tired of hearing about this.


----------

