• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by MR.CLEAN



    6 hours ago, IPLore said:

    Im reading the orders re motions in limine that Judge Meyer issued on 5th Feb the week before the trial.

    BKI vs Quarter Moon

    AFAI can tell, this case was narrowly a suit about trademark violation and misappropriation of the Bruce Kirby name.  It does not appear to be about the builders contract, the design of the Laser or the Laser trademark.

    Judge Meyer:

    1. Denied plaintiff's (BKI) motion to preclude argument that Laser Performance revenue is not attributable to Quarter Moon.  This meant that during the trial BKI had to prove that revenues from the sale of Laser sailboats were legally attributable to Quarter Moon.

    2. Denied plaintiff's motion to preclude the argument that the 1989 builders agreement was not terminated. Plaintiff argues that it was terminated and would have to prove this in court.

    3. In 2006, the US Patent and Trademark office issued a letter which according to the defendants (Quarter Moon) stated that the use of the phrase "Designed by Bruce Kirby" did not constitute a viable trace mark.  The Plaintiffs filed a motion seeking to preclude this letter from evidence. Judge Meyer granted this motion. There was no evidence submitted by the defendants showing that they were aware of this letter during the course of the alleged actions at issue during the case, nor had the defendants shown how their awareness of this letter at some later times is relevant.  The judge granted this motion such that both the letter itself and any mention of the letter were precluded from the trial .

    4.  Judge granted plaintiffs motion to exclude evidence related to the defendants counterclaims which have been dismissed. In particular this meant that the defendants could not introduce evidence at trial that BKI had acted improperly with regard to the construction manual (broken the confidentiality provisions) and tried to launch the Torch.

    5. The plaintiff filed a very clever motion to prevent the defendant arguing that BKI had acquiesced to the use of the Bruce Kirby name. The judge allowed the motion in so far as he ruled that the defendant( LP/Quarter Moon) could not argue the affirmative defense of acquiescence. He partially denied the motion  in so far as the defendant would be allowed to dispute plaintiff's lack of consent. This may have been an important win for the BKI team. Acquiescence is a very strong defense in a trade mark claim. However it is an affirmative defense and the defendants have to raise that defense in their answer to the complaint. For some reason, they failed to do so.  Nor did they amend their answer to the complaint to claim acquiescence. (Clearly they were not reading the thread on SA). BKI's young IP attorneys jumped on that one.

    6. The judge ruled that a 2017 lawsuit between the same parties regarding the "Kirby fishing boat" could not be introduced as evidence in this case. There's a twist we didn't know about! Who knew? :huh:

    I dont think # 1-4 were particularly significant. # 5 was interesting.

    My (admittedly misty) recollection was that the ISAF plaques contained the phrase "Designed by Bruce Kirby" on the plaque for many years.

    I also vaguely recall that when BKI wrote asking LP to stop using his name on the plaque, they did. 

    Included in the BKI lawsuit which was primarily about breach of contract and tortuous interference, was a claim for trade mark infraction for using the name "Bruce Kirby".  It may have been a colossal error not to at least answer that claim with a defense of "acquiescence". The outcome may have been the same but my guess is that it shifted the burden in a significant way.

    @Clean any thoughts?


    I think you may be on the right track regarding the willful infringement via using BK's name.  Also, I believe the claims were bifurcated between the contract issues and the trademark claims and the contract case has not yet been heard, but that information may be out of date.

    Having never done any deep work in the trademark infringement arena, some of your comments are a bit japanese to me.  I look forward to reading more about this case.




  2. 9 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

    I never read or heard any Libertarian rhetoric that passed even a cursory examination once I was older than 16 or so.

    It is the very definition of "juvenile".

    There was always that very smart but also borderline retarded kid who walked around with a dog eared copy of The Fountainhead, and thought it actually said something useful.

    Ayn Rand is the ultimate litmus test: Are you smart, or have you just spend a lot of time practicing sounding smart?



    • Like 2

  3. 4 hours ago, Plenipotentiary Tom said:


    Some of her better customers were California cannabis growers who tended to call her "dude" a lot and tried to pretend they were not growing cannabis. She's not stupid, wasn't fooled, but also didn't care. What tier would she be in?

    I hope a day comes soon when cannabis farmers can just open a bank account without hiring a lawyer, like any other farmer.

    If the upcoming election results in President Trump or President Bloomberg, that day will be further in the future, which I guess would be good for your business but I think it's bad for the rest of us.

    Tier III. Incidental MRB.

    My business would be even better under complete legalization.  In a world with the Patriot Act and BSA, unless ALL drugs are legalized, commercial growers will always need a lawyer to deal with the anti-money laundering provisions of those laws and the'tough on crime' politicians that passed them. 

    Come to think of it, every commercial business needs a business lawyer sooner or later.  I guess cannabis farming really is becoming legitimate business.


  4. 8 hours ago, NZK said:

    there's been a lot of chat in the past about how he uses the rest of the team to actually sail the boat and only pops up when the helicopter comes over for the photo shoot. 


    Any of the hundreds of people who've sailed with AT on a Boss boat know that's some bullshit.  Regardless of which of his team are aboard, Alex is like a little monkey, constantly jumping around the boat making sure everything is functioning properly.   His energy level is astounding.

  5. 11 hours ago, Uncle Buck said:


    And I'm sure those criticizing here have never received any advert revenue from or billed a right wing client.....pot kettle black?


    If you can't tell the difference between doing business with people regardless of their politics and raising money for the campaign of a lying criminal of a president, you should shut up and go rebuild that winch.

  6. 15 hours ago, martin.langhoff said:

    He wasn't any different when he was chasing, and later defending the AC. 

    except for the part about raising millions for a conspirator and traitor (and I'm not talking about Russell!) 

    • Like 2