Author Topic: White rose copyright action  (Read 3738 times)  Share 

Offline ademapearl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 29
    • View Profile
White rose copyright action
« on: Jul 2 - 2011 »
Seen today in the Yorkshire Post..... Samuel Smiths v Cropton Brewery hearing due to start in the High Court in London on Monday. The gist of this, for anyone who does not know already, is that cropton brewery, a small micro brewery near Pickering started selling Warrior beer using the logo of a yorkshire army regiment, to raise money for our soldiers who had been wounded in action. Part of said logo was a white rose. Humphrey took exception to this, and claimed the white rose was his copyright. He consulted a top legal firm in Manchester, also sending a threatening letter to this website. I am pleased to see that Cropton brewery have not just rolled over with a grovelling apology, but are actually prepared to take this case to court. I only hope this is going to be a David and Goliath outcome, though I rather fear a bloodbath, as the brewery usually employs top (and very expensive) barristers for this kind of thing. The newspaper article claims that the white rose logo is used by many other people, including other breweries. Also, there is no question of Cropton 'passing off' their beer as Sam Smiths.  Added to the fact that the action is so petty, vindictive and trivial, I only hope that the court sees sense and quickly throws the action out. If anyone gets any further news of how this action is resolved, I would be fascinated to know the result.

Offline bigjim

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 457
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: White rose copyright action
« Reply #1 on: Jul 3 - 2011 »
I was in Pickering on Saturday and this caught my eye. Unfortunately the search engine on the YEP website is so bad the article cannot be located. I don't think the allegation is anything to do with copyright, its about 'passing off'.




Offline OnTheDrink

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 843
    • View Profile
Re: White rose copyright action
« Reply #2 on: Jul 3 - 2011 »
Here's the YP piece...

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/at-a-glance/main-section/beer_war_of_roses_heading_to_high_court_1_3536915


Published on Saturday 2 July 2011 08:03

A FAMILY-owned brewery defending its right to carry Yorkshire?s famous emblem on its beer bottles in the Royal Courts of Justice on Monday, has claimed it will win a modern-day War of the Roses.

Cropton Brewery, behind the New Inn at Cropton, near Pickering on the edge of the North York Moors, is being taken to court by the Tadcaster-based brewery Samuel Smith?s over the use of the white rose on its bottles of Yorkshire Warrior Ale.

The beer was launched in 2008 in support of the Yorkshire Regiment to raise money for seriously-wounded soldiers returning from Afghanistan.

Last year Samuel Smith?s, which has used a white rose as its trademark since the 1960s, issued Cropton Brewery with a writ claiming its use of the ?stylised white rose device? is a trademark infringement that is ?confusingly similar? to its own logo.

But the micro brewery has refused to back down and will now challenge its right to display Yorkshire?s famous symbol in the High Court next week.

Andy Davidson, general manager of Cropton, which was founded in 1984, said: ?We are not worried because of the advice we have been given and going to the High Court you need to think you are right ? we will win.

?The white rose is something that belongs to Yorkshire.

?It is a badge for the whole of the region, not just one company.

?It seems ridiculous we are going to end up in court for running a charity campaign.?

Mr Davidson said the regiment had given the brewery permission to use its emblem ? a lion carrying the standard of St George above a white rose ? but had now asked for it to be removed.

?They are fighting out in Afghanistan and are still losing soldiers lives,? he said.

?They have very much more important things on their plates than legal disputes.?

The owner of Cropton Brewery, Phil Lee, was inspired to raise cash for brave army heroes after his brother Paul, 42, returned from the first Gulf War and Bosnia where he served with the Royal Engineers.

Shocked by low payouts for injured servicemen, he linked up with the Yorkshire Regiment and launched the 4.4 per cent Yorkshire Warrior ale in 2008, with most of the profits going to the regiment?s benevolent fund.

The bottles and beer pump clips featured the historic emblem ? which was issued to the Yorkshire Regiment by the Queen ? and the ale became a hit with drinkers, raising ?10,000 to which the New Inn added ?5,000 worth of hospitality events.

The writ issued by Samuel Smith?s alleges that, despite correspondence on the issue, Cropton has continued to use or authorise the use of the white rose, while Samuel Smith?s continues to suffer actual or threatened loss or damage.

The brewery is seeking an injunction, damages and the destruction of beer bottles and pump clips with illustrations which infringe the trademark, as well as costs.

Cropton?s defence statement claims the white rose on the Yorkshire Warrior beer is not confusingly similar to Samuel Smith?s emblem or products, and states that there are a number of other Yorkshire brewers which also use the symbol.

A spokesman for Samuel Smith?s was unavailable for comment.


Offline OldBreweryDrinker

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,110
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: White rose copyright action
« Reply #3 on: Jul 3 - 2011 »
Looks like it is going to court now and here is the artice in the Yorkshire Post.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/at-a-glance/main-section/beer_war_of_roses_heading_to_high_court_1_3536915

Offline pintplease

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 93
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: White rose copyright action
« Reply #4 on: Jul 4 - 2011 »

While court proceedings are on going its best not to publicly (on this site) say
too much about the case especially personal opinions on the rights and wrongs of it whilst its sub judice as that in itself can be unlawful.

Offline ademapearl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 29
    • View Profile
Re: White rose copyright action
« Reply #5 on: Jul 4 - 2011 »
I do not think this is a case being held before a jury. Whereas jurors could be influenced by any comments made, it is assumed that high court judges are immune to outside influences. In my experience high court judges do live in a world rather detached from mundane everyday life. I think we are quite safe in continuing to post comments about progress and I am very pleased to see that this website is reporting back on it.

Offline OnTheDrink

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 843
    • View Profile
Re: White rose copyright action
« Reply #6 on: Jul 4 - 2011 »

While court proceedings are on going its best not to publicly (on this site) say
too much about the case especially personal opinions on the rights and wrongs of it whilst its sub judice as that in itself can be unlawful.

I see where you're coming from but trust me, the Contempt of Court Act can't be applied to personal opinions expressed on a forum like this, in the sane way it can't be applied to social media such as Facebook. Judges are not influenced by opinions, so there is no risk to anyone expressing an opinion here.

Offline Cromwell

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: White rose copyright action
« Reply #7 on: Jul 5 - 2011 »
Is it not obvious to everyone that Samuel Smith ?s use a Tudor Rose for their Logo rather than that of the Yorkshire Rose and therefore is factually and historically wrong. Mr Smith can continue using his incorrect rose ?in context? as long as he likes; however, I would assume that the Cap Badge of the The Yorkshire Regiment belongs to The Crown as it is the emblem of one of Her Majesty?s Regiments of Foot.

I propose that Tadcaster Town Council contact The Yorkshire Regiment and offer the ?Freedom of the Town? to all four Battalions of the Regiment who have seen service in high intensity conflict in recent years and allow them the opportunity to march through the town with ?bayonets fixed and drums beating?. It would make a good spectacle and show to the rest of the country the support Tadcaster has for the soldiers who defend the liberties for Idiots like Mr Humphrey Smith to live in a delusional world of isolated fiefdom masquerading as ?Small Independent British Brewer?.

It has nothing to do with roses, but everything to do with bleeding dry a true ?Small Independent British Brewer? who is perceived as ?competition? through the legal wrangling?s of the High Court.

But what would one expect from the decendent of a Tanner from Leeds.

Offline minsterman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 72
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: White rose copyright action
« Reply #8 on: Jul 5 - 2011 »
Nice post Cromwell  :)
These are sad times :(

Offline pintplease

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 93
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: White rose copyright action
« Reply #9 on: Jul 5 - 2011 »

Times have changed, most people these days are against wars and don't want to see soldiers marching through towns with drums banging and bayonets drawn. Its only the bloodthirsty tabloid newspapers that  keep this "our boys" thing going by whipping up jingoism and patriotism. 

Offline ademapearl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 29
    • View Profile
Re: White rose copyright action
« Reply #10 on: Jul 5 - 2011 »
Very saddened to see pintplease's opinions about our armed forces. I too am very much against our involvement in Iraq and Afganistan, but it is the politicians we should blame for this - Tony Blair wrecked an otherwise passable reputation as prime minister by not being strong enough towards Georg Bush. But I have nothing but admiration for our soldiers who put their lives at risk every day in an unwinnable war - so we should not hesitate to give them our support. A march through Tadcaster and a toast afterwards with Warrior beer sounds a very good idea!

Offline OnTheDrink

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 843
    • View Profile
Re: White rose copyright action
« Reply #11 on: Jul 5 - 2011 »
Very saddened to see pintplease's opinions about our armed forces. I too am very much against our involvement in Iraq and Afganistan, but it is the politicians we should blame for this - Tony Blair wrecked an otherwise passable reputation as prime minister by not being strong enough towards Georg Bush. But I have nothing but admiration for our soldiers who put their lives at risk every day in an unwinnable war - so we should not hesitate to give them our support. A march through Tadcaster and a toast afterwards with Warrior beer sounds a very good idea!

Couldn't agree more with you, or less with pintplease's opinion.  Surely no sane person actually likes war but our armed forces deserve more support from us because they're put in such an impossible situation by politicians that outwardly claim to support the troops, but in reality refuse to provide decent equipment or proper pay.

Offline OldBreweryDrinker

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,110
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile

Offline pintplease

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 93
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: White rose copyright action
« Reply #13 on: Jul 5 - 2011 »


To glorify killing and death is wrong in my book. If its remembrance then that's another matter. Marching through towns with drums banging and weapons out on display is glorification and jingoism not remembrance.

Offline centurion

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 462
    • View Profile
Re: White rose copyright action
« Reply #14 on: Jul 5 - 2011 »


To glorify killing and death is wrong in my book. If its remembrance then that's another matter. Marching through towns with drums banging and weapons out on display is glorification and jingoism not remembrance.

 :o Nice to have the freedom to say that.
 Chuff, Chuff start up the outrage bus.  :-X