Brooklyn store, don't call the lawyers just yet, the copy cats will be closed by Labor Day.
June 3, 2016 at 6:55 PM
Anonymous said...
321 Ice Cream Shop has no legal standing because the trademark for 321 Ice Cream Shop including the image was abandoned on March 9, 2016.
Lab 321 must've seen this and figured let's bite off of them. What else between the 321 in the name, the lab theme, the word "lab" in it, and the businesses being the same?
'Problem with suing Lab 321 how could 321 Ice Cream Shop prove Lab 321 maliciously bit off of them? All Lab 321 ownership would have to do is feign ignorance and say the sign creator must've lifted from 321 Ice Cream Shop. The sign creator could testify to this and while he/she is committing moral perjury by saying he/she bit off 321, there is no actual perjury if perjury cannot be proven e.g. an email or letter from Lab 321 to the sign creator saying "Make the sign like 321 Ice Cream Shop."
My guess (and only my guess) is Lab 321 will change the name and sign to avoid potential legal trouble. They don't have a Yelp page up yet so they could do that.
June 4, 2016 at 2:28 AM
Anonymous said...
All they would have to do is switch 2 numbers on their sign and they are Lab-123. Problem solved!
June 4, 2016 at 7:28 AM
Anonymous said...
@2:28 am: A few minutes on google will show you that you don't have to prove that the use of the mark was "malicious" in an infringement claim. Also, there are protections for unregistered marks...
June 4, 2016 at 9:28 AM
Anonymous said...
I tried this last night and it was actually pretty good.
June 4, 2016 at 11:23 AM
Anonymous said...
All well and good 9:28am but how do you claim Lab 321 stole from 321 Ice Cream Shop maliciously or not? Lab 321 makes no reference to and claims no affiliation with 321 ICS. The name "Lab 321" doesn't have the words "Ice Cream Shop" in it nor does it signify it sells ice cream. 321 ICS says loud and clear Lab 321 is not affiliated with them so there's no confusion on the part of their customers. How many Lab 321 customers think it's affliated with 321 ICS? How has Lab 321 adversely affected 321 ICS i.e. cut into 321 ICS business? Both businesses have the number 321 in their names then again how many businesses in this country have 321 in it? Why doesn't 321 ICS sue every business with that number in it and since when do they own the trademark on a number? The only way one might confuse the two places is if he/she hits one then the other and noticed both have a lab theme - that isn't trademark infringement as you can't trademark a theme.
What protections are there for unregistered marks? If there are then why register them? Why would a judge rule for a business who is too lazy to keep a mark alive? If your business' name is vital to its function you keep the mark alive.
June 6, 2016 at 2:10 AM
Anonymous said...
Check that that Kinguin logo on their cup lol! Yet another knock off.
The shop that specializes in liquid nitrogen ice cream is now in soft-open mode at 27 St. Mark's Place between Second Avenue and Third Avenue... the space was previously the longtime home of the Sock Man.
And the folks of the popular -321 Ice Cream Shop in Brooklyn have let it be known that there are NOT affiliated with Lab 321...
8 Comments
Close this window Jump to comment formBrooklyn store, don't call the lawyers just yet, the copy cats will be closed by Labor Day.
June 3, 2016 at 6:55 PM
321 Ice Cream Shop has no legal standing because the trademark for 321 Ice Cream Shop including the image was abandoned on March 9, 2016.
Lab 321 must've seen this and figured let's bite off of them. What else between the 321 in the name, the lab theme, the word "lab" in it, and the businesses being the same?
'Problem with suing Lab 321 how could 321 Ice Cream Shop prove Lab 321 maliciously bit off of them? All Lab 321 ownership would have to do is feign ignorance and say the sign creator must've lifted from 321 Ice Cream Shop. The sign creator could testify to this and while he/she is committing moral perjury by saying he/she bit off 321, there is no actual perjury if perjury cannot be proven e.g. an email or letter from Lab 321 to the sign creator saying "Make the sign like 321 Ice Cream Shop."
My guess (and only my guess) is Lab 321 will change the name and sign to avoid potential legal trouble. They don't have a Yelp page up yet so they could do that.
June 4, 2016 at 2:28 AM
All they would have to do is switch 2 numbers on their sign and they are Lab-123. Problem solved!
June 4, 2016 at 7:28 AM
@2:28 am: A few minutes on google will show you that you don't have to prove that the use of the mark was "malicious" in an infringement claim. Also, there are protections for unregistered marks...
June 4, 2016 at 9:28 AM
I tried this last night and it was actually pretty good.
June 4, 2016 at 11:23 AM
All well and good 9:28am but how do you claim Lab 321 stole from 321 Ice Cream Shop maliciously or not? Lab 321 makes no reference to and claims no affiliation with 321 ICS. The name "Lab 321" doesn't have the words "Ice Cream Shop" in it nor does it signify it sells ice cream. 321 ICS says loud and clear Lab 321 is not affiliated with them so there's no confusion on the part of their customers. How many Lab 321 customers think it's affliated with 321 ICS? How has Lab 321 adversely affected 321 ICS i.e. cut into 321 ICS business? Both businesses have the number 321 in their names then again how many businesses in this country have 321 in it? Why doesn't 321 ICS sue every business with that number in it and since when do they own the trademark on a number? The only way one might confuse the two places is if he/she hits one then the other and noticed both have a lab theme - that isn't trademark infringement as you can't trademark a theme.
What protections are there for unregistered marks? If there are then why register them? Why would a judge rule for a business who is too lazy to keep a mark alive? If your business' name is vital to its function you keep the mark alive.
June 6, 2016 at 2:10 AM
Check that that Kinguin logo on their cup lol! Yet another knock off.
June 10, 2016 at 3:59 PM
Business Closed!
January 3, 2017 at 3:10 AM