This time a business consulting company is the target.
I suppose at some point these lawsuits will cease to be considered news, but…
Entrepreneur Media, the company that publishes Entrepreneur.com, has sued (pdf) yet another hapless entrepreneur who dared used the word “entrepreneur” in their business.
The Roos Cohen Group started a Mastermind program (god I hate that term) called Evolving Entrepreneur using the domain name EvolvingEntrepreneur.com.
The two-person company filed a trademark for Evolving Entrepreneur, which set Entrepreneur Media’s ever-busy lawyers to action. Entrepreneur Media challenged the trademark with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and filed suit in federal district court in New York.
Among Entrepreneur Media’s demands: the defendants hand over any domain name they own that contains the word ‘entrepreneur’.
John Kenney says
What a bunch of jack offs.
Ryan says
This one needs to be reviewed, it needs some national media to get this bs broken up
Rob says
Entrepreneurs should unanomously BOYCOTT “Entrepreneur Media” and all of their products/services.
Joseph Peterson says
Shameful.
bizstarz says
Entrepreneur magazine is an out of control “trademark bully.” They target entrepreneurs too small to fight back even against frivolous trademark claims. You never hear about Entrepreneur mag suing companies or govt agencies that can afford to fight back. For example, Entrepreneur mag’s owner and gang of attorneys know they would get their heads handed to them if dared to sue Ernst & Young or the U.S. Small Business Administration for their extension use of “Entrepreneur of the Year.” In fact, every time Entrepreneur mag has tried to have its own “Entrepreneur of the Year” award, they had to abandon it because they were guilty of willfully infringing on EY’s federal trademark for “Entrepreneur of the Year”! (Note: EY also has a history of being a trademark bully and their “Entrepreneur of the Year” trademark should be cancelled for being generic etc).
Allison says
Agreed. Entrepreneur Media and their frivolous and petulant lawsuits on SMBs is absurd – they did the same to us a few years back.
They tried to take our domain name, I hired a top law firm, and my lawyers silenced Entrepreneur Media and they weren’t heard from afterwards.
Meanwhile, the same attorney contacted me again a few years later trying to do the same precise thing. I guess he forgot we went down that rabbit hole with EM.
I had to remind that asshole about our past dealings.
Ultimately, EM left us alone when we lawyered up. But they definitely target SMBs that they feel won’t fight back and it appears to be a numbers game for them so they can justify being on retainer.
Essentially, expensive busy work that preys on small businesses. I know another small business owner that wasn’t as fortunate.
They are predators and you need to deal with those assholes accordingly.
Grace says
Thanks for sharing, Allison.
Other than hiring a top law firm, do you have any other insights or suggestions you can share, as you overcame when so many others didn’t?
How far did your attorney have to take it before EMI backed off?
Thank you for any tips you’re willing to share!
Allison says
Research the top business law firms in your state. Schedule a meeting with 2-3 as an informational query to ascertain what measures they suggest you take.
This will help you learn about your legal remedies and various legal positions.
No two law firms will handle it the same. And then there are those that just want billable hours. Be able to discern between the two.
The law firm that Entrepreneur Media uses are essentially ambulance chasers and like any predator they try to gauge your position to fight them. Ultimately, people that do things don’t talk about it, they do it. So, unless a suit is filed they are testing your mettle and they won’t fight cases they can’t win because it sets precedent.
A legal precedent ruling against them doesn’t work in their favor over time. So your goal is to call their bluff, and keep it out of court –– that helps the SMB community at large when you do this. You may not be a shark, but you need to hire a shark that is willing to call their bluff in legalese they understand.
Don’t reply to them personally, regardless of your business size. It makes you appear weak and without legal prowess.
Your attorney should prepare a letter responding to their claims, calling their bluff, and hinting at your own possible legal avenues. Essentially, you need to speak to bullies in language they understand. Lawyering up and sending a response letter does just that.
You don’t need to dole out a retainer at this juncture either, simply pay for the attorney’s time to draft and send the letter (a couple of hundred). Make sure a partner sends the letter, or someone with seniority — not some low-level assistant.
This is what we did and they backed the fuck off. Keep your emotions out of it, understand what their motives are — they want billable hours and and EMI wants legal precedent to keep enforcing their use of Entrepreneur as a trademark.
In some cases, your attorney can even suggest that they submit payment for your domain, if you don’t care enough to take the issue further. It’s hard to prove that you willfully tried to harm their business – which is what they want to do.
Talk with a bunch of attorneys, not just one, and select the one that best aligns with the outcome you want. The more you understand your legal position, the less fearful you’ll be of those assholes.
They weren’t worth my time so I never responded personally, my attorneys handled it (told them to fuck off or fuck around and find out) and we didn’t give them what they wanted on any front.
I’d be they Googled the firm I hired and they didn’t want to dance. It was no skin off my back and I learned a few things along the way.
Hope this helps.
bizstarz says
Allison, congrats and thanks for sharing your “success” against Entrepreneur Media!
But your advice to:
“Research the top business law firms in your state. Schedule a meeting with 2-3 as an informational query to ascertain what measures they suggest you take.”
and that…
“You don’t need to dole out a retainer at this juncture either, simply pay for the attorney’s time to draft and send the letter (a couple of hundred). Make sure a partner sends the letter, or someone with seniority — not some low-level assistant.”
…is arbitrary, quite optimistic and even unlikely.
What is a “top business law firm”? And how would the average Joe know? Most attorneys, especially ones at “top” law firms, aren’t going to schedule meetings with small businesses that can’t even afford their services, but wants to pay only a “couple hundred” dollars for a “partner” at the firm to send a letter to Entrepreneur Media’s huge law firm of Latham & Watkins. “Top” attorneys, especially partners, charge at least $500 per hour (hourly rate for Entrepreneur Media’s lead attorney, Perry Viscounty, is probably around $1,000 PER HOUR).
It’s also critical that entrepreneurs publicly expose and shame Entrepreneur Media and their law firm’s egregious efforts to monopolize the word “entrepreneur,” and their bullying and attacking of entrepreneurs who also use the word entrepreneur.
And even if a small business can somehow get a top attorney to write a strong letter to Entrepreneur Media for only a few hundred dollars, Entrepreneur Media and their attorneys will easily be able to tell if they can afford to pay their attorney 100s of thousands or much more to fight back if/when they file a federal lawsuit against. In fact, they likely already have made that determination before threatening you.
Bottom line is there’s strength in numbers. So if entrepreneurs truly want to finally put an end to Entrepreneur Media’s decades of attacks against entrepreneurs who use the word entrepreneur, they have to combine forces and publicly expose and shame Entrepreneur Media and their attorneys.
Allison says
And Grace,
I was strategic in my approach. They backed down and never brought suit.
We never went to court. That was the goal, given the more cases EMI can bring to court and win against ill-equipped entrepreneurs the more precedent they gain — and the stronger their claim to the mark becomes.
I refused to give them that kind of satisfaction.
The firm I hired was well-versed in the legal claim EMI tried to assert. It was a weak one, hence why they threatened suit and never followed through.
Every situation has its nuances — so a one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t apply here. But legal realities exist and many of the companies EMI has tried to bully never end up in court … you just tend to read about the ones who do.
I hired a top law firm, listened to their legal advice, shared my expectations and desired outcome, and took a specific path that worked.
The representation you choose is important. I didn’t bring a knife to a gun fight. And the attorneys were incredibly well-versed in dealing with the legal matter at hand.
You have to understand your strengths and weaknesses. EMI can clearly outspend most SMBs and tie you up in legal battles if you’re unwise. Which seems to be the case with that Bizstars guy.
It’s smart and advisable to schedule meetings with a few law firms and ask them how they’d proceed if you were to sign on given the nature of the EMI claim. Leave emotions out of it and focus on the legal realities and what, if any, case they may have.
Some folks are just simply lower hanging fruit, to be honest. So, they’ll empty their war chest and let EMI tie them up in lawsuits for ages, if given the opportunity. Just not very smart to take this approach with a company that can clearly outspend you.
Focus on the letter of the law. Many times, EMI’s argument is weak. But they bet on the ignorance of smaller players who will fold at the first sign of a fight. Which is what happens a lot, I’d wager.
Meanwhile, other entrepreneurs fall victim to hiring firms that need billable hours and will take their case for that sole reason. I hired a larger firm that didn’t need my billable hours and could handle themselves in a fight. So I eliminated that possibility from the equation.
John says
Any recommendation on that law firm, my friend?
We had a letter delivered this week from EM, and would like to push back against these idiots.
Thanks!
Allison says
Research the top business law firms in your state. You’ll want to deal with a reputable local firm.
Schedule a meeting with 2-3 lawyers (varying in firm size) as an informational query to ascertain what measures they suggest you take.
This will help you learn about your legal remedies and various legal positions.
No two law firms will handle it the same way. And then there are those that just want billable hours. Be able to discern between the two.
The law firm that Entrepreneur Media uses are essentially ambulance chasers and like any predator they try to gauge your position to fight them.
Ultimately, people that do things don’t talk about it, they do it. So, unless a suit is filed they are testing your mettle and they won’t fight cases they can’t win because it sets precedent.
A legal precedent ruling against them doesn’t work in their favor over time. So your goal is to call their bluff, and keep it out of court –– that helps the SMB community at large when you do this. You may not be a shark, but you need to hire a shark that is willing to call their bluff in legalese they understand.
Don’t reply to them personally, regardless of your business size. It makes you appear weak and without legal prowess. It seems they prey on this.
Your attorney should prepare a *fuck around and find out* response letter in response to their claims, calling their bluff, and hinting at your own possible legal avenues.
Essentially, you need to speak to bullies in language they understand. Lawyering up and sending a response letter does just that. This is the first step.
You don’t need to dole out a retainer at this juncture either, simply confirm you’d like to pay for the attorney’s time to draft and send the initial response letter (a couple of hundred) and you’ll revisit from there. Make sure a partner sends the letter, or someone with seniority — not some low-level assistant.
This is what we did and they backed the fuck off. Keep your emotions out of it, understand what their motives are — the firm wants billable hours from EMI and and EMI wants legal precedent to keep enforcing their absurd use of Entrepreneur as a trademark.
In some cases, your attorney can even suggest that they submit payment for your domain, if you don’t care enough to take the issue further. It’s hard to prove that you willfully tried to harm their business – which is what they want to do.
Talk with a bunch of attorneys, not just one, and select the one that best aligns with the outcome you want. The more you understand your legal position, the less fearful you’ll be of those assholes.
They weren’t worth my time so I never responded personally, the firm I hired handled it for a flat rate (told them to fuck off or fuck around and find out) and we didn’t give them what they wanted on any front.
I’d bet they Googled the firm I hired and they didn’t want to dance. It was no skin off my back and I learned a few things along the way.
Hope this helps.
bizstarz says
Allison, instead of talking about your attorney’s ($200?) letter that you say scared big bad EMI into leaving you alone, can you please just post a link to it?
Can you also let us know:
a) what name you used that EMI threatened you over?
b) if your “win” includes still being able to use it?
c) is Allison your real name?
d) if you were forced to sign one of EMI’s draconian NDAs?
(my apologies if you mentioned any of these things and I missed it)
Thanks.
Allison says
Bizstars, is it?
No personal attacks, just facts and a response to your “…is arbitrary, quite optimistic and even unlikely” ignorance.
I simply pointed out how:
a) your demonstrably baseless opinion about someone else’s experience is moot and
b) not at all helpful to John’s initial inquiry (for me, not you).
Furthermore, I don’t need to share any information with the general public (on a random thread) that I don’t deem appropriate or relevant.
And no, I did not sign an NDA of any form –– or perhaps you missed the part where I stated that they dropped their pursuit of the case.
Looks like you’ve been wailing at a wall about this for years, with not much to show for it circa 2021, outside of a few articles.
Which doesn’t address the root issue and clearly hasn’t put a dent in their strategy.
I responded to John to give him concrete tips on how to proceed based on my win.
Your verbose attempt to air your petty grievances, in lieu of providing actionable feedback that John requested is gauche and amateurish.
I suggest you focus on being helpful instead of attempting to spar with me (about my experience) and dedicating yourself to missing the point.
And for further reference, I did not confirm how much I paid the firm I hired, or the facts that you clearly are so desperate to know.
So no, I’ll pass.
This specific thread is clearly above your pay grade.
Bizstars, we’re done here.
—
John,
If you have further questions, feel free to connect.
bizstarz says
Allison, congrats and thanks for sharing your “success” against Entrepreneur Media!
But your advice to:
“Research the top business law firms in your state. Schedule a meeting with 2-3 as an informational query to ascertain what measures they suggest you take.”
and that…
“You don’t need to dole out a retainer at this juncture either, simply pay for the attorney’s time to draft and send the letter (a couple of hundred). Make sure a partner sends the letter, or someone with seniority — not some low-level assistant.”
…is arbitrary, quite optimistic and even unlikely.
What is a “top business law firm”? And how would the average Joe know? Most attorneys, especially ones at “top” law firms, aren’t going to schedule meetings with small businesses that can’t even afford their services, but wants to pay only a “couple hundred” dollars for a partner at the firm to send a letter to Entrepreneur Media’s huge law firm of Latham & Watkins. “Top” attorneys often charge $500 or more per hour (hourly rate for Entrepreneur Media’s lead attorney, Perry Viscounty, is around $1,000 PER HOUR).
It’s also critical that entrepreneurs publicly expose and shame Entrepreneur Media and their law firm’s efforts to monopolize the word “entrepreneur” and their bullying and attacking of entrepreneurs who use the word entrepreneur.
And even if you can somehow get a top attorney to write a strong letter to Entrepreneur Media for only a few hundred dollars, Entrepreneur Media and their attorneys will still easily be able to tell if you can afford to pay 100s of thousands or much more to fight back if/when they file a federal lawsuit against you. In fact, they likely already made that determination before threatening you.
Bottom line is there’s strength in numbers. So if entrepreneurs truly want to finally put an end to Entrepreneur Media’s decades of attacks against entrepreneurs who use the word entrepreneur, they have to combine forces and publicly expose and shame Entrepreneur Media and their attorneys.
Allison says
Bottom line.
I’m not theorizing here, I’ve shared precisely what I did and it is an approach that worked for us.
It’s called negotiations and you’re clearly tilting at windmills.
Of course, you sign an engagement letter, but as a client you need to work with a firm to gain their legal insight and ultimately make decisions that benefit your business. Which is precisely what I did.
And simply put, there are plenty things in life that you may view as “arbitrary, quite optimistic and even unlikely” and that’s a losers game.
I achieved what you think is impossible. Such a common and age-old story, isn’t it?
I didn’t take your weak-kneed approach and hence why we came out on top.
A “top business law firm” varies by market — obviously. Along with the rates they will charge to do specific work. There are nuances with every situation. For reference, I reside and do business in a Top 5 DMA; as such, my approach and outcome speaks for itself.
You are boxing out of your weight class on this one. I shared my experience and what worked for us — so your opinion is moot.
Furthermore, your theory doesn’t really hold water to my practical experience and favorable outcome dealing with EMI.
I don’t deal in what if’s and theories. I deal in facts and outcomes. And I only take advice from people who have been where I want to be and done what I want to do.
So, while I can understand your opinion, it’s merely that — and a weak one.
I don’t need to expose and shame EMI. My resources are better spent elsewhere. And if you give a company like that enough rope they’ll eventually hang themselves.
Successful business owners know what battles to fight and which ones win wars.
Allison says
John,
Also, read this article by an attorney that is well-versed on the matter:
https://www.patentlawny.com/uploads/Intellecual-Property-Magazine-Article-Jan-2011.pdf
The lawyer correctly reaffirms what I’ve said and one of the reasons why my approach worked.
How you handle the engagement and posturing from day one matters.
“At the same time that EMI was attacking marks like “entreprenerd” and “scientrepreneur,” small time marks filed by entities they figured they could easily vanquish, they ignored marks such as, “newpreneur” (filed very professionally by a holdings company in the Cayman Islands), and “orthopreneur” (filed very professionally on behalf of a corporation in Ohio). The description of goods for each clearly indicates that they, too, are selling magazines and business services to entrepreneurs. By acting professionally and properly and not stepping too much on someone else’s toes, you, too, can avoid an expensive attack.”
Let me know if you need any additional or specific input. Ultimately, the first step is to set up calls within 2-3 law firms to share the backstory, the letter you received, and your desired outcome.
bizstarz says
Allison (or whatever your real name is),
You have some helpful insight, and that’s great that your law firm was able to get EMI to back down. And I happily congratulated you for that.
So why all the anger, arrogance and personal attacks? Just because someone else has other experiences or opinions?
This is exactly why EMI has been able to get away with their trademark war against entrepreneurs for over FIVE decades. Because most entrepreneurs, and their attorneys, are not at all interested in solving the problem. They’re more interested in kicking the can down the road for the next entrepreneur to deal with (i.e. John) and telling the world how smart they are.
When EMI came after my small PR firm for entrepreneurs (EntrepreneurPR) back in Jan 1998, most entrepreneurs had no idea EMI was attacking entrepreneurs for using the word. Did you? Nope. The internet was still relatively new, and there was no information online or stories published about what EMI was doing. You couldn’t even see USPTO records online. For each request, you had to pay the USPTO quite a bit of money for paper copies ($150?) to be scanned and sent weeks later via snail mail. So unlike you, we were understandably blindsided by EMI’s claims and attacks.
I probably did far more due diligence than you or anyone you know before choosing our name, including hiring a trademark attorney who specialized in small businesses, and a business naming firm. The USPTO also determined that our EntrepreneurPR name did not conflict with any other co’s names, including EMI’s. Yet, we still found ourselves under a vicious and all-out attack by EMI. So I ended up being the first, and still only, entrepreneur to fight back against EMI all the way to federal trial (Herb Kelleher, founder of Southwest Airlines, provided us with some much appreciated financial help, but we were way over matched financially). In fact, because of me, EMI had to replace their longtime solo attorney (the late Henry Bissell) with Latham & Watkins because no else had fought back.
And because of my efforts to fight back and warn other entrepreneurs about EMI’s trademark battles, there have been tons of damning articles published about EMI, including by the likes of Businessweek (it was the most read story on their website when it came out).
What have you done to prevent EMI from being able to continue to go after more entrepreneurs, besides post comments? Why won’t you say who your super-duper law firm was, instead of nameless praise? Or say what name you used that EMI came after? Why such lack of transparency? So you can wage strangely angry personal attacks against others w/out anyone knowing who you are? Because EMI was able to force you to sign one of their draconian NDAs?
You act like you got it all figured out because you’re so much smarter than all the 100s (1,000s?) of entrepreneurs who were unable to fight back against EMI for whatever reasons.
But you fail to acknowledge that you were in a much better position because of the fights others put up well before you had any idea about what EMI is up to. And if you were so smart, how did you not know about EMI’s trademark claims before choosing a name they would go after you for? Did you and/or your attorneys fail to properly research your name and find out about EMI’s possible attacks beforehand? Even though because of the public record created by others, it takes less than 5 minutes of basic research to dig up tons of info about EMI’s trademark battles over the word entrepreneur.
Whatever your personal opinions or hangups, please refrain from the personal attacks, and stay focused on the big picture; helping to finally prevent EMI from attacking any more entrepreneurs for using the word entrepreneur.
bizstarz says
Allison,
re: “I don’t need to expose and shame EMI. My resources are better spent elsewhere.”
You repeatedly contradict yourself. That Intellectual Property magazine article that you praise and apparently benefited from, was a direct result of an entrepreneur getting the word out about EMI (you’re welcome). In fact, the main subjects of the article, Mr. Markva and Mr. Castro, I personally helped fight back against EMI. Mr. Markva tried valiantly, but unfortunately ran out of gusto. Mr. Castro though was very happy with his outcome.
bizstarz says
[For some reason, “Allison” is incredibly insulted and angered that I dared to disagree with some of his or her comments. So my responses are not expected to change her or his opinion. They’re so others can read and evaluate more than just one anonymous person’s opinions/facts]
Allison (clearly not your real name),
Jeez. Why so angry and argumentative? Especially if it’s true that you swiftly defeated Goliath and did so for the unheard cost of $200 or so for a partner at a top law firm?
And against someone who’s done more to fight back against EMI (and other trademark bullies) than anyone you know.
Is there no room left in your larger-than-normal brain for other opinions or ideas?
Because of me and my solo attorney, you and others get the benefit of the only published federal ruling on EMI’s trademark which correctly states that it’s “weak” and “descriptive.” And EMI was able to outspend us by at least 10x (plus we had a judge who demonstrated and acknowledged that she knew nothing about intellectual property law). If we had anywhere near equal resources, we would’ve crushed them into oblivion. But of course, that’s why EMI targets smaller businesses that lack comparable resources.
Besides being strangely angry, rude and obsessed with proving your supposed superior intellect, you’re suspiciously refusing to be transparent, while simultaneously claiming to be a know-it-all about something you have limited experience with compared to tons of others.
You also falsely/suspiciously claim that just because EMI supposedly let you off the hook, that you couldn’t have signed an NDA.
While you claim w/out proof that it happened for you, it’s misleading to suggest to John and others that multiple “top” law firms are willing to schedule meetings with small businesses that can’t afford their legal fees, and on top of that, for only about $200, will have one of their $500/hr+ partners research, write, and send knock-out responses to cease and desist letters from Latham & Watkins (one of the world’s largest law firms) for a client as unreasonable and litigious as EMI.
So can you let everyone know why you’re so angry and hiding behind a keyboard while making debatable claims and personal attacks?
You will hopefully be able to better and respectfully respond and explain your comments.
Peace out.
Allison says
It looks as though the owner of “THE KICKASS ENTREPRENEUR” filed for a trademark in 2018 and EMI opposed it.
However, the website was not handed over to EMI and is still operating under its owner.
https://www.trademarkia.com/opposition/the-kickass-entrepreneur-opposed-trademark-87876878-91245769
There’s another case in which the website owner had to cease operating and handover their site and social accounts to EMI.
ENTREPRENEUR MEDIA, INC. v. NKWOCHA
https://www.leagle.com/decision/infdco20190514626
FU says
I worked at Entrepreneur for years and that company is going down the drain. The fact that son Ryan Shea gets paid $50,000 a month is a joke. The guy is never in the office. Ryan even tried to launch an Uber X service and failed miserably. The keep decreasing the number of their issues which says it all.
bizstarz says
Entrepreneur magazine is a trademark bully that can’t defend its ridiculous claims of owning the word “entrepreneur.” So CEO Peter Shea hides behind his gang of $800/hr attorneys and fake names (just founder Chase Revel). He even fails to show up for scheduled depositions and files motions trying to get out of depositions for cases his own attorneys filed. He’s even too afraid to respond to articles about Entrepreneur magazine’s own lawsuits. But that’s what cockroaches do, they work under the cover of darkness and scurry like hell when the lights come on.
Chris B. says
In reality though, whether light or dark Scott Smith willfully and intentionally infringed on Entrepreneur Magazine’s trademark.
He lost in every battle he ever started. Federal court, state court,
bankruptcy court, federal appeals court, state appeals court and the TTAB.
He is a very spiteful, vengeful and bitter person who just can not except the fact is was wrong and continues to be wrong.
But don’t believe me or him. Do a quick search and you will see for yourself.
bizstarz says
Just like the founder of Entrepreneur magazine Chase Revel, trademark bully Entrepreneur magazine CEO Peter Shea must hide behind FAKE NAMES. As one reporter told their in-house attorney Ron Young when he kept trying to attack me instead of answer questions, “I don’t care if Smith boils live puppies, this is not about Scott Smith, it’s about your company’s trademark claims.” So it’s no surprise that Peter Shea keeps hiding behind fake names to attack me and totally ignores what this article is actually about: Entrepreneur magazine’s history of suing entrepreneurs over use of the word entrepreneur. It’s also amusing that Peter Shea claims I’m such a “loser” but he totally obsesses over me, including spending over SIX YEARS and over $500,000 trying to prevent me from launching BrandLarceny.com. Why? Because BrandLarceny.com is a website for exposing Entrepreneur magazine and other trademark bullies that target businesses too small to fight even ridiculous trademark claims such as Entrepreneur magazine’s claims of owning the word entrepreneur (a generic word they didn’t create and predates them by well over 100 years). CEOs of companies with valid trademark claims want to address questions about their trademark disputes, and would never resort to using fake names to defend themselves. But most companies are not founded by convicted bank robbers using fake names and then get bought by someone who also uses fake names. Most companies also didn’t get their trademarks by fraud and beating up on the small businesses they claim to support. WATCH PETER SHEA REFUSE TO RESPOND TO ANY OF THIS: Peter Shea, can you deny that Ernst & Young sued Entrepreneur magazine for willfully infringing EY’s “Entrepreneur of the Year” trademark and that your lawyers tried to defend your infringement by admitting that the word entrepreneur is GENERIC? Or that Entrepreneur magazine has at least TWICE abandoned Entrepreneur of the Year awards after EY’s attorneys came after Entrepreneur magazine for trademark infringement?
Peter says
So?
Josh says
You really laid it out Chris. I did do a little search and I never saw a worst case of sour grapes by Scott Smith. I agree with a lot Scott says and Entrepreneur is somewhat of a predator on some small businesses, but they do have a trademark and they are enforcing their brand. Scott even attacks the magazine because they can afford good attorneys. I would be doing the same and so would Smith if he was in the same position.
He lost big time and owes a lot on money and also loss all his appeals. Really tough, but those are the court decisions.
What needs to done is for the trademark people to look into some of these common words and change the rules. Or maybe for Congress to get involved someway.
But as far as Entrepreneur, I think that ship has sailed because the courts have said their mark is strong and they keep racking up wins. Too bad for the little guys who get caught up in that.
Jimmy Korne says
WOW! Bizstarz has some real haters out there. What is the deal with that? Bizstarz, please take a breath and know that the haters are simply baiting you. The more you respond the more they will fan those flames and you gain nothing. Step away and move on to more productive things.
steven Ansel says
What is Bizstarz really? Is it a business or some protest site? I can’t find anything that says it’s functioning.
Maybe the people that are hostile got burned someway.
I don’t know why people don’t do a little research before jumping into a business. It would certainly save a lot of headaches and money down the road.
Martin says
Very interesting dialogue. I wonder what Bizstarz and all the others would do if they had the trademark?
Would then let everyone use it and do nothing? I think not. But you would never get anybody to ever admit that.
Apple is a much more common word then entrepreneur and I am sure they would get sued too if they tried to infringe on that trademark.
It sounds like a lot of people who are sorry they didn’t get there trademark first.
Lindsey Marks says
Another crazy lawsuit was Richard Branson suing people for the use of the word “virgin”. But he won. In fact many times. They say that his company gives virgin a secondary meaning that is widely recognized.
So I see where Entrepreneur is coming from, though I don’t agree with lawsuits. When you hear the word entrepreneur many think of the magazine right off since it has a large following. Another example is monster. People think of Monster Cable. It’s troubling to people to see this but I always go back to, “Why are they given the trademark in the first place”????