Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pirate Joe’s, Maverick Distributor of Trader Joe’s Products, Shuts Down

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 283 posts

Re: Pirate Joe’s, Maverick Distributor of Trader Joe’s Products, Shuts Down

#111

Post by belorn »

chx wrote: post #95

Let's review one of the court documents because it has a very important detail. https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/08/26/1... > Defendant Michael Norman Hallatt purchased Trader Joe’s-branded goods in Washington State, transported them to Canada, and resold them there in a store he designed to mimic a Trader Joe’s store . Trader Joe’s sued under the Lanham Act and Washington law. Repeated later: > I…

I know that many stores have different design on where they places products, but I doubt if that design is covered under copyright or trademark law. There could be fraud claim if he intend to fool a customer, but a store called pirate joe store do have a rather strong message that it isn't the true store.

Re: Pirate Joe’s, Maverick Distributor of Trader Joe’s Products, Shuts Down

#113

Post by fnordfnordfnord »

chx wrote: post #95

Let's review one of the court documents because it has a very important detail. https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/08/26/1... > Defendant Michael Norman Hallatt purchased Trader Joe’s-branded goods in Washington State, transported them to Canada, and resold them there in a store he designed to mimic a Trader Joe’s store . Trader Joe’s sued under the Lanham Act and Washington law. Repeated later: > I…

Sounds more like he was moving them with names like Pirate Joe's, and Irate Joe's at one point.

Re: Pirate Joe’s, Maverick Distributor of Trader Joe’s Products, Shuts Down

#114

Post by Spooky23 »

will_brown wrote: post #45
captainmuon wrote: post #10

I don't understand with what right trader Joe's can prohibit somebody from reselling their products. If he clearly states where he bought them from, and that he is not affiliated, and doesn't misuse their trademarks (impersonate them), it should be absolutely legal. A side remark, people often say how great the US / north America is for entrepreneurs, compared to (continental) Europe where there is a lot of red tape…

A lot of people are using the "I bought chips at Costco and resold them at a concession stand example". This is at least a little different. Say you owned Captainmuon Grocery and only sold private label Captainmuon Chips. Although demand is so high you could distribute your Chips to other groceries and retailers, you see greater value in driving traffic to your store through the exclusive distribution. Don't you have…

No.

You do have a right to go after Commandermuon Grocery for abusing your trademark.

Usually liability traverses the chain of custody. If I give you a bag of chips, that doesn't absolve Frito-Lay of liability for a salmonella contamination issue associated with that lot of chips. Likewise, if I crush the chips and sell the bag to you, it's not Frito-Lay's problem, it's mine.

This stuff has been litigated extensively. There was a few cases around fancy grey-market watches that Costco was buying overseas and selling here at a discount. Costco provided a third party warranty to address that issue, but was allowed to continue. First sale doctrine applies here too.

Re: Pirate Joe’s, Maverick Distributor of Trader Joe’s Products, Shuts Down

#115

Post by basseq »

TommyBombadil wrote: post #16
captainmuon wrote: post #10

I don't understand with what right trader Joe's can prohibit somebody from reselling their products. If he clearly states where he bought them from, and that he is not affiliated, and doesn't misuse their trademarks (impersonate them), it should be absolutely legal. A side remark, people often say how great the US / north America is for entrepreneurs, compared to (continental) Europe where there is a lot of red tape…

Yeah, I don't really understand the difference between Pirate Joe's and every snack stand that resells candy and soda they bought from somewhere else like Costco.

Better analogy would be a store called "Smirkland's Signature" that sells Costco-branded products (e.g., Kirkland's Signature).

Re: Pirate Joe’s, Maverick Distributor of Trader Joe’s Products, Shuts Down

#116

Post by dawnerd »

So if Trader Joes is so concerned why don't they just open up shop in Canada? I've heard the podcast about it and original articles way back and it's amazing they're shutting out a market that seems to be very welcoming.

Maybe they see Target Canada failure and are scared away by that?

Re: Pirate Joe’s, Maverick Distributor of Trader Joe’s Products, Shuts Down

#117

Post by milesvp »

will_brown wrote: post #78
guelo wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the seller does not have any of those rights. It's called the first-sale doctrine.

Just so we are on the same page first-sale doctrine applies to works with copyright (i.e. You buy my book you have a right to resell or display it) it does not apply to consumable goods/food stuffs. Almost any reasonable person can understand practical limits of resale rights: think reselling your prescription opiates claiming first-sale doctrine. And no just because Trader Joe's products have TJ trademarks does not…

This is false. The first sale doctrine can be summarized as, once I have physical possession of an item I can resell it.

Do not confuse issues around distributorships, which are contracts that say, I will agree to sell you these goods at wholesale prices so long as you agree not to sell them anywhere I say you can't.

Your example with reselling prescription opiates, is that opiates are a controlled substance, food is not.

Trademark would only be a problem here if what Pirate Joes was selling was counterfeit Trader Joe's goods.

Pirate Joes' core business was perfectly legal in the US. The only way trademark could be a problem is that Pirate Joes might be ruled too close to Trader Joes, and that's the trademark of the business, not the trademark of the items for sale in the store.

Re: Pirate Joe’s, Maverick Distributor of Trader Joe’s Products, Shuts Down

#118

Post by Chaebixi »

chx wrote: post #95

Let's review one of the court documents because it has a very important detail. https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/08/26/1... > Defendant Michael Norman Hallatt purchased Trader Joe’s-branded goods in Washington State, transported them to Canada, and resold them there in a store he designed to mimic a Trader Joe’s store . Trader Joe’s sued under the Lanham Act and Washington law. Repeated later: > I…

> he designed to mimic a Trader Joe’s

So what? The mimicry occurs in Canada, where Trader Joe's apparently does not operate. I thought the whole point of trademark law was to prevent customer confusion, not to give a party property-like rights to some retail "style."

I'm really surprised this is an issue for the US courts at all, and that they didn't refer Trader Joe's to the Canadian court system.

Re: Pirate Joe’s, Maverick Distributor of Trader Joe’s Products, Shuts Down

#119

Post by massung »

I'm looking at this as though Trader Joe's was a different company... say Disney. Disney goes to great lengths to work out how its products are used, packaged and distributed to not only maximize profits, but also to maintain a certain image.

If I go to DisneyWorld, purchase a Mickey Mouse doll, an take it home. I have the right to do with that doll whatever I want: burn it, give it to my daughter, or resell it at whatever price I see fit.

However, I don't believe I have to right to go - as an agent of another (presumed competitor), purchase that same doll, and then resell it in my own store. I have no resell agreement with Disney to do so. In a typical reseller arrangement, wouldn't a store (e.g. Target) have an agreement with Disney to purchase bulk product for resell, presumably at a reduced price, but also under strict guidelines as to how it could do so? For example: cannot be sold above a certain price, cannot be sold next to adult content, etc.

On a side note: I have to believe that (while not a TJ problem or related to the lawsuit) there were other issues with what Pirate Joe's was doing related to imports, possible tariffs not being adhered to, etc.

/IANAL

Re: Pirate Joe’s, Maverick Distributor of Trader Joe’s Products, Shuts Down

#120

Post by s73ver »

ska wrote: post #32
sp332 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a trademark infringement case. The (alleged) problem is that he set up a store which billed itself as being basically a Trader Joe's.

Except he didn't. It was always clear what he was doing. This is pretty straightforward legal bullying, in my opinion.

To me it is pretty clear that's what he was doing.
Post reply on HN