"Earlier trademark owner" and longtime HN member here. Happy to answer whatever questions I can.
You should spread this over more outlets, I think it's already being flagged here...
11–20 of 205 posts
"Earlier trademark owner" and longtime HN member here. Happy to answer whatever questions I can.
You should spread this over more outlets, I think it's already being flagged here...
Yikes. I'm glad you're going public with this. Companies shouldn't be able to get away with legal bullying like this.
You will eat the soy.
You will live in the pod.
You will own nothing.
And to be 100% clear I am not being an apologist for Impossible. If they are indeed bullying and the case is as clear cut as this article describes then that is ugly behavior.
If the "later" impossible food succeeds in canceling the trademark, does that mean that any company can market their product as "impossible burgers"?
If the "later" impossible food succeeds in canceling the trademark, does that mean that any company can market their product as "impossible burgers"?