Pirate Joe’s, Maverick Distributor of Trader Joe’s Products, Shuts Down • Hacker News Board

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

#161

Post by chc » Fri, Jun 09, 2017, 8:50 PM UTC

plink wrote: post #154

learc83 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounded like they weren't actually suing him over selling their products, but over the name "Pirate Joe's" Hey may still have won that one, but it's at least somewhat plausible that consumers might actually be confused by the name.

So, they were claiming exclusivity on the descriptor "pirate"?

They may have thought it was confusingly similar to the pattern they use for their brands (e.g. Trader Jose's, Baker Josef's).

Update: I went and read the actual complaint by Trader Joe's and, though it does mention this, I think this comment may be overly generous to their thought process.

The complaint[1], as far as I can tell, was basically that their decor looked kinda like Trader Joe's and they sold Trader Joe's products and this combination is deceptive.

[1]: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/51fc7d3ce4b05ae014fc8...

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

#162

Post by wayn3 » Fri, Jun 09, 2017, 8:52 PM UTC

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…

lul yea, if you just blatantly resell an aldi brand, they can totally wreck your shit.

google cases of people selling as little as 5 items of "esprit" clothing.

if you resell brands and youre not an authorized vendor, youre not going to have a lot of fun for a while.

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

#163

Post by stale2002 » Fri, Jun 09, 2017, 8:55 PM UTC

tryitnow wrote: post #141

As much as I like to side with the little guy, I think it's pretty fair for an establishment to restrict whom they sell to (as long as it's not based on a protected class like race, gender, orientation, etc). Despite being banned from the store this guy still sought out ways to shop there, so I can't defend him too enthusiastically. Then again it kind of annoys me that TJ's just didn't open a damn store in Canada. An…

Sure, you can stop selling to HIM.

But there is nothing illegal about this guy convincing other people to buy stuff for him.

You as a consumer, can sell your goods to whoever you want because of the first sale doctrine, and trader Joe's can't stop you.

Yes they could then ban YOU from buying from there..... But then the guy could just convince someone else to shop there, and around and around it goes.

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

#164

Post by ams6110 » Fri, Jun 09, 2017, 8:59 PM UTC

FireBeyond wrote: post #73

will_brown wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

"Don't you have a legal right to create exclusive distribution" Fairly clearly, under law, no. Well, kinda: You have the right to decide who you will sell to, entirely. You have no right to prevent things under the first sale doctrine. (Some of the attempts to limit this include printing on packaging 'not for resale' as an attempt to EULA the physical product).

You have the right to decide who you will sell to, entirely.

Not entirely, see recent cases of bakers who didn't want to sell cakes for gay weddings.

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

#165

Post by noonespecial » Fri, Jun 09, 2017, 9:00 PM UTC

culturalzero wrote: post #96

rfdub wrote: post #76

Trader Joes doesn't have a goddamn peg-leg to stand on in this dispute. If Trader Joes had made any indication whatsoever they were seeking to satisfy the clearly substantial demand for their products in Vancouver I might better be able to see their side of the story, but they have done absolutely nothing to expand into what would be ludicrously lucrative market. I know multiple people who have sent bloody hand-writt…

Yeah, I just don't understand capitalists that actively fight against capitalizing on clear opportunities. I would have just opened a store down the street or something.

It's because legal departments are not capitalists. They're a kind of ultra-conservative entity motivated entirely by fear/anger of any perceived change.

What we have here is a COO/CEO asleep at the wheel. One of the CEOs most important jobs is to watch the legal department for signs they're about to draw the old foot-gun and start playing "this little piggy" with company toes.

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

#166

Post by afuchs » Fri, Jun 09, 2017, 9:03 PM UTC

lr4444lr wrote: post #150

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…

His bulk shopping trips got the attention of Trader Joe’s, and in 2013, the company filed a lawsuit against Mr. Hallatt for trademark infringement, unfair competition, false designation of origin and false advertising. What's so hard to understand? The guy was using a knock-off name on a well-known brand without permission to sell their same products. Also, food is one of those specially regulated items that distribu…

It is called the Grey Market. It isn't a legal designation.

The first sale doctrine still applies to bulk purchases. If a seller wants to, they can refuse to sell to anyone that they think will latter resell their product.

You can go into a store right now, buy something at full retail price, and list it on eBay. I doubt you would make any money, unless, like Pirate Joe's, you are selling to a market that is unable to buy from the original retailer.

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

#167

Post by ams6110 » Fri, Jun 09, 2017, 9:05 PM UTC

rdtsc wrote: post #38

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…

> I don't understand with what right trader Joe's can prohibit somebody from reselling their products. I can see this line of reasoning: a lot of products TJ sells are of TJ's brand. If this individual buys the product but then lets it spoil and resells it and makes someone sick, there might be a chance for that end-consumer to sue TJ for it.

If you're in the business of selling food you are taking that risk no matter what. You have insurance.

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

#168

Post by 801699 » Fri, Jun 09, 2017, 9:05 PM UTC

falsedan wrote: post #146

801699 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

afaik, he was not sued in canada.

afaik he wasn't trading in the US

but he had assets there and his business required access to a us-based store.

one story said he met his wife in the us. if she was a us citizen that could be an addtional reason he might want to be able to travel to the us.

in other words, he had reasons to care about potentially having an outstanding judgment against him in the us.

or maybe the appeals court date was before he changed the name to pirate joes?

to be fair, i am making an assumption when i say he picked th wrong name (original name was transilvania trading): that he did not want to be sued in the us. but maybe he did. does not sound like he had a large legal budget though.

there is also the possibility that the name of the business and the other things he did to mimick trader joes had nothing to do with courts reasoning. the fact that he sold goods with a us trademark on the label was enough.

in that case maybe the name matters little.

but if that is true, then shouldn't we see some changes in the risk profile for all sellers of grey market goods even when the names of their stores bear no resemblance to any us trademark associated with goods they sell.

all of the grey market stores i have seen have names that do not mimick any trademarks held by the manufacturers of the goods they sell. but maybe i have not seen enough of them.

my opinion is he picked the wrong name. what consumer would think "transilvania trading" was an authorized reseller of trader joes? otoh, "pirate joes"? but what do i know? not much.

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

#169

Post by macspoofing » Fri, Jun 09, 2017, 9:08 PM UTC

will_brown wrote: post #121

_red wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can't sell something you own, then you don't own it. Being free to dispose of property how you see fit has been a foundation of common law for a few centuries.

In that case you don't own your prescription medication. Reselling alcohol is another legal gray area, but absolutely prohibited to sell to minors, so not being able to dispose of your property how you see fit I guess you don't own your alcohol either.

Yes. Controlled substances are a grey area.

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

#170

Post by patmcc » Fri, Jun 09, 2017, 9:13 PM UTC

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've been in Pirate Joe's (several years ago now); I can't imagine anyone thinking it was a legitimate Trader Joe's store - it felt very obviously to be a parody/rip-off. Isn't the main point of trademarks to avoid brand confusion? I doubt people were thinking this was an actual outlet of Trader Joe's - Hallat was always very transparent about his business practices.