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

The Whiskey Rebellion

brokenpianoforpresident.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 112 posts

Re: The Whiskey Rebellion

#61

Post by qw »

nirvana wrote: post #60

Besides being polite this letter provides two remedies that are unusual, and I think there might be a potential third that would make these cases much less contentious. First off, it doesn't demand a removal of the book for sale, but merely requests that the next printing have a different cover. That's a huge step forward, and since the need here is to protect the trademark ability of the brand, outrageous demands re…

Yet I've never seen someone offer to license the trademark to a violator.

Licensing would probably push the case into another department and out of the lawyer's hands. I wouldn't be surprised if they act out of self interest and prefers to deal with it themselves.

Re: The Whiskey Rebellion

#62

Post by jsolson »

tptacek wrote: post #55
TeMPOraL wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good idea; I'm going to buy one with next money I can spare.

Whoah whoah taking this maybe a little bit too far; before we make Jack Daniels the Louis CK of bourbon (presumptive nerd favorite in exchange for one congenial gesture), maybe you should try some Evan Williams Black Label. It costs 2-3 cups of coffee, and is way better.

First, Jack Daniels is not bourbon; it's Tennessee whiskey.

Second, if you're going to tell people to drink Evan Williams, at least point them towards the single barrel. It lacks most of the abrasive industrial solvent characteristics of the black label, and if I recall correctly it's still typically cheaper than JD.

Re: The Whiskey Rebellion

#63

Post by tptacek »

jsolson wrote: post #62
tptacek wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoah whoah taking this maybe a little bit too far; before we make Jack Daniels the Louis CK of bourbon (presumptive nerd favorite in exchange for one congenial gesture), maybe you should try some Evan Williams Black Label. It costs 2-3 cups of coffee, and is way better.

First, Jack Daniels is not bourbon; it's Tennessee whiskey. Second, if you're going to tell people to drink Evan Williams, at least point them towards the single barrel. It lacks most of the abrasive industrial solvent characteristics of the black label, and if I recall correctly it's still typically cheaper than JD.

Are you saying you like Jack Daniels more than Evan Williams Black Label?

I am happy to have provided the opportunity for someone to draw the distinction between "Tennessee whiskey" and "Bourbon", that written point being a regulatory requirement for all message board discussions regarding whiskey. :)

Re: The Whiskey Rebellion

#64

Post by tptacek »

nirvana wrote: post #60

Besides being polite this letter provides two remedies that are unusual, and I think there might be a potential third that would make these cases much less contentious. First off, it doesn't demand a removal of the book for sale, but merely requests that the next printing have a different cover. That's a huge step forward, and since the need here is to protect the trademark ability of the brand, outrageous demands re…

Well, licensing will earn them a negligible amount of money, while continuing to promote the notion of a "rock & roll American whiskey label" that just happens to comprise all the distinct elements of the Jack Daniels label; that's textbook dilution.

Re: The Whiskey Rebellion

#66

Post by mapgrep »

jsolson wrote: post #62
tptacek wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoah whoah taking this maybe a little bit too far; before we make Jack Daniels the Louis CK of bourbon (presumptive nerd favorite in exchange for one congenial gesture), maybe you should try some Evan Williams Black Label. It costs 2-3 cups of coffee, and is way better.

First, Jack Daniels is not bourbon; it's Tennessee whiskey. Second, if you're going to tell people to drink Evan Williams, at least point them towards the single barrel. It lacks most of the abrasive industrial solvent characteristics of the black label, and if I recall correctly it's still typically cheaper than JD.

You're way off on standard Evan Williams ("black label"). It's very good, even if you don't factor in the remarkably low cost. Calling it "abrasive" or like an "industrial solvent" is way inaccurate. Maybe you're just used to very mellowed and sweet sipping whiskies. That's fine but it doesn't make brawnier whiskies trash as you imply.

As someone who mixes many of his Manhattans and Old Fashioneds with Williams (alongside Rittenhouse 100 rye), and who has tried it blind against Jim Beam black label, Maker's, and Daniels, I endorse wholeheartedly Eric Felten's take in The Wall Street Journal:

"It's a terrific deal. Most of the [inexpensive] bourbons I tasted were barely adolescents -- Beam, for example, spends about four years barrel aging. But Evan Williams is made of whiskey that has been in oak for five to seven years, and the extra age comes through. The nice spicy rye in the mash also comes through, giving the bourbon a dash of cinnamon that keeps the vanilla sweetness from cloying. Evan Williams is a good, solid, no-nonsense bourbon. " http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120916374801546109.html

I've had the single barrel. It's fine, very nice for sipping. But by no means would I use it in the drinks where I use regular Evan Williams. It's a little too mellow for a cocktail (although Esquire came up with an interesting one - basically a Manhattan made with Lillet blanc instead of sweet vermouth - I think they called it a Yellow Dog. You'll notice Lillet is much more meek than a sweet vermouth, even a relaxed Dolin. That way it doesn't overwhelm the soft nine-to-twelve-years-aged Single Barrel).

(update - here's a link to the Evan Williams Single Barrel cocktail - http://www.esquire.com/features/how-to-give-a-toast-0212)

Re: The Whiskey Rebellion

#67

Post by drumdance »

nirvana wrote: post #60

Besides being polite this letter provides two remedies that are unusual, and I think there might be a potential third that would make these cases much less contentious. First off, it doesn't demand a removal of the book for sale, but merely requests that the next printing have a different cover. That's a huge step forward, and since the need here is to protect the trademark ability of the brand, outrageous demands re…

The fact that they even off to help financially is really encouraging. Perhaps they could structure this similar to a product placement deal like you see in Hollywood.

Re: The Whiskey Rebellion

#68

Post by sliverstorm »

nirvana wrote: post #60

Besides being polite this letter provides two remedies that are unusual, and I think there might be a potential third that would make these cases much less contentious. First off, it doesn't demand a removal of the book for sale, but merely requests that the next printing have a different cover. That's a huge step forward, and since the need here is to protect the trademark ability of the brand, outrageous demands re…

Is it possible to license a likeness, though? Notice the logo was mimicked here, not copied. It is clearly not actually a JD logo.

Re: The Whiskey Rebellion

#69

Post by krogsgard »

tptacek wrote: post #63
jsolson wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, Jack Daniels is not bourbon; it's Tennessee whiskey. Second, if you're going to tell people to drink Evan Williams, at least point them towards the single barrel. It lacks most of the abrasive industrial solvent characteristics of the black label, and if I recall correctly it's still typically cheaper than JD.

Are you saying you like Jack Daniels more than Evan Williams Black Label? I am happy to have provided the opportunity for someone to draw the distinction between "Tennessee whiskey" and "Bourbon", that written point being a regulatory requirement for all message board discussions regarding whiskey. :)

the definition of bourbon varies based on country, but pretty much it's anything over 50% corn based.

The difference in "Tennessee Whiskey" is the charcoal filtration. They pour the whiskey over an enormous pile of charcoal, which provides a unique flavor, independent of standard bourbon. They obtained the legal right to distinguish it this way a long time ago. To me, technically, Tennessee Whiskey could be called bourbon, but bourbon should not be called Tennessee Whiskey without this process. IE, square/rectangle relationship.

After the charcoals, it goes to the barrels, and anything that ages appropriately (usually depends on the height of the barrel in the storeroom and the strength of the winters/summers) between, I think, 3 and 7 years becomes JD black label. If it hasn't aged after 7 years, it becomes green label. Gentlemen Jack gets put through the coals twice, and single-barrel is well, single-barrel.

If you haven't been to Lynchburg, I recommend it. It's an awesome tour.

Re: The Whiskey Rebellion

#70

Post by excuse-me »

mikeash wrote: post #56
excuse-me wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be a parody you have to be paroding the thing you are copying, not using it to parody a third party. The defense is intended to stop ACME company preventing you saying "Boycott ACME" by claiming ownership of the name. It doesn't allow you to copy ACME's fine range of anti-roadrunner products to protest against something else. For example Weird Al's songs are parodies but they aren't protected because he is parodyi…

Weird Al isn't parodying the artists he parodies? What?

In the strict first amendment sense - no he isn't (with the possible exception of the Nirvana one)

The parody protection is very narrowly defined, mainly to stop the target using it to squash opposition. You can't automatically use artist X's tune/style/etc to parody politician Y. And just making your own funny version of something is definitely not

Post reply on HN