Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Aloha Poke Protests
#1
A company based in Chicago has trademarked the business name Aloha Poke Company. They have asked a few other businesses around the country to stop using the name. Protestors from Hawaii are gathering in Chicago this weekend for an Aloha Is Not For Sale rally, with claims the Hawaiian word Aloha cannot be trademarked. Especially by people on the mainland in Chicago.

I hope it's a large rally, attended by many of the 160,000 online protestors who said they are against the trademark (twice as many as were against the TMT). I hope "The Protectors" have found an even more popular potential source of lucrative donations from this new cause, and focus entirely on the issue. I'm 100% behind them.

Here are some highlights of the argument:

From Hawaii:
* Poke shop owners and Native Hawaiian activists have vocally opposed the letters, saying that to trademark the Hawaiian terms would amount to cultural appropriation.
* “As a Native Hawaiian living in Chicago, I am offended and embarrassed. This company clearly doesn’t understand the word Aloha," said Lanialoha Lee, a long-time Chicago resident.
* “Aloha’ is something we’ve shared with the world, and in this case, Aloha Poke Co. is trying to take the word away from us – that is unacceptable,” said Kuhio Lewis, chief executive officer of the Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement

http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/38854...wn-chicago

From Chicago:
* This is standard behavior in the business world. Trademarks protect companies from rivals trying to free-ride on their hard-won reputations, and they protect consumers from being misled.
* An online petition that has garnered some 160,000 signatures calls on the company to stop using either word.
* But if aloha is not for sale, someone needs to tell Hawaiians. If you check the Honolulu online telephone directory, you’ll find dozens of businesses that have decided to make commercial use of the term, including Aloha Upholstery and Aloha State Refrigeration.
* The critics want the company to drop the use of both words, which they say “belong to the whole Hawaiian culture – not to a U.S. company in Chicago.”

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opini...story.html

“We have knowledge that beyond the border there is a wonderful beauty, a space for beauty, for greatness […] if perhaps you can believe in it, if you have such an experience, your life is a little bit changed.” - László Krasznahorkai
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves
Reply
#2
From what I remember they are trademarking either and all terms which would then be problematic for those Aloha (and poke?) companies.
Reply
#3
they are trademarking either and all terms

They trademarked both words together "Aloha Poke."
So anyone can still name a business "Aloha ______" (fill in the blank with anything except Poke, or other previously trademarked business name starting with Aloha, of which there are many)

“We have knowledge that beyond the border there is a wonderful beauty, a space for beauty, for greatness […] if perhaps you can believe in it, if you have such an experience, your life is a little bit changed.” - László Krasznahorkai
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves
Reply
#4
It looks like originally "The company was needlessly asking for trouble when its cease-and-desist letters said the use of “aloha” by itself was an infringement. If some people want to boycott and protest the restaurant chain, they have every right."(wapo) but later backtracked??? Or made an honest error?
Reply
#5
I don't think anyone would think twice of Rainbow Bread if they tried this, right?
Leilani Estates, 2011 to Present
Reply
#6
They should focus their attention on Kona Brewing for trying to pass their mainland beer off as genuine Hawaiian. And all their Hawaiian name trademarks (Liquid Aloha being one of them).
Reply
#7
focus their attention on Kona Brewing for trying to pass their mainland beer off as genuine Hawaiian

...and "Kona" coffee for being 90% cheap imported junk.
Reply
#8
Isn't Kona Brewing Company owned by Anheuser Busch?
Reply
#9
Isn't Kona Brewing Company owned by Anheuser Busch?

Isn't Anheuser Busch merely a division of InBev, the world's largest brewing company?

In any case: Kona Brew is owned by Craft Brew Alliance, itself formed by the merger of Redhook Ale Brewery and Widmer Brothers Brewery.

The other island breweries are still independent.
Reply
#10
Kona Brewing, via it's parent company Craft Brew Alliance, Inc, is a publicly traded corporation. Anheuser Busch (AB) owns about 1/3 of the shares. Anybody can buy into it via a stockbroker. It's about $20 per share.

ETA: AB is also the distributor for Craft Brew Alliance. (As far as I know, the sole distributor). When you control the distribution, you control the product, and therefore the company. So while AB might "only" own 1/3 of the shares, it "owns" the company.

"Use of the term "craft brew"

While the company name contains the phrase "craft brew", it does not meet the definition of a craft brewer according to the Brewers Association,[20] due to the percentage stake owned by Anheuser-Busch InBev.[3][21][22][23] The Brewers Association defines American craft brewers as "small, independent and traditional", with 'small' defined as an "annual production of 6 million barrels of beer or less", a limit changed in 2011 from 2 million to 6 million to ensure the ongoing inclusion of Boston Beer Company[24] (the producer of the Samuel Adams brand), 'independent' defined as at least 75% owned or controlled by a craft brewer, and 'traditional' defined as at least 50% of its volume being all malt beer.[20][23] "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craft_Brew_Alliance
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)