copyright infringement is copyright infringement.

Montecristo (CC) - 1935

Montecristo (NC) - 1995

Tatuaje - 2003

Pardon me while I LMAO.
[Reply]

Carlos is correct. The parties may ask the court to have the loser pay both court costs and the winners costs, which is what I think that Slavic was alluding to, although such payments are not automatic and must be asked for specifically in a judgment.

From Black's Law Dictionary, Abridged Seventh Edition.

cost, n, 2. (pl) The charges or fees taxed by the court, such as filing fees, jury fees, courthouse fees, and reporter fees. -- also termed court costs.

cost, n, 3. (pl.) The expenses of litigation, prosecution, or other legal transaction, esp. those allowed in favor of one party against the other -- Also termed [...] litigation costs.

court costs. See COST (2).

So we can see that the term "cost" can potentially cover both uses, but court costs is specific.

No links, this is from my printed copy.
[Reply]

I am in trouble, I have a felur de lys as part of my tattoo. putting something over it will be less expensive then court fees i guess. oh well.
[Reply]

Correct. There are many matters that get considered, often, in such cases esp. whether or not the copyright should ever have been awarded and what, specifically, constitutes the item that has been granted protection. I do my work in the patent area and am very successful at getting patents reviewed and withdrawn by both US Federal Court and the USPTO. I assume that there are other experts who do similar for copyright.

btw, IANAL.
[Reply]

If they sue them, then the Boy Scouts are next.



[Reply]

:-)
[Reply]

Couple of things:

The suit is for trademark infringement, not copyright infringement.

Under the federal trademark act, a prevailing party can, but does not automatically, recover both attorney's fees and costs.

Tatuaje sued first in federal court in LA, on August 21, 2009, seeking a ruling that it doesn't infringe any Altadis trademarks. Altadis' suit was filed in federal court in Miami on Friday. Because Tatuaje's suit was filed first, it is likely that it will proceed and Altadis' later-filed suit will be dismissed or transferred to be consolidated with Tatuaje's suit in LA.
[Reply]

Unreal. Altadis might benefit from it if someone confuses a Montecristo for a Tatuaje. :-)
[Reply]

Considering that the history of Altadis goes as far back as 1918...Tatuaje goes back all of 6 years....

For those of you who wish Altadis to fail, maybe you want to re-think your words??
[Reply]

It is still going to be a legal fiasco when (if) the Embargo ends IMHO.
[Reply]

Agree with ya there Tom!!
[Reply]

Well, still want them to fail. And if the commies don't believe in ownership of property, why should they believe in owner of trademarks. :-)
[Reply]

I would understand the lawsuits and everything if Altadis had the FdL trademarked a long tile ago, but they just did it this year AFTER they saw the sucess tat was having and that was the embl they used. Definatly sleezy to say the least
[Reply]

Hey,
Anyone using a Montecristo photo for an Avatar, look out!!! You too may get sued by Altadis.:-)
[Reply]

if they made tasty cigars maybe I'd give a S**t!
[Reply]

Nah! In New Orleans they spell it "Fleur de lis" so it must be something different.:-):-)
[Reply]

I find it kind of amusing as the Fluer is one of the most generic symbols used for a lot of different companies and wouldn't think that a symbol like that couldn't be trademarked. Hell, the Saints use it, BoyScouts, Big Tattoo Wines(http://www.bigtattoored.com/) etc etc. Altadis will need to start thier own legal dept if they really want to say they trademarked it. I'm going to go and trademark the question mark tomorrow and anyone who uses it whether it's for their company or in the paper or magazines I am sueing the crap out of them. Whenever I wear my Tatuaje t-shirt people always ask if I am a Saints fan. Never once did someone say, "Hey I like Montecisto too.":-)
Sounds to me like Altadis does not like that Pete/Pepin has taken a big chunk of their market share. Maybe they should concentrate more on making a better cigar that will appeal to the masses rather than nit picking generic symbols. Just my .02
[Reply]

Trademarks are with respect to specific products. So one company could have cigars, another a football team. Now, if the Saints tried to market a cigar, it could get interesting.
[Reply]

Anyone have any Montecristos and is there a ©, TM or ® next to the symbol?
[Reply]

In 2006 Altadis sold 3.2 billion cigars worldwide. Pete Johnson sells around 1.2 million a year. We could all quadruple our Tatuaje consumption and that still wouldn't be "taking a big chunk" out of Altadis' business. If anything is hurting Altadis' business, it's governments and taxes... not Pete Johnson.
[Reply]