Specialized up to their old tricks - a new victim

dodgy
dodgy Posts: 2,890
edited April 2014 in Road general
This time, Neil Pryde. http://www.neilprydebikes.com/news/late ... azare.html

They've had to change the name of one of their bikes.
«13

Comments

  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    Again, that's completely OTT. Wonder what Mr Sinyard's excuse will be this time....?
  • neil.s
    neil.s Posts: 123
    Obviously haven't learnt anything about public relations.
  • paul_onabike
    paul_onabike Posts: 194
    I wonder if TA Specialites will have to change the name of their company and cranks then? (TA Alize) I think not as TA have been around longer.
    Perhaps they (TA) should get their lawyers to tell Specialized that their name is too close to theirs?

    Most of these cases have no merit but the smaller companies have to back down because they cannot afford the legal costs of fighting a claim. It is just a form of bullying, nothing to do with trademark infringement.

    As you say, Specialized will never learn, they think they can do what they like and get away with it.
  • gingaman
    gingaman Posts: 576
    "So long ALIZE and allez, allez NAZARÉ!"

    :D
  • Pickled Pig
    Pickled Pig Posts: 233
    I have a spesh and like it but this obsession over very vague name similarities does them no favours.
  • meesterbond
    meesterbond Posts: 1,240
    Someone in their PR team needs to have a quiet word with their legal team. Not doing themselves any favours here.
  • BrandonA
    BrandonA Posts: 553
    Do we know why they actually changed their name i.e did a judge/court tell them to or did they do it themselves after speaking to Specialized?

    Either way I doubt they would have done it if they knew they were in the wrong. The link may state that they don't know why they had to but this is marketing and they are bound to state that regardless of who asked/told them to do it.
  • dodgy
    dodgy Posts: 2,890
    BrandonA wrote:
    Do we know why they actually changed their name i.e did a judge/court tell them to or did they do it themselves after speaking to Specialized?

    Either way I doubt they would have done it if they knew they were in the wrong. The link may state that they don't know why they had to but this is marketing and they are bound to state that regardless of who asked/told them to do it.

    I think it's well established that litigation costs money, more so as the size of your adversary grows. A legal case against one of the bigger players in the industry is going to cost you money. That's the whole point, even if you've missed it.

    It's usually less risk to simply give in.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    Probably something to do with some Americans being unable to differentiate between the pronunciation of 'Allez' and 'Alize'...
  • chris_bass
    chris_bass Posts: 4,913
    I might start a bike specific sunglasses range called special eyes and see if they sue me, free publicity if they do :-)
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • arran77
    arran77 Posts: 9,260
    Chris Bass wrote:
    I might start a bike specific sunglasses range called special eyes and see if they sue me, free publicity if they do :-)

    :lol:
    "Arran, you are like the Tony Benn of smut. You have never diluted your depravity and always stand by your beliefs. You have my respect sir and your wife my pity" :lol:

    seanoconn
  • RDW
    RDW Posts: 1,900
    Maybe Specialized have been reading Gumtree:

    http://www.gumtree.com/p/for-sale/speci ... r/91691331

    I don't think that one would stand up in court - obviously different names and pronunciation, and bikes targeted at different markets, with the Allez being the cheap model.
  • rolf_f
    rolf_f Posts: 16,015
    Chris Bass wrote:
    I might start a bike specific sunglasses range called special eyes and see if they sue me, free publicity if they do :-)

    A great idea. I think you should go for a simple model name though. So you could have your sunglasses ranges called A, B, C and D. That would have a nice ring to it.

    As for Specialized. Just a company that leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. Just don't buy their products.
    Faster than a tent.......
  • thefd
    thefd Posts: 1,021
    I don't get all the Specialized haters on this thread. They have the right to protect 'their' brand. All companies do this to greater and lesser extent. When the Olympics came to London, their marketing company stopped local bakers and chippies from selling 'Olympic' menu food.

    If you have a company and build it up with a reputation if another firm used a similar product name then you would surely want to do something about protecting your company.
    2017 - Caadx
    2016 - Cervelo R3
    2013 - R872
    2010 - Spesh Tarmac
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    TheFD wrote:
    I don't get all the Specialized haters on this thread. They have the right to protect 'their' brand. All companies do this to greater and lesser extent. When the Olympics came to London, their marketing company stopped local bakers and chippies from selling 'Olympic' menu food.

    If you have a company and build it up with a reputation if another firm used a similar product name then you would surely want to do something about protecting your company.

    So you think that 'Alize' is close enough to 'Allez' to present a threat to Specialized's global brand ID, presumably..??
  • thefd
    thefd Posts: 1,021
    Imposter wrote:
    TheFD wrote:
    I don't get all the Specialized haters on this thread. They have the right to protect 'their' brand. All companies do this to greater and lesser extent. When the Olympics came to London, their marketing company stopped local bakers and chippies from selling 'Olympic' menu food.

    If you have a company and build it up with a reputation if another firm used a similar product name then you would surely want to do something about protecting your company.

    So you think that 'Alize' is close enough to 'Allez' to present a threat to Specialized's global brand ID, presumably..??
    Much the same as 'Greasy Joe's Fish and Chippy' will bring down the Olympic Movement by having an Olympic Chippy Dinner.

    Listen - I don't think it would be much of a threat to Specialized - but they obviously do. All I'm saying is that all companies will do what they can to 'protect' their brand. I would do the same and so would you, so why is everyone jumping on the back of Specialized?
    2017 - Caadx
    2016 - Cervelo R3
    2013 - R872
    2010 - Spesh Tarmac
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    TheFD wrote:
    I would do the same and so would you,

    That's just it - I wouldn't.
    TheFD wrote:
    so why is everyone jumping on the back of Specialized?

    Because in this case, the steps they are taking seem unreasonable and illogical - and have all the makings of yet another PR disaster for them. Deservedly so, too...
  • thefd
    thefd Posts: 1,021
    Imposter wrote:
    TheFD wrote:
    I would do the same and so would you,

    That's just it - I wouldn't.
    You wouldn't protect your brand...? That's what I have said. Companies do what they think is necessary to protect their brand. I'm not saying I would do what Specialized have, but I would do what I think is necessary to protect my company's brand!
    2017 - Caadx
    2016 - Cervelo R3
    2013 - R872
    2010 - Spesh Tarmac
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    TheFD wrote:
    You wouldn't protect your brand...? That's what I have said. Companies do what they think is necessary to protect their brand. I'm not saying I would do what Specialized have, but I would do what I think is necessary to protect my company's brand!

    I'm pretty sure that most people here get the concept of brand protection. But the general idea behind 'protecting it' is to not make it any worse while you are doing so. There's the irony, see...
  • thefd
    thefd Posts: 1,021
    Imposter wrote:
    TheFD wrote:
    You wouldn't protect your brand...? That's what I have said. Companies do what they think is necessary to protect their brand. I'm not saying I would do what Specialized have, but I would do what I think is necessary to protect my company's brand!

    I'm pretty sure that most people here get the concept of brand protection. But the general idea behind 'protecting it' is to not make it any worse while you are doing so. There's the irony, see...
    Well a couple of posts above you seemed to be struggling with the concept... :D

    I don't think a couple of folks on a forum somewhere saying they won't buy from Spesh again will really effect them. They obviously felt protecting their brand was more important.

    Apple have done it in the past and they obviously felt it was more important to protect their brand and risk losing a few sales.
    2017 - Caadx
    2016 - Cervelo R3
    2013 - R872
    2010 - Spesh Tarmac
  • gethinceri
    gethinceri Posts: 1,644
    It doesn't stop them being perceived as being cunts just because Apple have done something similar. A lot of people think Apple are cunts.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    TheFD wrote:
    Well a couple of posts above you seemed to be struggling with the concept... :D

    I hope not - I made a good living out of it for about 20 years.

    TheFD wrote:
    I don't think a couple of folks on a forum somewhere saying they won't buy from Spesh again will really effect them. They obviously felt protecting their brand was more important.

    That's fine. Nobody should express their views on this forum ever again.
    TheFD wrote:
    Apple have done it in the past and they obviously felt it was more important to protect their brand and risk losing a few sales.

    Posting another example of a US-based global corporation being over-zealous in it's brand protection does not excuse Specialized (or any others) from doing it. But you knew that...
  • bikingjohn
    bikingjohn Posts: 202
    speciALIZEd
    They own it!

    They are not gentleman enough. Won't buy anything from them.
    2015 Trek Domane 4.5 Disc
    http://chup.info/c/tag/trek/
  • Doris Day
    Doris Day Posts: 83
    Do they actually have 'Globel' rights to the name 'Allez'
    Fuji kicked there bottoms last time this happened as they had the 'Glinel rights' in there last lawsuit.
  • kajjal
    kajjal Posts: 3,380
    TheFD wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    TheFD wrote:
    You wouldn't protect your brand...? That's what I have said. Companies do what they think is necessary to protect their brand. I'm not saying I would do what Specialized have, but I would do what I think is necessary to protect my company's brand!

    I'm pretty sure that most people here get the concept of brand protection. But the general idea behind 'protecting it' is to not make it any worse while you are doing so. There's the irony, see...
    Well a couple of posts above you seemed to be struggling with the concept... :D

    I don't think a couple of folks on a forum somewhere saying they won't buy from Spesh again will really effect them. They obviously felt protecting their brand was more important.

    Apple have done it in the past and they obviously felt it was more important to protect their brand and risk losing a few sales.

    That's how I see it to.
  • Bordersroadie
    Bordersroadie Posts: 1,052
    Next victim lining himself up to be shot:

    " Allez cycling t-shirt brand launched

    And we end Tech Roundup today with a news of yet another t-shirt brand to offer some cycling themed clobber. This is a young company based in the Netherlands, they’re actually a couple of students, and have only been going three months. "

    http://road.cc/content/news/109979-tech ... e-and-more

    Like watching lambs going to slaughter. . . :(
  • dodgy
    dodgy Posts: 2,890
    TheFD wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    TheFD wrote:
    I would do the same and so would you,

    That's just it - I wouldn't.
    You wouldn't protect your brand...? That's what I have said. Companies do what they think is necessary to protect their brand. I'm not saying I would do what Specialized have, but I would do what I think is necessary to protect my company's brand!

    You're posting on a thread that is discussing Specialized bullying a smallish manufacturer. In the context of this thread, you are saying you'd do the same, otherwise you wouldn't be defending them.

    Or are you saying if a company set them self up as 'Speshulized' and started selling Roubaix bikes, then you'd act? Of course you would.

    But this thread is about wholly disproportionate action against a smaller company and is why Specialized is getting so much grief over it.

    I don't see anyone else defending them.
  • chris_bass
    chris_bass Posts: 4,913
    Bordersroadie wrote:
    Next victim lining himself up to be shot:

    " Allez cycling t-shirt brand launched

    And we end Tech Roundup today with a news of yet another t-shirt brand to offer some cycling themed clobber. This is a young company based in the Netherlands, they’re actually a couple of students, and have only been going three months. "

    http://road.cc/content/news/109979-tech ... e-and-more

    Like watching lambs going to slaughter. . . :(

    I hope not, I quite like that upside down 13 shirt
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • brettjmcc
    brettjmcc Posts: 1,361
    Kajjal wrote:
    TheFD wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    TheFD wrote:
    You wouldn't protect your brand...? That's what I have said. Companies do what they think is necessary to protect their brand. I'm not saying I would do what Specialized have, but I would do what I think is necessary to protect my company's brand!

    I'm pretty sure that most people here get the concept of brand protection. But the general idea behind 'protecting it' is to not make it any worse while you are doing so. There's the irony, see...
    Well a couple of posts above you seemed to be struggling with the concept... :D

    I don't think a couple of folks on a forum somewhere saying they won't buy from Spesh again will really effect them. They obviously felt protecting their brand was more important.

    Apple have done it in the past and they obviously felt it was more important to protect their brand and risk losing a few sales.

    That's how I see it to.

    Really not unknown... Let's say for instance (hypothetically of course), the Ford Kuga, which is known as the Ford Escape in North America isn't called the escape because it was too close to a certain French manufacturers MPV name...
    BMC GF01
    Quintana Roo Cd01
    Project High End Hack
    Cannondale Synapse SL (gone)
    I like Carbon
  • thefd
    thefd Posts: 1,021
    dodgy wrote:
    You're posting on a thread that is discussing Specialized bullying a smallish manufacturer. In the context of this thread, you are saying you'd do the same, otherwise you wouldn't be defending them.

    Or are you saying if a company set them self up as 'Speshulized' and started selling Roubaix bikes, then you'd act? Of course you would.

    But this thread is about wholly disproportionate action against a smaller company and is why Specialized is getting so much grief over it.

    I don't see anyone else defending them.
    You are saying they are bullying them. Spesh will say they are defending their company...
    I am saying I would defend my company - not in the same way as Spesh have but I can see why they have done what they have...

    Again - in your eyes it is wholly disproportionate, but in Spesh's eyes it isn't. Same as Olympic movement sponsorship is wholly disproportionate in many peoples eyes but not in theirs. Same as MacDonald's have sued other companies when they step on their trademark, same as many big business (yes mostly American) do. In your eys it is unfair - in their eyes it is justified...

    That's what I'm saying...
    2017 - Caadx
    2016 - Cervelo R3
    2013 - R872
    2010 - Spesh Tarmac

Categories