Ken Byron’s Extra Mature FVF

[Johnny_Pipecleaner]

People are simply not free to casually use someone else's work product for their own profit. Not only that, what if in his efforts to "reprocess" the SG products, he inadvertently introduces some toxin or harmful mold which subsequently injures or even kills some smokers? with SG's name on the product, do you think they would benefit by such a thing? Arguably, they could even be named in subsequent lawsuits. There are all kind of reasons there are laws to protect against this kind of behavior.

Interesting. Does it work the same way for all blenders? Most are probably not growing their own right? So they use someone else's products, and if anything ends up harming anyone down the line... do they go back to the original producer(s) of the various components?

 

[verporchting]

More information changes the analysis a lot.

Just banging a label on a product saying it’s aged is a so what moment. I mean, really, something that you bought yesterday and resold today is “aged”? Well, no shit. Every product on the market could have that label tacked on by the retailer.

Bought in bulk and modified? Well, that’s fairly common in the industry and has been for ages by tobacconists who reblend their own house blends. Seems the ship sailed long ago on that one and honestly the industry seemed to encourage it. So not a huge deal.

Altering a blend and then creating the label using a copyrighted image and brand name without permission and calling it by its original name plus something additional is quite different and almost certainly infringes on the brand’s legal rights - in more than one way. What if it sucks and people don’t buy the original product again due to mistaking the altered product for an original or brand created product. Clearly harm done to the brand’s name, business reputation and all of the trademark and copyright infringements on top of it.

Ultimately it’s the brand’s call to make even if there is infringement, they might approve or just not care. Wouldn’t surprise me if they care very deeply and are willing to litigate just to protect against future problems even if it wasn’t cost effective this time. Legal rights are funny things and you wouldn’t want to sit on them and risk waiving them in case the next time is something you really care about and it appears that you have a history of allowing a prescriptive use by allowing it to occur through non action.

 

[verporchting]

Hoosier is spot on in his analysis btw. Doesn’t matter a nonce what the consumer thinks about whether there is a violation. It’s a matter of fact and law. Whether the consumer approves or not is of no importance. Otherwise the laws mean nothing and the mob rules according to the fashionable opinion of the moment and the desires and whims of a fickle consumer market. Doesn’t work that way.

 

[logs]

Isn't this what most blenders do though? Buy bulk product from someone else, then modify it and resell it.

Well kind of. The big famous producers buy raw leaf or basic mixer blends and then process it into a finished blend that is smokable. It's different than re-blending an already finished blend, which is what Ken Byron typically does. From what I've seen he generally tweaks someone else's blends rather than building something from scratch.

 

[BROBS]

It’s most certainly a violation of copyright law. ?

In the past he’s always rebranded it completely.

I like his products etc but it’s obvious this type of branding isn’t legal.

also those making their own bulks don’t make a blend then call it “Peter Stokkebye Special Shop Blend” because it’s not created by Stokkebye.

technically he could have called it KBV Extra Matured then in the description said what it was. The way it’s done now makes the consumer see a familiar copyrighted label first, then you have to look for the difference. The difference must be easily noticeable and changed from the original.

 

[Johnny_Pipecleaner]

Never said it was legal. I totally understand where y’all are coming from. Fair enough

Personally I’m way more disgusted when people hoard rare blends only to sell the tins for 5x what they paid for them, after doing nothing but stacking them in their closet.

 

[condorlover1]

@verporchting +100. If I buy a bottle of Johnnie Walker Red and add something to it or run it through the still a second time and add the words 'Improved' to the label which is identical to the original label I have infringed the owners rights. If my improved concoction turned out to be dangerous or worse then I have damaged the copyright/trademark owners reputation plus opened myself up for a host of legal issues. If on the other hand I purchased the liquor and then resold it as 'Star Cats Magic Milk' and the concoction damaged someone then the issue would rest with me.

 

[condorlover1]

@Johnny_Pipecleaner I suppose if that argument is taken to its logical conclusion the same would apply to coin collectors, stamp collectors or even investors in the stockmarket. I see your point but it does fly in the face of the free market. Maybe when Bernie is POTUS we can all have rare blends at cost!

 

[BROBS]

Never said it was legal. I totally understand where y’all are coming from. Fair enough

Personally I’m way more disgusted when people hoard rare blends only to sell the tins for 5x what they paid for them, after doing nothing but stacking them in their closet.

You mean like maturing a bulk blend and then making $2,000 off a $45 box?

I like what he’s doing definitely and I understand the way he charges however there is no break for buying more. So if you want a lb you pay the same per oz so it’s basically never worth it to buy a large amount. Because of this I never buy more than 4oz at a time from him. Otherwise I would.

 

[logs]

Personally I’m way more disgusted when people hoard rare blends only to sell the tins for 5x what they paid for them, after doing nothing but stacking them in their closet.

I don't have a problem with the idea of re-blending tobacco the way Byron does it. He does seem to have found an audience for his stuff--mostly experienced smokers looking for a novel twist to an already familiar smoke. The legality of it all I have no clue about.

 

[Johnny_Pipecleaner]

You mean like maturing a bulk blend and then making $2,000 off a $45 box?

Hold up, a $45 box contains how much? I generally see 250g priced at $35-40 or so (taxes, shipping).

I regularly see 50g SG tins priced at $16 (or more) shipped. I feel his prices are reasonable here but yeah, no bulk discounts are a bummer, I hear that

 

[hoosierpipeguy]

Interesting. Does it work the same way for all blenders? Most are probably not growing their own right? So they use someone else's products, and if anything ends up harming anyone down the line... do they go back to the original producer(s) of the various components?

I would suspect they have some form of contract in place, with the suppliers they purchase from, granting SG the permission to reuse the raw products in their production. There's also a difference when Joe Sixpack's Tobacco Farm isn't selling to end users and has no market brand recognition. In fact, Joe Sixpack's Tobacco Farm likely isn't even licensed or approved to sell their product to end users. In other words, it is implied and even obvious they are a supplier of raw materials to be used in the production of tobacco products sold to end users.

I doubt Toyota has to worry about these permissions with the companies they purchase nuts and bolts from. By the same token, Toyota doesn't casually advertise and use the logo of Acme Bolt and Screws. Were they to do so, I can assure you Toyota would have the appropriate contracts and permissions in place.

If the guy in question would simply be purchasing bulk SG and reselling it under his own logo and brand name, with no mention of SG, I don't believe there would be a problem. However, not only is he using their logo and branding, he is stating he is using their products. So he is profiting off of Samuel Gawith while also potentially putting them at risk without any contract or permissions in place. People just can't do this sort of thing. The laws are in place to protect the manufacturers and the consumer.

Another example. What if this guy got greedy and started purchasing Sutliff products to package and stating they were repackaged SG tobacco blends with his special sauce and processing. I think it is easy to see how this could be potentially harmful to SG. Some unwitting smoker, who has never smoked SG, purchases some and smokes it. Then declares "I paid $8 and ounce for this stuff and it tastes like Sutliff crap." You think that benefits SG?

 

[rushx9]

Just a guess, but I'll bet he asked permission, and SG gave it. The Gawith houses, Germain's, Lane, Sutliff, C&D, and others make and sell bulk blends for tobacconists and B&Ms with the presumption that it will be relabeled as a house blend. Sometimes, especially with english brands, the producer is credited because the provenance helps sell the blend (think smokers haven). More often, the blend gets a new name and the b&m stays tight lipped because they don't want you to know you're overpaying for rebadged 1-Q.
I bought some crystal covered Grasmere at a B&M not too far from here and they said no one had picked up that jar in over 5 years. I thought "Sweet, aged tobacco with no upcharge!" They had a similarly neglected jar of Kendal Dark Flake... Can't wait to go back and wipe them out!?

 

[BROBS]

Hold up, a $45 box contains how much? I generally see 250g priced at $35-40 or so (taxes, shipping).

I regularly see 50g SG tins priced at $16 (or more) shipped. I feel his prices are reasonable here but yeah, no bulk discounts are a bummer, I hear that

Lol I suck at math bro. I was figuring grams as oz lolol

so basically he’s only doubling his money after all that work. Which is not out of line at all.

 

[verporchting]

Star Cat’s Magic Milk ????

Holy Shit, Batman, I nearly spit my soda out laughing. That’s just what we need, MORE STAR CAT! ?

That would make this thread SO much more interesting and increase the lock potential by magnitudes, LOL.

 

[condorlover1]

@verporchting More Cow Bell or More Star Cat. Its all relative when gauging the potential for thread lock down.

 

[verporchting]

Exactly!

 

[gervais]

Well let us know how it smokes, will ya? Im itching to find out

 

[Johnny_Pipecleaner]

Well let us know how it smokes, will ya? Im itching to find out

My attorney has advised me not to confirm nor deny any involvement or dealings with the aforementioned tobacco blender or any of its products, partners, subsidiaries, or affiliates.

 

[alaskanpiper]

Just a guess, but I'll bet he asked permission, and SG gave it. The Gawith houses, Germain's, Lane, Sutliff, C&D, and others make and sell bulk blends for tobacconists and B&Ms with the presumption that it will be relabeled as a house blend. Sometimes, especially with english brands, the producer is credited because the provenance helps sell the blend (think smokers haven). More often, the blend gets a new name and the b&m stays tight lipped because they don't want you to know you're overpaying for rebadged 1-Q.
I bought some crystal covered Grasmere at a B&M not too far from here and they said no one had picked up that jar in over 5 years. I thought "Sweet, aged tobacco with no upcharge!" They had a similarly neglected jar of Kendal Dark Flake... Can't wait to go back and wipe them out!?

Surprised it took this long for anyone to mention this possibility. A lot of assumptions going on here.