Beer Marketer's Insights
The US Supreme Court may clearly answer that question after it hears oral argument in an upcoming case, veteran alcohol beverage attorney Richard Blau told INSIGHTS. The fundamental issue is whether an anonymous tip, with no other evidence of wrongdoing, would be enough to stop and search an alleged drunk driver. Or does the 4th Amendment protection against unreasonable searches/seizures demand corroboration of the tip? And even if the 4th Amendment prevails, should there be a "drunk driving exception," to protect the public interest?
Back in 2000, the Court seemed to resolve the issue. It "reaffirmed that law enforcement may conduct a stop only where an anonymous tip has a 'moderate indicia of reliability,' and a 'tendency to identify a determinate person,'" Blau notes. But subsequently, a handful of federal and state courts, have "fashioned a de facto drunk driver exception to the corroboration requirement," he adds. Yet a few state courts have also rejected that exception. Meanwhile, Chief Justice Roberts has not only acknowledged the dangers of drunk driving but identified "the enhanced reliability of tips alleging illegal activity in public, to which the tipster was presumably an eyewitness," suggesting that he might well support a drink driving exception, if the tipster's an eyewitness. Scholars following the courts fall in on both sides.
The current case, involving two brothers transporting marijuana stopped by the police based solely on a tip of a "reckless driver" on the road, but no corroboration of reckless driving, will allow the court to decide whether a drunk driver exception is legitimate, Blau believes. While the implications include a broad range of possible criminal cases, "DUI cases may be the most affected by the Court's ultimate decision." Indeed, the US Solicitor General and 32 states plus DC filed briefs with the court arguing "in favor of a ruling that the compelling public interest in stopping drunk driving, balanced against the minimal intrusion of a car stop, makes it reasonable under the 4th Amendment" to stop cars based solely on anonymous tips as long as the police confirm the location and identification of the vehicle to show that the tipster "had a basis of knowledge and was truthful." Note there would be no requirement that the tipster has a basis of knowledge that the driver is indeed drunk.
Back in 2000, the Court seemed to resolve the issue. It "reaffirmed that law enforcement may conduct a stop only where an anonymous tip has a 'moderate indicia of reliability,' and a 'tendency to identify a determinate person,'" Blau notes. But subsequently, a handful of federal and state courts, have "fashioned a de facto drunk driver exception to the corroboration requirement," he adds. Yet a few state courts have also rejected that exception. Meanwhile, Chief Justice Roberts has not only acknowledged the dangers of drunk driving but identified "the enhanced reliability of tips alleging illegal activity in public, to which the tipster was presumably an eyewitness," suggesting that he might well support a drink driving exception, if the tipster's an eyewitness. Scholars following the courts fall in on both sides.
The current case, involving two brothers transporting marijuana stopped by the police based solely on a tip of a "reckless driver" on the road, but no corroboration of reckless driving, will allow the court to decide whether a drunk driver exception is legitimate, Blau believes. While the implications include a broad range of possible criminal cases, "DUI cases may be the most affected by the Court's ultimate decision." Indeed, the US Solicitor General and 32 states plus DC filed briefs with the court arguing "in favor of a ruling that the compelling public interest in stopping drunk driving, balanced against the minimal intrusion of a car stop, makes it reasonable under the 4th Amendment" to stop cars based solely on anonymous tips as long as the police confirm the location and identification of the vehicle to show that the tipster "had a basis of knowledge and was truthful." Note there would be no requirement that the tipster has a basis of knowledge that the driver is indeed drunk.
Newsletter
Alcohol Issues Insights
Tagged under
The US Supreme Court may clearly answer that question after it hears oral argument in an upcoming case, veteran alcohol beverage attorney Richard Blau told INSIGHTS. The fundamental issue is whether an anonymous tip, with no other evidence of wrongdoing, would be enough to stop and search an alleged drunk driver. Or does the 4th Amendment protection against unreasonable searches/seizures demand corroboration of the tip? And even if the 4th Amendment prevails, should there be a "drunk driving exception," to protect the public interest?
Back in 2000, the Court seemed to resolve the issue. It "reaffirmed that law enforcement may conduct a stop only where an anonymous tip has a 'moderate indicia of reliability,' and a 'tendency to identify a determinate person,'" Blau notes. But subsequently, a handful of federal and state courts, have "fashioned a de facto drunk driver exception to the corroboration requirement," he adds. Yet a few state courts have also rejected that exception. Meanwhile, Chief Justice Roberts has not only acknowledged the dangers of drunk driving but identified "the enhanced reliability of tips alleging illegal activity in public, to which the tipster was presumably an eyewitness," suggesting that he might well support a drink driving exception, if the tipster's an eyewitness. Scholars following the courts fall in on both sides.
The current case, involving two brothers transporting marijuana stopped by the police based solely on a tip of a "reckless driver" on the road, but no corroboration of reckless driving, will allow the court to decide whether a drunk driver exception is legitimate, Blau believes. While the implications include a broad range of possible criminal cases, "DUI cases may be the most affected by the Court's ultimate decision." Indeed, the US Solicitor General and 32 states plus DC filed briefs with the court arguing "in favor of a ruling that the compelling public interest in stopping drunk driving, balanced against the minimal intrusion of a car stop, makes it reasonable under the 4th Amendment" to stop cars based solely on anonymous tips as long as the police confirm the location and identification of the vehicle to show that the tipster "had a basis of knowledge and was truthful." Note there would be no requirement that the tipster has a basis of knowledge that the driver is indeed drunk.
Back in 2000, the Court seemed to resolve the issue. It "reaffirmed that law enforcement may conduct a stop only where an anonymous tip has a 'moderate indicia of reliability,' and a 'tendency to identify a determinate person,'" Blau notes. But subsequently, a handful of federal and state courts, have "fashioned a de facto drunk driver exception to the corroboration requirement," he adds. Yet a few state courts have also rejected that exception. Meanwhile, Chief Justice Roberts has not only acknowledged the dangers of drunk driving but identified "the enhanced reliability of tips alleging illegal activity in public, to which the tipster was presumably an eyewitness," suggesting that he might well support a drink driving exception, if the tipster's an eyewitness. Scholars following the courts fall in on both sides.
The current case, involving two brothers transporting marijuana stopped by the police based solely on a tip of a "reckless driver" on the road, but no corroboration of reckless driving, will allow the court to decide whether a drunk driver exception is legitimate, Blau believes. While the implications include a broad range of possible criminal cases, "DUI cases may be the most affected by the Court's ultimate decision." Indeed, the US Solicitor General and 32 states plus DC filed briefs with the court arguing "in favor of a ruling that the compelling public interest in stopping drunk driving, balanced against the minimal intrusion of a car stop, makes it reasonable under the 4th Amendment" to stop cars based solely on anonymous tips as long as the police confirm the location and identification of the vehicle to show that the tipster "had a basis of knowledge and was truthful." Note there would be no requirement that the tipster has a basis of knowledge that the driver is indeed drunk.
Newsletter
Alcohol Issues Insights
Tagged under
Armed with a new study and an Affordable Care Act that funds a powerful prevention tool, the Centers for Disease Control's director Dr. Tom Frieden advocated for greater use of Alcohol Screening and Brief Interventions (ASBI) at a press conference earlier this month. ASBI is a simple, straightforward prevention tool - basically brief conversations between health professionals and their patients about current drinking levels and potential steps that can be taken to reduce drinking, if warranted - that can effectively, and inexpensively, reduce problem drinking and drinking problems, as INSIGHTS and others have reported. Unfortunately, these conversations simply don't happen often enough as part of primary care, stressed Frieden.
"We're not saying no one should drink," Frieden insisted several times during his brief talk with the press. Most Americans drink "without adverse health problems," he added. But too many adults drink too much on certain occasions, or overall, and that leads to a litany of well-known problems and costs, Frieden said. He focused on binge drinking (5+ per occasion for men, 4+ for women), frequent bingeing, exceeding weekly limits under the US Dietary Guidelines (15+ for men, 8+ for women) and any consumption by pregnant women. In 2011, approximately 18.3% of US adults reported binge drinking at least once in the month prior to being asked. Frieden used the 38 mil figure that the percentage suggests as the number of Americans "who drink too much."
In the same year, this new study of 167,000 adults in 44 states found, 15.7% of adults said they had "ever" discussed their alcohol use with a health professional; just 7.6% had that discussion in the past year. Among self-reported binge drinkers, 25.4% had ever discussed drinking; 13.4% in the previous year. Most alarming to Frieden: "only 34.9% of those who reported binge drinking 10 or more times in the past month had ever discussed alcohol with a health professional." That's even while 6-15 minute ASBI interventions have been shown to "significantly reduce weekly alcohol consumption (by 3.6 fewer drinks/week for adults) and binge level episodes (reported by 12% fewer participants)." ASBI also results in patients sticking more closely to drink limits. What's more, "effects can last for years and show improvement in health care utilization outcomes including fewer hospital stays and lower costs," the study points out. Yet, while brief counseling clearly "works," Frieden concluded: "The health system is not doing an effective job finding out about problems and about patients who want to reduce their drinking."
Frieden pegged the timing of his conference to the study release, while also noting that the under Affordable Care Act this service is covered without co-pays. Also, two large health systems have recently shown some success with expanded use of ASBI. Kaiser Permanente in California provided over 200,000 on-site interventions and referrals and the New York City Health Department screened "10s of thousands" of patients in recent years. These experience show that ASBI can become part of the same "routine patient care" as screening for high blood pressure or cholesterol, Frieden said, and that health insurers can include ABSI as part of their "standard services" and integrate the data with patients' records. Ref 3
Newsletter
Alcohol Issues Insights
Tagged under
The call from the National Transportation Safety Board last year to lower the legal BAC limit for driving from .08 to .05 did not get much traction. Even MADD has not been a vocal supporter. But that may change given the findings of a new study published in the British Medical Journal's Injury Prevention. Researchers from the University of California, San Diego reviewed fatal crash data in the US from 1994-2011 from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS). Information was available on over 570,000 fatal crashes, with BAC data available by increments of .01. The key finding: even at very low BAC levels, "buzzed" drivers are much more likely to be deemed "responsible" for the accident than sober drivers.
The authors had access to police reports that identified 50 possible "driver factors" in a crash, i.e. "driving on the wrong side of the road," "making an improper turn," etc. They also had access to demographic information on the individuals involved to judge other possibly confounding variables. Here are the main findings, which applied to both men and women.
The policy implications of these findings are fairly clear and the authors offer them up:
The authors had access to police reports that identified 50 possible "driver factors" in a crash, i.e. "driving on the wrong side of the road," "making an improper turn," etc. They also had access to demographic information on the individuals involved to judge other possibly confounding variables. Here are the main findings, which applied to both men and women.
- "Even minimally buzzed drivers are much more likely than sober drivers to be blamed for a crash." The authors developed a new measure called SOB ("sole official blame ratio"). As baseline, they found that among drivers with a BAC of .08, there are "about 5 times as many drivers who are officially and solely blamed for the crash as held blameless." Among drivers as low as .01 BAC, the SOB ratio is 2.45 compared to 1.54 for sober drivers. Overall, "buzzed drivers" (.01 to .07 BAC) had an SOB of 3.39 vs 1.62 for sober drivers. "Thus," the authors note, "SOB for 'buzzed drivers is more than double SOB for sober drivers."
- "SOB does not increase abruptly at BAC of .08: there is no threshold effect at the legal US limit for intoxicated driving."
- Up to a BAC level of 0.24, "the higher the driver's BAC, the more likely the driver is to be blamed for the crash." SOB holds steady after .24
- Among all 55 demographic subgroups" SOB for 'buzzed' drivers exceeds SOB for sober drivers." The difference is statistically significant in 53 of 55 subgroups.
The policy implications of these findings are fairly clear and the authors offer them up:
- Ad campaigns against "buzzed" driving should be ramped up.
- MADD should broaden its focus to include "buzzed" driving.
- States should sanction not only young drivers for "buzzed" driving but adult drivers as well.
- Adopt .05 BAC as the legal limit. Ref 2
Newsletter
Alcohol Issues Insights
Tagged under
While the Beer Institute remains the only industry organization that has weighed in on potential changes in the 2015 Dietary Guidelines, several other interested parties have filed comments with the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. Most interesting: an in-depth report and comments from the Center of Alcohol Studies (CAS) at Rutgers State University of New Jersey, which publishes the highly regarded Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs.
In brief, CAS seeks a "more accurate representation of potential risks of alcohol consumption" in the Guidelines "in terms of both short- and long-term health consequences related to level of consumption." The current guidelines, in CSA's view, fail to provide enough information about the complexities of drinking and its health consequences or to "provide the American public with a basis for accurately correlating the standard drink" to BAC levels. That makes it difficult for consumers to "make rational scientifically-based decisions about drinking practices." Net-net: to be of serious assistance to consumers, the guidelines need to include much more information, CAS insists. Here are some of CAS's specific points:
In brief, CAS seeks a "more accurate representation of potential risks of alcohol consumption" in the Guidelines "in terms of both short- and long-term health consequences related to level of consumption." The current guidelines, in CSA's view, fail to provide enough information about the complexities of drinking and its health consequences or to "provide the American public with a basis for accurately correlating the standard drink" to BAC levels. That makes it difficult for consumers to "make rational scientifically-based decisions about drinking practices." Net-net: to be of serious assistance to consumers, the guidelines need to include much more information, CAS insists. Here are some of CAS's specific points:
- The guidelines "currently include alcohol as little more than a footnote…. If alcohol is to be included in the DGA, there needs to be a more nuanced focus on alcohol burden on the individual."
- CSA quotes NIAAA's advice that given "individual metabolic differences" and the importance of the time over which drinking takes place "definitions based solely on the number of drinks are not the best approach."
- Like Beer Institute, CAS cites studies and surveys that have shown that typical pours, consumer awareness of ABV and even their own consumption and between beverage ABVs vary widely.
- The guideline's standard drink "is not very useful in a practical sense, particularly in that it does not take into account the wide and disparate alcohol content in various beverages, nor does it take into account the well-documented drinking practices of the public as a whole, both domestic and along international lines."
- To be useful, guidelines would need to take into account: gender, time frame of a drinking episode, alcohol tolerance, body weight, achieved blood alcohol content, developmental stage and health status of the drinker, "to mention a few."
- Guidelines need to consider both acute risks (driving) and chronic risks (long term problems), as well as single drinking episodes vs. multiple episodes, drinking patterns, etc. "It is ill-advised to make equivalencies between Standard Drink and BAC without taking into account all of the pharmokinetic variables and their phamacodynamic implications."
- "To be useful,' CAS concludes, communications about a Standard Drink" need to consider not only the science and health implications, but also the "well documented factors regarding actual drinking practices and outcomes of the American public." Without that, the guidelines "will have little impact" on drinking practices, CAS advises. Indeed, if the guidelines don't "follow the science of alcohol studies in its totality" they will "remain an ineffective and obscure exercise."
- An expansion of the definition of standard drink to include info that "some alcoholic beverages have higher or lower alcohol content than the standard drinks."
- A requirement for Alcohol Facts labels on all alcohol beverages including calories, ingredients, serving size/servings per container, alcohol content per serving as well as the Guideline's advice on moderate drinking.
- "Calorie contribution of popular alcoholic beverages" should be "prominently stated" in the guidelines. Beyond the statement that mixers add calories, the Guidelines should "list the calorie content of several popular alcoholic drinks." CSPI provides a sample list, including margaritas (500 calories), Red Bull and Vodka (150), Mike's Hard Lemonade (220) and more.
- "Include as a key recommendation that pregnant women should not consume alcohol."
Newsletter
Alcohol Issues Insights
Tagged under
12/24/2013
Spirits Parallels: Mont May Limit Microdistiller Sales, "Transparency," Tavern Assn Behind Scenes
Proposed amendments to Montana's governance of small state distillers provide some interesting parallels to discussions of not only "craft" branding and definitions, but also their impact on alcohol policy. The state's Dept of Revenue plans to hold a hearing to discuss "what qualifies as liquor produced on premise," according to the Missoula Independent. Currently, small liquor suppliers may source spirits distilled elsewhere, age or blend that liquid on-site and then sell it. Labels must use language like "produced by" rather than "distilled by," according to federal requirements. But some small Montana distillers believe "there should be transparency there. If you're pimping yourself as a Montana product, you should be a Montana product," owner of Steel Toe Distillery told the paper. Since licensed state microdistilleries, like small brewers, are allowed to sell their products on-site to visitors, next month's state hearing will consider requiring 90% of a microdistillery's on-site sales to be distilled on-site.
The practice "damages the whole brand of craft," co-founder of Montgomery Distillery told the paper, "whether it's craft brewing or craft distilling or craft cheesemaking." But a co-owner of Willie's Distillery, which sources liquor to use in its Montana Wild Chokecherry Liqueur, believes its product is "as transparent as the day is long," and that the proposed legislation indicates "a broader lack of understanding" about the process of spirits-making. Besides a "transparency" issue, the bill could be backed by the Montana Tavern Assn, another microdistillery-owner suggested. He sources cream mixed with alcohol ("to make it shelf stable") to make a cream-liqueur, but reminded that the Mont Tavern Assn has attempted to limit supplier tasting rooms in the past. Recall, early in 2013 small Mont brewers worked to stop an MTA-backed bill that would have limited small brewers' tasting room sales to just 10% of production.
The practice "damages the whole brand of craft," co-founder of Montgomery Distillery told the paper, "whether it's craft brewing or craft distilling or craft cheesemaking." But a co-owner of Willie's Distillery, which sources liquor to use in its Montana Wild Chokecherry Liqueur, believes its product is "as transparent as the day is long," and that the proposed legislation indicates "a broader lack of understanding" about the process of spirits-making. Besides a "transparency" issue, the bill could be backed by the Montana Tavern Assn, another microdistillery-owner suggested. He sources cream mixed with alcohol ("to make it shelf stable") to make a cream-liqueur, but reminded that the Mont Tavern Assn has attempted to limit supplier tasting rooms in the past. Recall, early in 2013 small Mont brewers worked to stop an MTA-backed bill that would have limited small brewers' tasting room sales to just 10% of production.
Newsletter
Craft Brew News
Tagged under
12/24/2013
Second Co-Op Brewery Opening in Texas
Another group of Texas beer lovers has started process of forming a brewpub co-op, according to Morris News. Yellow City Brewing seeks to open in Amarillo by June of 2015 as its 9 board members work to fundraise about $500K through investors and locals willing to pay for $150 memberships. Recall, Black Star Pub and Brewery Co-Op formed in 2006 and opened to the public in 2010 (see CBN vol #3, no 22). It now has over 3200 members, had sales closing in on $2 mil in 2012, but is "yet to reach profitability." Another co-op-run brewpub opened in Dayton, Oh this summer, raising around $600K, twice what founders expected to need. It had 300 members pre-opening last June, and now has 2300.
Newsletter
Craft Brew News
Tagged under
Northern Calif and San Diego, Portland, Me and Boston: all big craft markets with long histories of local brewing with almost constant flow of new entrants. Sacramento's brewing scene grew by 9 hometown brewers in 2013, bringing the city's total to 31, according to a recent Sacramento Biz Journal report. Four more are already slated to open next year and "from the valley to the Sierra, 25 microbreweries have opened over the past four years." Many fall into the "nano" category, one startup claiming "it's easier to open your own brewery than it is to do your own taxes." Mike Mraz of Mraz Brewing also noted that "we want to grow organically. We don't have any outstanding loans or investors." A survey of San Diego-area breweries from SanDiego.com argued that some of these smaller breweries are "putting the big time craft beers to shame." While the brewery-count there has exploded, it doesn't seem to be slowing local stalwarts Stone, Ballast Point, Green Flash and others.
On the opposite coast, Portland, Me's near 30-yr brewing history got full treatment from the Portland Press Herald. Maine is now home to 48 breweries, according to the paper, 10 of which opened in the last year. Detailing the rise of Gritty McDuff's, which now operates 3 brewpubs in the state after opening Maine's first in 1988, the article concludes with advice from co-founder Richard Pfeffer, that staying afloat in this "so dynamic," "so crowded" environment is "about making sure we still do a good job and keep an eye out for the next opportunity." In nearby Boston, small brewer memberships and entrepreneurial beer store owners help the local market continue to evolve, according to a couple of recent Boston Globe columns. Local brewers Mystic and Night Shift have been using club memberships or subscription-sales of specialty beers to boost early sales, like other brewers we wrote about in our Sept 13 and 20 issues. On the other side of the 3-tier system, customer service-focused retailers like Boston-area's Craft Beer Cellar have seen much success in helping initially-confused beer buyers become regular craft shoppers. That success led founders Kate Baker and Suzanne Schalow to franchise the concept: CBC's are now open in 4 other Massachusetts towns with more coming in Vt, NH, Fla, St. Louis and Seattle.
On the opposite coast, Portland, Me's near 30-yr brewing history got full treatment from the Portland Press Herald. Maine is now home to 48 breweries, according to the paper, 10 of which opened in the last year. Detailing the rise of Gritty McDuff's, which now operates 3 brewpubs in the state after opening Maine's first in 1988, the article concludes with advice from co-founder Richard Pfeffer, that staying afloat in this "so dynamic," "so crowded" environment is "about making sure we still do a good job and keep an eye out for the next opportunity." In nearby Boston, small brewer memberships and entrepreneurial beer store owners help the local market continue to evolve, according to a couple of recent Boston Globe columns. Local brewers Mystic and Night Shift have been using club memberships or subscription-sales of specialty beers to boost early sales, like other brewers we wrote about in our Sept 13 and 20 issues. On the other side of the 3-tier system, customer service-focused retailers like Boston-area's Craft Beer Cellar have seen much success in helping initially-confused beer buyers become regular craft shoppers. That success led founders Kate Baker and Suzanne Schalow to franchise the concept: CBC's are now open in 4 other Massachusetts towns with more coming in Vt, NH, Fla, St. Louis and Seattle.
Newsletter
Craft Brew News
Tagged under
Georgia's legislative session doesn't begin until Jan 13, but beer industry members there are already talking about potential changes lawmakers may consider in 2014. Recall, a state committee tabled a bill that would have allowed in-state breweries and brewpubs to sell limited amounts of beer to consumers for off-premise consumption. A committee of lawmakers have now studied that proposal and drafted a report on whether the bill should move forward or not, to be presented by the end of the month and considered when the session begins, according to a Creative Loafing Atlanta report. The Georgia Beer Wholesalers Assn hired veteran alc bev lawyer and distrib advocate Mike Madigan to speak to the committee about historical 3-tier issues, and generally take the "why mess with a good thing?" approach.
Once chinks are put into the 3-tier system, "you have the potential of someone challenging the system" as a whole, wholesaler lobbyist Martin Smith told the paper. Smith also wondered whether the entrance of big new breweries in nearby North Carolina, by either "tax incentives or loosening the regs," would be "to the detriment of some of the smaller breweries." An anonymous source told the paper "we've got a couple hundred customers who do not want breweries or brewpubs to sell beer direct to consumers, but they don't want backlash either," later describing those customers as "restaurants and retailers" that are unwilling to publicly state approval of continuing current limitations on media-darling small brewers.
At least one retailer disagrees, publicly noting that direct sales by breweries could "theoretically" hurt his biz, but that "as long as there are limits on [the] amount of direct-package sales, I am in favor." One small brewer insisted that even with the ability to sell beer on-site, "I would still use my distributor for 99 percent of my beer sales." John Pinkerton, prexy of the Georgia Craft Brewers Guild, highlighted the trickiness of moving forward with these arguments, since "we consider the wholesalers our intimate business partners." As such, "the last thing we want to do is make our business partners mad." Another brewer insisted that "competition makes us better," believing the proposed bill would create much-needed competition for retailers and wholesalers. "Go watch the Nature Channel," he told the paper, "the slow antelope always gets eaten. The herd as a whole gets faster." While each party waits for Jan before official stances can be taken, Pinkerton said that his guild is "trying to work directly with the legislators to see if we can't quietly impress upon them that things are about to get noisy." If distributors don't "do some kind of deal," then brewers will "really pull out all the stops with a grassroots campaign." Though they "want to make sure that the message remains positive," they "believe that we are right in trying to tip the scales back a little bit in our favor. Because they've been tipped in the other direction for far too long."
Once chinks are put into the 3-tier system, "you have the potential of someone challenging the system" as a whole, wholesaler lobbyist Martin Smith told the paper. Smith also wondered whether the entrance of big new breweries in nearby North Carolina, by either "tax incentives or loosening the regs," would be "to the detriment of some of the smaller breweries." An anonymous source told the paper "we've got a couple hundred customers who do not want breweries or brewpubs to sell beer direct to consumers, but they don't want backlash either," later describing those customers as "restaurants and retailers" that are unwilling to publicly state approval of continuing current limitations on media-darling small brewers.
At least one retailer disagrees, publicly noting that direct sales by breweries could "theoretically" hurt his biz, but that "as long as there are limits on [the] amount of direct-package sales, I am in favor." One small brewer insisted that even with the ability to sell beer on-site, "I would still use my distributor for 99 percent of my beer sales." John Pinkerton, prexy of the Georgia Craft Brewers Guild, highlighted the trickiness of moving forward with these arguments, since "we consider the wholesalers our intimate business partners." As such, "the last thing we want to do is make our business partners mad." Another brewer insisted that "competition makes us better," believing the proposed bill would create much-needed competition for retailers and wholesalers. "Go watch the Nature Channel," he told the paper, "the slow antelope always gets eaten. The herd as a whole gets faster." While each party waits for Jan before official stances can be taken, Pinkerton said that his guild is "trying to work directly with the legislators to see if we can't quietly impress upon them that things are about to get noisy." If distributors don't "do some kind of deal," then brewers will "really pull out all the stops with a grassroots campaign." Though they "want to make sure that the message remains positive," they "believe that we are right in trying to tip the scales back a little bit in our favor. Because they've been tipped in the other direction for far too long."
Newsletter
Craft Brew News
Tagged under
Lotsa trademark tiffs out there in craft land, given challenge of coming up with new names/themes. But here's a twist. Montana's Big Sky Brewing Co sued AB in fed ct over widely publicized new videos for Bud Light by actor John Krasinski using theme "hold my beer and watch this." Three videos have been on You Tube for weeks and garnered plenty of press and plays. Turns out Big Sky has been using same phrase since "at least as early as February 24, 2004," on packaging, promos, ads, glassware, events, you name it. What's more, Big Sky got trademark registration for phrase in 2009. After 3 videos hit YouTube Dec 1, Big Sky sent AB a cease and desist letter on Dec 9, explaining how it has used phrase and has trademark, claiming that AB's use of it is "likely to cause confusion" among consumers. Demanded AB "immediately" stop using it and remove videos from You Tube. It hoped to avoid lawsuit, atty wrote, and sought "mutually satisfactory resolution." On Dec 20, Big Sky filed lawsuit claiming trademark infringement and irreparable harm, seeking injunction and monetary damages.
Newsletter
Craft Brew News
Tagged under