# Read this before considering Specialized



## AlanE (Jan 22, 2002)

Let your conscience be your guide

War vet forced to change bike shop?s name after threat from Specialized | Calgary Herald


----------



## Mr645 (Jun 14, 2013)

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/ge...bike-shop-owner-changing-his-name-315155.html


----------



## BluesDawg (Mar 1, 2005)

Regardless of the legalities, Specialized has walked into a PR nightmare that they need to get out of. I think a $1 a year license to use the word Roubaix would be a good idea.

Damage Control. | tomdemerly


----------



## Typetwelve (Jul 1, 2012)

BluesDawg said:


> Regardless of the legalities, Specialized has walked into a PR nightmare that they need to get out of. I think a $1 a year license to use the word Roubaix would be a good idea.
> 
> Damage Control. | tomdemerly


It's only a PR nightmare because most consumers are ignorant of the laws apparently. In that ignorance, they are bashing a company taking a legal right.

They have a trademark on a word used on an item. This man took that word, and without permission, put it on an item of his own. Case closed.

It doesn't matter if he is a get, or disabled, or a widow or anything. He broke a trademark law and that's that. If Internet morons want to be up in arms about it, it is what it is.

If this guy was making wheels with the words "Nintendo DS", "Mickey Mouse", "cherry coke" on them...and the companies that had spent a ton of $$ trademarking and advertising these names went after the guy, would it be any different?

Not really.

I can assure you, if I spent millions developing/advertising a brand name and some joe came along and put that name on a product of his own, I'd sue him too.


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

Quick show of hands....

How many of YOU would be OK with someone else stealing the property of your company and making their own money off it?

[scans room...not a hand in the air]

Yeah....thats what I thought.


----------



## NealH (May 2, 2004)

I ride an S-Works Tarmac and, am close to buying another bike.....which will very likely be another Specialized. Don't worry, my conscience is just fine thank you.


----------



## Mr645 (Jun 14, 2013)

How come they are not fighting with Fuji? Who also makes a road bike called Roubaix.


----------



## Typetwelve (Jul 1, 2012)

Mr645 said:


> How come they are not fighting with Fuji? Who also makes a road bike called Roubaix.


That deal was reached years ago...


----------



## headloss (Mar 3, 2013)

RkFast said:


> Quick show of hands....
> 
> How many of YOU would be OK with someone else stealing the property of your company and making their own money off it?
> 
> ...


There are things out there that leave a bad taste in one's mouth... usually called abuse, in this case of a patent. If the guy was trying to sell a bike called the roubaix, then you might gave a point. 

What's the point of being technically correct when at least 90% of use still think Specialized is a bunch of jerkoffs now? The point is, it's bad PR... not whether it was within Specialized's legal right to douche-baggery. I'm amused that anyone feels the desire to defend them.


----------



## headloss (Mar 3, 2013)

Typetwelve said:


> That deal was reached years ago...


In other words, Specialized was payed off? $$$*

(* I don't know that they were, that's why I'm asking. Seeing as they apparently don't have a trademark for Roubaix in the US, I'll assume that is the reason why Fuji can do this. I doubt that any deal was reached, but if you know of such a deal, please enlighten.)


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Typical Spcial-Ed shiat. Nevermind the fact that the word "Roubaix" taken from a French town that's been associate with cycling race for probably a century now. Did Spesh ask the French for permission to use?

Idea: why don't Spesh use their town Morgan Hills as a name of thier bike? I imagine instead of say "I want a Roubaix", one would say "I want a Morgan Hills". lol retarded huh?

some of the responses are typical fanboys.

But I'll bet Specialized is not laughing now. Don't really care. Plenty of better bikes out there. Buying a Spesh is like buying a Chevy, or a Chrysler? Woopity-doo.


----------



## Tire Biter (Jul 24, 2012)

I see this trade mark issue in other countries occasionally. I found this in two minutes: CAMPAGNOLO RESTAURANT. I bet if this Canadian business started putting the name on bicycle parts there would be a problem too. I also see car manufacturers naming vehicles after places, i.e. Tahoe, Park Ave., Denali, Lincoln, etc., so sticking it to Specialized over a common practice of naming after a town is lame. I feel sorry for the guy, but you need to do a little research first to avoid these types of issues. I have no association with Specialized.


----------



## Duane Behrens (Nov 8, 2013)

BluesDawg said:


> Regardless of the legalities, Specialized has walked into a PR nightmare that they need to get out of. I think a $1 a year license to use the word Roubaix would be a good idea.
> 
> Damage Control. | tomdemerly


Word.


----------



## Duane Behrens (Nov 8, 2013)

Typetwelve said:


> It's only a PR nightmare because most consumers are ignorant of the laws apparently. In that ignorance, they are bashing a company taking a legal right.
> 
> They have a trademark on a word used on an item. This man took that word, and without permission, put it on an item of his own. Case closed.
> 
> ...


Well unfortunately, that's the rub. Specialized somehow gained "rights" to the name of a town that has existed for centuries. . . then used it as a basis to sue. Used in that framework, those rights are clearly viewed as bogus by thousands of owners and would-be buyers alike. They've made a serious error here. Maybe they'll name their next bike "Jesus." After claiming the rights to the brand name, think of the money they'll make suing the Episcopals! and the Lutherans, and the Presbyterians . . . after that, they can name a bike "weather" and sue the Weather Channel. Then they could name a bike "Dubya" and sue the Republicans. "Smith" and "Jones" would open up entire phone books for litigation. And so on.


----------



## Tire Biter (Jul 24, 2012)

I sure hope they don't name their next bike a-hole.


----------



## redondoaveb (Jan 16, 2011)

Tire Biter said:


> I sure hope they don't name their next bike a-hole.


Why, do you have a copyright on that?


----------



## Tire Biter (Jul 24, 2012)

Lawyers are expensive and I may get sued.


----------



## ejprez (Nov 9, 2006)

Mr645 said:


> How come they are not fighting with Fuji? Who also makes a road bike called Roubaix.


cause fuji had it first


----------



## headloss (Mar 3, 2013)

Tire Biter said:


> I see this trade mark issue in other countries occasionally. I found this in two minutes: CAMPAGNOLO RESTAURANT. I bet if this Canadian business started putting the name on bicycle parts there would be a problem too.


I fail to see where that would create a problem, so long as the business doesn't a) brand non-campagnolo parts as campagnolo or b) give a false impression that they are an authorized dealer for campagnolo products.

It's different if Campagnolo is a family name and not a blatant attempt to use a trade-mark for some sort of financial advantage that would be considered fraud. The whole issue with Cafe Roubaix is that no attempt of fraud is being made, no attempt to abuse the trademark. The trademark is completely irrelevant to this case aside from the fact that Specialized is threatening legal action over it. Now, if he was trying to call the business "Cafe Specialized Roubaix" or the "Specialized Cafe Roubaix" I would have a different opinion. Roubaix is too generic a name in cycling, it's an absurd trademark to have been granted in the first place. I'm glad that they have it, in the case that someone did try to blatantly commit some sort of fraud, but again that is clearly not the case here.


----------



## stanseven (Nov 9, 2011)

Typetwelve said:


> It's only a PR nightmare because most consumers are ignorant of the laws apparently. In that ignorance, they are bashing a company taking a legal right.
> 
> They have a trademark on a word used on an item. This man took that word, and without permission, put it on an item of his own. Case closed.
> 
> ...


Very well written and informed post!

Most people posting don't realize that if Specialized didn't take immediate action to defend, they might lose their trademark. While that's not likely, conceivably someone else could start producing Roubaix frames. It's important in cases of infringement to have a record of tough and timely defense of your intellectual property.

Also I'm surprised at all the people defending that shop owner. Anyone going into business needs to be aware of all the laws, regulations and policies affecting their business. Taking the name of a large company's product and making it yours is just plain dumb.


----------



## headloss (Mar 3, 2013)

stanseven said:


> Also I'm surprised at all the people defending that shop owner. Anyone going into business needs to be aware of all the laws, regulations and policies affecting their business. Taking the name of a large company's product and making it yours is just plain dumb.


Is taking the name of a product that is used by more than one company, is the name of a bicycle race, and the name of a city in France... dumb? It's a matter of perspective. 

If you want to convince me that Specialized isn't just being dicks, throw up some other cases of other big cycling manufactures behaving this way... Specialized is starting to have a track record of an overly aggressive legal department.

As for losing their trademark, their trademark is on a bicycle and not the name of a shop. If he's not trying to masquerade as a representative of Specialized, then there is no need to defend their trademark. 

But hey, if you want to keep riding their bikes, more power to you. I'm more than happy to badmouth them for the rest of my life if they don't make this right. I'm more than happy to go to competitors (which thankfully, there are many).


----------



## Tire Biter (Jul 24, 2012)

headloss said:


> I fail to see where that would create a problem, so long as the business doesn't a) brand non-campagnolo parts as campagnolo or b) give a false impression that they are an authorized dealer for campagnolo products.
> 
> It's different if Campagnolo is a family name and not a blatant attempt to use a trade-mark for some sort of financial advantage that would be considered fraud. The whole issue with Cafe Roubaix is that no attempt of fraud is being made, no attempt to abuse the trademark. The trademark is completely irrelevant to this case aside from the fact that Specialized is threatening legal action over it. Now, if he was trying to call the business "Cafe Specialized Roubaix" or the "Specialized Cafe Roubaix" I would have a different opinion. Roubaix is too generic a name in cycling, it's an absurd trademark to have been granted in the first place. I'm glad that they have it, in the case that someone did try to blatantly commit some sort of fraud, but again that is clearly not the case here.


So if you owned the Cafe Yukon Denali SUV store, and you sold SUV items with the label in competition with GMC, you think they should sit on their hands and not say anything? Look at this guys site and products, this appears to be more sophisticated than a startup: Road Bicycles, Café Roubaix Bicycle Studio, Cochrane, Alberta


----------



## clynch (Jan 14, 2007)

Disclaimer: I ride Specialized. I have ridden their bikes for years and genuinely enjoy the riding experience they have given me. I don't consider myself a fanboy but I must be because it has become the defacto term used to rebut any argument( valid/invalid) made by someone who rides a Specialized.

As a "fanboy" this story is lukewarm to me at best, but I have at least taken the time to read through countless forum responses and internet blogs to make sure I am not turning a blind eye to something morally reprehensible in pursuit of my own riding enjoyment. 2 points I cannot help but notice:

1. The use of the generalized term "sue", Specialized has in fact taken legal actions against said shop owner but not to pursue reward/compensation/damages, rather they have strongly urged him to cease and desist his use of a name which they have legally trademarked and substantially invested. So although they are "suing" him, they have also provided an easy, mostly painless out for him.....change your name(namely that of his Roubaix Wheel products....which is a point that seemingly gets glazed over in the misinformation that his shop name is the actual basis of action). Simply, the gentleman can plead ignorance regarding the Roubaix trademark, refile his business license, amend his tax documents, sell some old jerseys on closeout, erect anew sign and live happily ever after. Note: based on the internet chatter and bleeding hearts, these costs should easily be covered by all those willing to donate to this "cause". OR he can rally together with the other noble souls looking to take a stand against oppression in their lives and fight the power.

2. The outpouring of people who cannot bear to ride their Specialized bikes or who were considering buying a flagship S-Works 3 days ago but now will "never again" even consider riding a Specialized is somewhat laughable. I wonder how many of them drive their Brand X vehicles to work each day without giving a thought to the labor violations Brand X manufacturers partake in regularly, or live in their cookie-cutter suburban development built on the backs of illegal undocumented workers, or eat food from the grocery picked by the same workers, etc,etc,etc,etc.

Come on people, this is a simple open and shut deal. He started a business and chose a name that was already protected in the same market. Unless his passion for cycling runs so shallow that he has no exposure to one of the industry's largest brands, there is no comprehensible scenario where he could not have given a single thought to Specialized's pairing with Roubaix. For god's sake, their marketing efforts are massive, and love them or hate them you are aware of them.


----------



## chudak (Jul 28, 2012)

aclinjury said:


> Typical Spcial-Ed shiat. Nevermind the fact that the word "Roubaix" taken from a French town that's been associate with cycling race for probably a century now. Did Spesh ask the French for permission to use?
> 
> Idea: why don't Spesh use their town Morgan Hills as a name of thier bike? I imagine instead of say "I want a Roubaix", one would say "I want a Morgan Hills". lol retarded huh?
> 
> ...


^^^ This


----------



## chudak (Jul 28, 2012)

headloss said:


> I fail to see where that would create a problem, so long as the business doesn't a) brand non-campagnolo parts as campagnolo or b) give a false impression that they are an authorized dealer for campagnolo products.
> 
> It's different if Campagnolo is a family name and not a blatant attempt to use a trade-mark for some sort of financial advantage that would be considered fraud. The whole issue with Cafe Roubaix is that no attempt of fraud is being made, no attempt to abuse the trademark. The trademark is completely irrelevant to this case aside from the fact that Specialized is threatening legal action over it. Now, if he was trying to call the business "Cafe Specialized Roubaix" or the "Specialized Cafe Roubaix" I would have a different opinion. *Roubaix is too generic a name in cycling, it's an absurd trademark to have been granted in the first place.* I'm glad that they have it, in the case that someone did try to blatantly commit some sort of fraud, but again that is clearly not the case here.


Generally trademarks are not supposed to be granted for common terms and phrases and the PTO routinely screws this up (in recent history they granted a trademark for the term "firkin", which is a common unit of beer measure in the UK, as is the "pin"). You wouldn't expect someone to be able to trademark the work "pint" or "meter" would you? I'd argue that the name of a city is a common term. But again, because it's in France the PTO in their ignorance granted it.


----------



## clynch (Jan 14, 2007)

Define Irony:

A large corporation takes legal action against a local shop owner who, regardless of severity, has infringed upon a registered trademark.

In response to the news, partially informed consumers rush to judgement forming rigid opinions about an issue whereas they only have information from one of the parties involved. Outraged by the perception of bullying(given historical reference) dozens of people take to social media outlets twisting and exaggerating the sparse facts available in a forceful effort to dissuade the corporation's actions......effectively bullying in reverse.


Please people, push away from the keyboards and focus these efforts on something more meaningful. Donate this time to a local shelter. Generate awareness for underprivileged children in your community. At minimum, go ride a bicycle.


----------



## bikingmeditation (Apr 23, 2013)

Typetwelve said:


> It's only a PR nightmare because most consumers are ignorant of the laws apparently. In that ignorance, they are bashing a company taking a legal right.
> 
> They have a trademark on a word used on an item. This man took that word, and without permission, put it on an item of his own. Case closed.


You're the one who doesn't understand the laws.

Canadian trademark law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> Trademark law provides protection for distinctive marks, certification marks, distinguishing guises, and proposed marks against those *who appropriate the goodwill of the mark or create confusion between different vendors' goods or services.*


The bike shop does not "appropriate the goodwill" of Specialized (they're clearly referring to the Paris-Roubaix race and the geographical location) and they do not "create confusion" as to whether the cafe roubaix is related to Specialized. They're a small bike shop. There's no customer confusion. So the trademark law does not enable or encourage Specialized's actions here.


----------



## ziscwg (Apr 19, 2010)

stanseven said:


> Very well written and informed post!
> 
> Most people posting don't realize that if Specialized didn't take immediate action to defend, they might lose their trademark. While that's not likely, conceivably someone else could start producing Roubaix frames. It's important in cases of infringement to have a record of tough and timely defense of your intellectual property.
> 
> Also I'm surprised at all the people defending that shop owner. Anyone going into business needs to be aware of all the laws, regulations and policies affecting their business. Taking the name of a large company's product and making it yours is just plain dumb.


Spec did have to take action, but they could have done something so it was a win-win for both sides. 

I don't know all the details of Canadian law on this, but as suggested, a $1 yr license would be a win-win scenario

The problem is that Specialized is known as a corp bully by many. So, this just continues that reputation label.


----------



## headloss (Mar 3, 2013)

chudak said:


> Generally trademarks are not supposed to be granted for common terms and phrases and the PTO routinely screws this up (in recent history they granted a trademark for the term "firkin", which is a common unit of beer measure in the UK, as is the "pin"). You wouldn't expect someone to be able to trademark the work "pint" or "meter" would you? I'd argue that the name of a city is a common term. But again, because it's in France the PTO in their ignorance granted it.


Which, honestly, is fine... PTO will get things wrong. At that point, it's on Specialized' shoulders as they know it won't hold up in court. The supportive position is that they *have to* go after such a violation of their trademark or they could lose it... I think it's the opposite though, but going after such a stupid trademark, they've set themselves up to potentially lose it. They rest on their laurels because they don't expect such bullying to result in a court case, seeing as the target is small and doesn't have the means.

But even if you take the latest Roubaix issue out of the picture. They've been just as abusive with other names. Stumptown is such a common word to hear around Portland... and yet Specialized goes after it as a threat to "stumpjumper?" Please... just another example of BS. In that case as well, it's clear that the name choice has absolutely nothing to do with the Specialized Bicycle Corp. 

The Epic WheelWorks thing annoys me too... but I think they have a little more of a case to preserve that trademark (even if I think "epic" is a word that shouldn't be trademark-able). I think that the EpicDesign case was again, overreach. 

It's not a winnable PR war when they do this over and over. Each time, more people are taking notice. When I was in the Navy, I once had a crusty old chief advice me on the following course of action "Choose your fights wisely." I think Specialized should consider that advice. Stick with possible trademark infringements that are actual threats, instead of what seems to be a fear-of-the-slipperly-slope approach. What next, going after a little girl with a lemonade stand named Ruby's?


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

Concerning corporate law, I would hope that even if Specialized has a legal justification in doing this, that anyone would at least be able to see why so many people are having the emotional reaction that this is absurd. It is not that cut-and-dry. "Mickey-Mouse," "Nintendo DS," and "Cherry Coke" are not the names of a centuries old region in France that has been part of cycling cultural dialogue for over 100 years. The name "Roubaix" is used so often that I would not have named my shop "Cafe Roubaix" not because of trademark but because I would have thought it too cliche'. As far as spending millions developing and advertising a brand name, they are not responsible for that. Roubaix is a "brand" that has been around for a long time and is well known. They named their bike after something that was already developed and advertised. This would be a different story if he had named his shop "Cafe Anthem X Advanced 29er" or "Cafe CAAD 10." I am not a lawyer and cannot make a confident argument that this is a legally unjustifiable thing that Specialized is doing. I am just saying that it is totally understandable that people are having the reaction that they are, especially with regard to a company that has already earned a litigious reputation.


----------



## Big-foot (Dec 14, 2002)

View attachment 289688


----------



## RedViola (Aug 15, 2012)

thechriswebb said:


> This would be a different story if he had named his shop *"cafe anthem x advanced 29er"* or "cafe caad 10."


:lol:

Your entire post was sensibly articulated, but I just lost it when I got to that bit.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Reminds me of the time Starbucks sued a monastery on Vashon Island over their offering of "Christmas blend" coffee beans. That time, the monks beat the big company in court. They still sell their Christmas blend. Both cases are examples of companies not knowing how to pick their battles.


----------



## Lesscan (Oct 10, 2013)

Sorry if this was explained, as I honestly didnt read through the entire thread.

Fuji first trademarked the name Roubaix for use on their bikes in the USA.
They then licensed that trademark to Specialized but only in Canada.
Fuji still owns that trademark in the USA.
It is doubtful there is any such trademark in France unless its owned by the French government themselves.


_EDIT - Specialized may not have had the right to register that name in the first place.

If that article posted below is legit ( I was also going to post it) then it may not have been up to Spec to register nor follow-up on infringements of that registration._


----------



## Tire Biter (Jul 24, 2012)

Well here you go: ASI says Calgary bike shop can use Roubaix name | Bicycle Retailer and Industry News


----------



## Lesscan (Oct 10, 2013)

Tire Biter said:


> Well here you go: ASI says Calgary bike shop can use Roubaix name | Bicycle Retailer and Industry News



I was just about to post that!

I saw that posted on their FB page.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Tire Biter said:


> Well here you go: ASI says Calgary bike shop can use Roubaix name | Bicycle Retailer and Industry News


Well. ASI has more sense than Starbucks had.


----------



## blitespeed (Mar 2, 2013)

Ha ha ha. Specialized now you look even worse. 
Kudos to you ASI.


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

So where does this fit into the whole "Specialized had a legal obligation to litigate" that I have been seeing in several places?


----------



## Lesscan (Oct 10, 2013)

thechriswebb said:


> So where does this fit into the whole "Specialized had a legal obligation to litigate" that I have been seeing in several places?



Well apparently now they dont!

ASI has the trademark in several countries not including Canada.
ASI licensed the name Roubaix to Specialized for use in Canada.
Specialized took that one further and trademarked that name in Canada which they had no right to do under their license agreement with ASI.
So basically, ASI told Specialized to shut up, sit down, and leave the dude alone, we will license the name of his bike shop.

I'll be expecting a public apology from Specialized very soon.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

thechriswebb said:


> So where does this fit into the whole "Specialized had a legal obligation to litigate" that I have been seeing in several places?


this thread is about to go silent real quick from the fanboys


----------



## Dunbar (Aug 8, 2010)

aclinjury said:


> this thread is about to go silent real quick from the fanboys


While the Specialized haters have a field day.


----------



## blitespeed (Mar 2, 2013)

Don 't you think they brought it all on themselves. ? !


----------



## Typetwelve (Jul 1, 2012)

aclinjury said:


> this thread is about to go silent real quick from the fanboys


I still feel I would taken the Merckx route...sorry, not going to renege my opinion...



Dunbar said:


> While the Specialized haters have a field day.


They're always there, running their mouths. When it comes to any item or brand...somehow its ok to be a "hater" but not a "fanboy"...



blitespeed said:


> Don 't you think they brought it all on themselves. ? !


By speaking an opinion on an open forum full of opinionated people? Not really...


----------



## Mapei (Feb 3, 2004)

An Indian restaurant nearby my house recently changed their sign. It used to read "Specialized in a variety of tandoori dishes." I wonder if Specialized had anything to do with this?


----------



## blitespeed (Mar 2, 2013)

blitespeed said:


> Don 't you think they brought it all on themselves. ? !


The 'they' I was referring to are Specialized.
As, "Don't you think Specialized brought all of this on themselves."


----------



## Lesscan (Oct 10, 2013)

blitespeed said:


> The 'they' I was referring to are Specialized.
> As, "Don't you think Specialized brought all of this on themselves."


In hindsight? Yes. They did.

Had Spec legally owned that trademark, then I would have and did side with them.
But now that we know Spec did not have the right to own it nor enforce it, I have now gone to the side of ASI and the small biz owner.

Spec should have contacted ASI first before any proceeding were pursued.

They didnt. They got called out on it and they got owned by ASI.


----------



## Typetwelve (Jul 1, 2012)

blitespeed said:


> The 'they' I was referring to are Specialized.
> As, "Don't you think Specialized brought all of this on themselves."


Ah-ha...I see.

I'm sure they're clamoring at the moment. At this point, and with that finding, I'm sure Specialized is wishing they hadn't brought this up.


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

I'm a strong believer that patents should exist for original work product. Patents are for INVENTIONS for God's sake, specifically requiring novelty. There is nothing original about the name Roubaix. It's the name of a city. It's associated with cycling. This frivolous corporate patent spree is as bad in cycling as it is in consumer electronics.


----------



## headloss (Mar 3, 2013)

DrSmile said:


> I'm a strong believer that patents should exist for original work product. Patents are for INVENTIONS for God's sake, specifically requiring novelty. There is nothing original about the name Roubaix. It's the name of a city. It's associated with cycling. This frivolous corporate patent spree is as bad in cycling as it is in consumer electronics.


Mostly agree, but I do understand trademarks from the perspective of preventing "clones." Clearly, in the case of Cafe Roubaix, such trademark has always been irrelevant (to anyone besides S-Law, based on the shop's name alone; the wheels, I think, were a legitimate action by S-Law *if they actually owned the trademark).


----------



## Lesscan (Oct 10, 2013)

DrSmile said:


> I'm a strong believer that patents should exist for original work product. Patents are for INVENTIONS for God's sake, specifically requiring novelty. There is nothing original about the name Roubaix. It's the name of a city. It's associated with cycling. This frivolous corporate patent spree is as bad in cycling as it is in consumer electronics.



This is not a patent. Its a trademark. They are 2 totally different things.
Trademarks are not for originals works or ideas they are to protect a name, original or not, which can be and is just as important as an idea.

#1. The trademark is not just for the name, but its for taking that name and placing it on things you sell.
#2. Specialized does NOT have the trademark for Roubaix, ASI does.
#3 ASI licences the use of that name out to Specialized and is also doing so to Cafe Roubaix.
#4, Everything you do, watch, read, drive, wear, eat, sleep on and in, watch and listen to, has a patent, trademark or copyright and they dont necessarily have to do with a corporate patent spree.


----------



## SNS1938 (Aug 9, 2013)

I'll bet Specialized won't try to name their next bike a word commonly used in cycling.

Threatening legal action against a little guy when you have a license agreement with the actual trademark owner which says you aren't allowed to take out trademarks in other countries … Not cool.


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

Trademarks are also subject to distinctiveness. They don't apply to "names" specifically.

Trademark distinctiveness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Considering Roubaix an "Arbitrary mark" is quite a stretch in my opinion.


----------



## rcb78 (Jun 15, 2008)

I own and love my Specialized, it's a great bike.


----------



## SNS1938 (Aug 9, 2013)

The Cafe Roubaix FB page has a video of Sinyard up in the Cafe Roubaix shop apologizing. Well played Specialized, well played.


----------



## BluesDawg (Mar 1, 2005)

wow! Mike looks like he had his fanny whipped.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=429367720519294&set=vb.219609484828453&type=2&theater


----------

