This isn't the first time I've heard of Monster Energy acting like school yard bullies just because they have money. Their latest target is a forum called MonsterFishKeepers.com, that has been running since 2005, because they have a modified "M" for their trademark and have "monster" in the name. They also use the color black in their background. Other than that, the two are completely unrelated. One is an internet forum for fish keepers, the other is a drink company. I don't see how they are competing but apparently the company's lawyers do.
Does this really look like copyright infringement?
Where should we draw the line of what companies can own? I think it is bullchit that they are even allowed to start such lawsuit. This is worse than Monster Energy Drink v. Stone Art Brewery because small Vermont brewery made a beer called Vermonster.
Here is a link that has all of the drink company's information and a brief summary of the situation.
http://support.monsterfishkeepers.com/
Hopefully enough people will alert them to the ridiculousness of their lawsuit.
Does this really look like copyright infringement?
Where should we draw the line of what companies can own? I think it is bullchit that they are even allowed to start such lawsuit. This is worse than Monster Energy Drink v. Stone Art Brewery because small Vermont brewery made a beer called Vermonster.
Here is a link that has all of the drink company's information and a brief summary of the situation.
http://support.monsterfishkeepers.com/
Hopefully enough people will alert them to the ridiculousness of their lawsuit.
