InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 4
Posts 1390
Boards Moderated 2
Alias Born 04/01/2009

Re: chipdacup post# 66

Wednesday, 07/08/2009 5:32:20 PM

Wednesday, July 08, 2009 5:32:20 PM

Post# of 1030
I found it amusing that there is a post on the DKAM board about a privately held company's product, namely "Happy Vodka" which is not owned by LIQR, just distributed by LIQR.

What is funnier is the continual bashing of LIQR and nervous ranting about the lawsuit. It is like listening to a group of girls at the hair salon wondering if Johnny is going to ask Tina out on a date. Will he? Won't he? I heard he has a girlfriend, I heard he was gay...

Now they are claiming that there is a $100 Million lawsuit in the works. Here is some logic: DKAM has a TOTAL purchase value of only $12M, how could they suffer $100M in damages? All of this is also assuming they are even preparing a lawsuit against LIQR.

FYI, if you look in the archives of the Southern District Federal Court (Jacksonville, FL) & the Federal Court of Appeals in Atlanta, you will find that Happy Vodka Corporation was already sued and already won their battle on the smiley face, and they had the trademark prior to Wal-Mart's use, which began in 2002, which IMO is why Happy Vodka can continue to use the trademark and Wal-Mart cannot.

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.