Findlaw reports that two Florida bars are engaged in a fight over who has the right to use the name “Sloppy Joe’s”. The original Sloppy Joe’s was run by “Sloppy Joe” Russell, a friend of Ernest Hemmingway, and was regularly frequented by the novelist, though it closed down in 1937. Captain Tony’s Saloon moved into the basement of the city morgue which had housed the original Sloppy Joe’s and began calling itself “the First and Original Sloppy Joe’s 1933-1937”. Meanwhile, Sidney Snelgrove and John Mayer bought the Sloppy Joe’s bar, which had moved down the road. Now Sloppy Joe’s is claiming Captain Tony’s use of the Sloppy Joe’s name infringes its registered trade mark.
The IPKat thinks that if the new Sloppy Joe’s succeeds in this suit, there would be no way for Captain Tony’s to describe the way in which its building had been previously used. This would rule out a form of descriptive use of a trade mark.
Things to eat while you’re there here and here
More sloppy drinking establishments here and here
“Captain Tony's products are not of Sloppy Joe's quality, and the condition of its premises does not meet Sloppy Joe's standards. As a result, Captain Tony's has sullied Sloppy Joe's distinctive style and decor"said the suit filed before the Federal Court. No date for the trial has been set.
The IPKat thinks that if the new Sloppy Joe’s succeeds in this suit, there would be no way for Captain Tony’s to describe the way in which its building had been previously used. This would rule out a form of descriptive use of a trade mark.
Things to eat while you’re there here and here
More sloppy drinking establishments here and here
SLOPPY BARS SPELL TRADE MARK TROUBLE
![SLOPPY BARS SPELL TRADE MARK TROUBLE]()
Reviewed by Anonymous
on
Tuesday, July 20, 2004
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html