The summaries will be dealt with by a subsequent blog, As for the haikus, there were some excellent entries -- including many that followed the conventional rules for writing a haiku (or plain 'haiku', as we cognoscenti say). Stuart had two stabs. First, he essayed this:
It's only a nameThen, with a little hindsight, and some enthusiasm for his damning middle line, he added "actually this one might be better, although it's a bit biased":
No-one drinks you anyway
Have a beer instead.
It's just their town's nameCraig Smith, in contrast, retracted his earlier offering before submitting this:
No-one drinks you anyway
Later rights should lose
It is not Czech mate,A very distinguished London lawyer, who begs to remain anonymous but whose haikus must be the most expensive in the Western World if his charge-out rate is anything to go by, got the Kats into a giggling fit with this:
Well it is confusing Bud,
Another fight brews…
Bengoshi-san:The author modestly says "... but I'm not sure that it has mass-market appeal". Certainly it is not as populist as the offering from regular correspondent Miri Frankel, who weighs in with
"Budobaru, Anhoisaa Bussho,
Arigato gozaimasu."
Oh, where in the world?!and again with
Can someone please summarize
which Bud prevailed where?
Which Bud is for you?the Abbot being, the Kat suspects, a cultural allusion to Messrs Abbott & Costello, one of whom was indeed a Bud. Less delicate and more exuberant, but with a gleeful reference to what some regard as Budweiser's ultimate fate and others see as its main ingredient, Steven Hartman declaims:
This Bud. That Bud? The Czech Bud.
Check Bud? Hey Abbot!
Billions for Busch warThen there's this from someone who signs himself simply "James" (could it be he of Nurton fame?), who proposes:
Budvar courts insurgency
I pee with delight
Litigious parties.Ruth Soetendorp came with this on a long (and, one imagines, dry) car journey:
Same brand so huge kerfuffle.
Happy lawyers, no?
Keep thirst in czeckShabtai Atlow capped a valiant argument that the rules for writing haiku should be ignored, or at least generously bent, citing no less an authority on the subject than Jack Kerouac himself, before producing this:
with bud or bud, bud weiser
by var drink water
Budejovicky's brewTwo Tims come next. From Tim Lucas there's a truly classical haiku, incorporating a reference to the seasons and the weather:
likely deceives or confuses?
Anheuser-Busch whacked.
A bud in winter:Not to be outdone, Tim Roberts makes a nod to the shifts in UK trade mark law that have seen the end of concurrent use (one of those concepts that worked fine in practice but not in theory):
the tussle of old and new
lingers year on year.
Now concurrent useIn David Fyfield's case it's the beer, rather than the weather, that contains the climatic allusion:
Leaves the later registrant
Sadder Budweiser
Frosty beer brewersFinally, from the Olympian heights of the IP Bar comes John Baldwin QC, who alludes to the large amount of money derived by his colleagues from the Budweiser dispute (John was not involved in this spat: if you want to see who was, click here):
Dispute trade marks old and new
Appealing conclusion
Budweiser BudvarDisqualified, for being a limerick rather than a haiku, but included because it's good fun, is this piece of poesy from Steven. M. Getzoff, an old acquaintance who must surely owe him at least one beer:
Fat wallets on great lawyers
Fat tum otherwise.
Two beery eyed boozers named BudThe IPKat awards the Golden Palm to Tim Lucas, to whom a copy of the Butterworths IP Law Handbook will soon be winging its way; special commendations go to Steven Hartman and Tim Roberts. Merpel meanwhile thanks all the contestants for making the effort to make the IP environment more fun than it would otherwise be.
both fought 'til each fell with a thud.
One cannot imagine the broke glasses and flagons
all for the name of some suds.
Did he suggest
ReplyDeleteBud lost Buddies won
Enjoy the Blog