Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Spam Government The Courts Your Rights Online News

Hormel Back on The Spam Offensive 305

Anonymous Howard writes "After an xapparent setback in litigation, Hormel Foods is again pursuing actions against entities and organizations over the 'spam' trademark. According to the web site of DSPAM, an open-source statistical anti-spam filter, "Anti-spam software manufacturers may be in for a rude awakening. Hormel Foods Corporation and Hormel Foods LLC have recently filed for extensions to oppose or to cancel many new and existing spam-related trademarks and are even filing a few technology trademarks of their own. The DSPAM project, a popular open source and freely available spam filtering application, has already received two such notices of opposition from the trademark trial and appeal board. The complete history can be viewed here. This came about a year after the software's user community scrounged up the fee to file for a trademark...""
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hormel Back on The Spam Offensive

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Spam (Score:3, Interesting)

    by antifoidulus ( 807088 ) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @09:00AM (#12604414) Homepage Journal
    Actually my Chinese roommates love it, they eat it about 2 times a week.
  • by Crimson Dragon ( 809806 ) * on Sunday May 22, 2005 @09:00AM (#12604418) Homepage
    I am curious why this article wasn't filed as "Your Rights Online". Maybe I am missing the boat here, but this seems to be an IP-related discussion and not a technical issue.
  • Re:Spam (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Supertroll ( 210165 ) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @09:05AM (#12604427) Homepage
    Actually, "turkey spam" isn't that bad.
  • Re:Lets see... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by DoorFrame ( 22108 ) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @09:07AM (#12604431) Homepage
    Yeah, I'm not sure the infamous "Googlefight logic" neccessarily stands up in court.

    Eh, but it worked against kleenex so who knows.
  • Re:Spam (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Senor_Programmer ( 876714 ) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @09:14AM (#12604455)
    I often grab a SPAM musubi and a couple of manapua(a pork and a duck or a curry chicken and a duck) for lunch.
  • Re:Spam (Score:3, Interesting)

    by smittyoneeach ( 243267 ) * on Sunday May 22, 2005 @09:28AM (#12604503) Homepage Journal
    I heard from someone who lived on Oahu that Hawaiians consume a disproportionate amount of the US spam intake.
    I've heard of a spam variation on this gastrointestinal atrocity^W delight [whatscookingamerica.net], which is still better than balut, I suppose...
  • by yelvington ( 8169 ) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @09:43AM (#12604559) Homepage
    If you're one of those poor souls who can't appreciate the pure joy of two slices of spam with cheap yellow mustard on white bread, here's an alternative that you should try:

    1 small onion
    1 can Spam
    2 inches cut from the end of a block of Velveeta

    Peel the onion and chop it in a food processor. Add the Velveeta and chop for a short burst. Then add the Spam and chop only long enough to blend the results -- you're don't want to turn it into a paste, you want to leave the Spam somewhat chunky.

    Spread the result thickly on a hamburger bun or English muffin, and place Spam-side-up on a tray under the broiler until the cheese melts.

  • Re:Trademarks (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Tristandh ( 723519 ) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @09:53AM (#12604594)
    I agree that they are quite reasonable in the whole matter. In fact, they explicitly state

    We do not object to use of this slang term to describe UCE.

    But OTOH, they say

    Ultimately, we are trying to avoid the day when the consuming public asks, "Why would Hormel Foods name its product after junk e-mail?"

    Which kind of conflicts with the former quote. Everyone knows about spam-email. Everyone has to deal with it. Seems to me they're fighting a lost case, and they know it.
  • by bitingduck ( 810730 ) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @10:01AM (#12604617) Homepage
    I wouldn't be so sure that they're privately pissed.

    The whole thing has brought a lot of attention to their canned meat product, and as another poster mentioned, they may actually be doing this as much from a marketing standpoint as for real trademark protection.

    They've certainly started pushing the product more over the past couple years-- a few years ago I went to reach for the tuna in my local grocery, and the shelf of chunk white had been replaced by SPAM in all varieties, with the tuna moved below it. I'm sure they paid the grocery some $$$ to do that, but it's a sign that they're definitely pushing SPAM (an in southern California).

    By accepting that they aren't going to change the email meaning of it, and instead focusing on "spam=bad thing, SPAM=good thing" they get what might be a low cost, long term ad campaign that keeps both senses of spam on everyones lips and gets people who otherwise wouldn't even think about it to at least try it.
  • by Futurepower(R) ( 558542 ) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @10:10AM (#12604662) Homepage

    I think that in this case, "pretty well established" is probably a correct term, but I also think it is a mistake.

    The question is not why unwanted email was originally named "spam". The question is why the term was immediately adopted and enthusiastically used by so many people.

    The people who named it "spam" and the people who adopted the term so easily and with such popularity were probably older people, not teenagers or people in their early twenties. I say that because I believe the formula for Hormel Foods SPAM has changed. I tried SPAM in the 50's. Even as a child I was disgusted by the fat in SPAM then. So, when I first heard the word "spam" associated with unwanted email, I completely understood and agreed wtih the reference.

    If unwanted email had been named "foot stomp", I might have recognized the reference to the Monty Python TV show, but I would not have adopted the term myself.

    I remember trying a bite of Hormel Foods SPAM several years ago, and I was surprised that it was not disgusting. That's why I think that the formula was changed.

    Someone, please look on a can of Hormel Foods SPAM and post a comment with the total calories per serving and the number of fat calories per serviing.

    Funny official statement from Hormel Foods [spam.com] : Let's face it. Today's teens and young adults are more computer savvy than ever, and the next generations will be even more so. Children will be exposed to the slang term "spam" to describe UCE well before being exposed to our famous product SPAM. Ultimately, we are trying to avoid the day when the consuming public asks, "Why would Hormel Foods name its product after junk e-mail?"
  • SPAM! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Kwirl ( 877607 ) <kwirlkarphys@gmail.com> on Sunday May 22, 2005 @11:03AM (#12604904)

    SPAM stands for Specially Processed Assorted Meat, the acronym chosen during the world wars when the original name was not popular enough.


    The internet 'SPAM' as in unwanted content came from the Monty Python skit where they repeated 'spamspamspam' ad infinum, and generally annoyed everyone. You see the relevance?

  • by idonthack ( 883680 ) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @12:39PM (#12605337)
    They were giving out free samples of SPAM at the Wildflower Festival [wildflowerfestival.com] yesterday. I took one, (it was one of those "SPAM Singles"), and it had 25% of the Daily Value of fat (it said for normal AND saturated) for a 2000 calorie diet.
    But it was delicious.
  • Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @12:43PM (#12605362)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by jacobcaz ( 91509 ) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @01:11PM (#12605538) Homepage
    Years back (like 1996/1997) I registered the domain name spam.net and ran a site where people submitted funny computer articles that ran along side articles of my own writing.

    I ran the site for maybe a year before I received my first C&D letter from Hormel. I replied back telling them I was not attempting to compete and was not dilluting their mark. Basically a nice, "Go to hell, Hormel!"

    There were one or two more letters back and forth between Hormel and myself. When I registered the domain you still didn't have to pay for a registration. When Hormel decided they wanted it back you had to pay $100 for two years to InterNIC. I wanted Hormel to at least buy me a new domain since they were starting to threaten litigation if I didn't hand over spam.net (I was 20 at the time, litigation by a LARGE corporation didn't sound like a walk in the park).

    Some months later I received a letter from WIPO [wipo.int] telling me that Hormel had filed a petition against me and they decided the case was vague enough that they wouldn't give Hormel the name, but I couldn't use it either. InterNIC put the domain name on hold until Hormel and I could sort it out amongst ourselves.

    Hormel contacted me once against asking for the name and I told them if I couldn't have it, they couldn't either. I was happy to leave it on hold so NEITHER of us could use it (scorched earth mentality baby!).

    They just went away.

    I would check on the name from time to time to see if it was still on hold. About 2 months before the payment was due (InterNIC required payment for on hold domains, damn their then-monopoly) I checked on the domain name. I was registered to Hormel, lock stock and barrel!

    My plan had been to pay the registration feel just to keep the name tied up, but somehow - and without anyone notifying me - they managed to get the name transfered to them and taken off hold.

    At no point had I ever agreed to transfer the name or provided anything in writing that said anything remotely close to it. But there it was, big as day, off hold and in the hands of Hormel.

    I've been a little bitter about it ever since.

  • Re:Spam (Score:4, Interesting)

    by hey! ( 33014 ) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @02:17PM (#12605888) Homepage Journal
    Yep. A friend of mine spent a summer at the Beijing sports college, where the literal breakfast of champions every day was a big bowl of jook (rice porridge) with a slice of spam on top.

    Curiously, this is very similar to the way Hawaians use spam with poi, which is a starchy tuber that's is cooked into a porridge like consistency.

    In any case, there's a big cultural difference between the way the Ameicans (well, haole Americans) use meat and the way the Chinese do. In American cuisine meat is the meal, and other stuff just goes around it to complement. You have a meal of burgers, and have your corn on the cob on the side. In Chinese cuisine, meat is used as a flavoring, like we use catsup. It's not that the don't have dishes that are primarily meat, but these are typically eaten as a course. Regular day to day meals do not center around meat.

    Spam fits into this mode of meat eating better than the American mode. From a culinary standpoint, Spam as the centerpiece of a meal has the following faults:

    (1) It's too spicy
    (2) It's too salty
    (3) It's too fatty
    (4) It has an insipid texture.

    Of course the first point is debatable, but most people who like "spicy" food like capsium based hotness. It's been a while since I've had Spam, but I remember it has rather clove-y, possibly with mace or some other aromatic seed spice. After you've eaten a quarter pound of the stuff, I'd think you'd get pretty sick of it.

    None of these objections apply to Spam as a flavoring. In fact you can say pretty much all of them about anchovies, but very few people except for fish nuts like me eat anchovies right out of the can.

  • Re:Spam (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Pharmboy ( 216950 ) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @08:14PM (#12608329) Journal
    I buy several turkey spam and regular spam every fall, for my "just in case it snows so bad Im stuck in the house for two or three days" stockpile during the winter. Civilian equivelent of the C rations I had in the military, way back when.

    You can eat it cold if you must, or heat over the fire, it is calorie dense, tastes reasonably good, stores well, and I just eat the cans that are left over in the spring as sandwiches (sliced in thirds and lightly browned in a skillet) so my "rations" are never more than a year old.

    It makes an excellent emergency ration, figuring one or two cans per day per person. Of course, we keep about 10 gallons of fresh water stocked as well.

    Since North Carolina gets a snow storm that knocks out power (and I use a well: no power = no water) and snows us in for a day or three every few years, it comes in pretty handy. Its also pretty cheap for this purpose.

E = MC ** 2 +- 3db

Working...