Backcountry.com not playing nice

Parker C wrote: Bad backcountry....but let’s be honest I will buy shit from wherever it is cheapest lol

Who wants to bet there will be extra big Black Friday sales to bring all these angry people back in the fold...and guess who’s gonna take advantage...me

Old lady H wrote: I'll be interested to hear from my local guys if they come through with anything like an apology, appropriate reparation, and it isn't all under a gag order.

Best, Helen

You won't hear anything... Its like you guys have never worked for a large company. It would be suicidal to contact a company you had sued over their name and apologize... Instead they make a carefully crafted public statement and wait for everything to blow over. 

Ma Ja wrote:
I blame the mentality of beliving so little of yourself, you cant fathom having enough influence to affect change. We all stop spending money through Amazon tomorrow, and buy direct from manufacturers, the game is over, there's no more Amazon.

Yeah, no.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/in-2018-aws-delivered-most-of-amazons-operating-income/

For the full year, Amazon's net income reached $10.1 billion, or $20.14 per diluted share, compared with a net income of $3 billion, or $6.15 per diluted share, in 2017. Net sales increased 31 percent to $232.9 billion, compared with $177.9 billion in 2017. AWS nudged out Amazon's North American e-commerce unit to deliver the most operating income for 2018. AWS had operating income of $7.3 billion for 2018 to Amazon North America's $7.27 billion. The catch is that it took Amazon North America $141.4 billion of sales for that operating income and AWS needed $25.65 billion.

Jon Hillis wrote:

You won't hear anything... Its like you guys have never worked for a large company. It would be suicidal to contact a company you had sued over their name and apologize... Instead they make a carefully crafted public statement and wait for everything to blow over. 

From the link upstream:

 "He told GearJunkie the brand will be reaching out individually to every brand impacted by the retailer’s legal actions.
“Each one of the companies that has heard from us over the last couple years will hear from us again,” he said. "

I dunno, kinda sounds like he's saying maybe? If so, yes, I would be impressed.

I'm almost 63, I get how big companies work. Yet, once in awhile, they can do surprising things. Make it substantive, it's still a drop.in the bucket money wise, and buys a big chunk of good PR, or at least a start toward it.

Best, Helen

Martin le Roux wrote:

Not exactly. If you dig through USPTO filings it's apparent that Backcountry.com got what they wanted. In 2018 Backcountry Babes applied for a trademark covering outdoor education, guiding services and "Backcountry Babes"-branded t-shirts, jackets, hoodies, etc. Backcountry.com objected because they wanted trademark protection for "Backcountry"-branded clothing and outdoor goods. To date the USPTO has denied this, citing potential confusion with other trademarks that use the term "Backcountry". So Backcountry.com pressured Backcountry Babes into dropping all references to branded clothing in their trademark application. Backcountry Babes' trademark is now limited to outdoor education and guiding services, and it includes a disclaimer that they're not claiming an exclusive right to use the term "Backcountry" for other purposes.

Best post of the thread. 

Given that backcountry babes owns a trademark that covers outdoor education and guiding services, can they sue any guiding service that has the word 'backcountry' in it? 

Check out what Backcountry magazine had to say.  Just Google it.

First the Vista Outdoors boycott worked.

And now the Backcountry.com boycott worked.

Boycotts due to progressive causes seem to be successful in the outdoor industry when it comes to affecting change.

The bounties of space, of infinite outwardness, were three: empty heroics, low comedy, and pointless death

Meanwhile. 99.9% of their customer base didn’t pay attention/doesn’t care.

They are protecting their brand - capitalism at its finest - wake up 'merica there's a lot of other important shit to get all butthurt about these days...

Marc801 C wrote: While I don't agree with the trademark antics of Backcountry, how is a name change "trying to force customers to have fewer choices"?

You're aware that Backcountry dropped the action against Backcountry Babes?

Let's pretend there's "backcountry Bros" and they're next up for the Jacobin Woke Olympics mob to admonish.

Malachi Constant wrote: The bounties of space, of infinite outwardness, were three: empty heroics, low comedy, and pointless death

So it goes.

Ma Ja wrote:

I wish reading was easier. My comments are directed at those posting "Well, Backcountry isn't getting another penny of my money!  ", right after they just renewed their subscription to the CIA's favorite marketplace.

Anyone looking to enhance their understanding of how greed and corruption hurts everyone,  and who is hit the hardest, I'd suggest reading Chris Hedges' recent books. For those that cant understand anything I've written, he's got plenty of YouTube videos as well. Ralph Nader is the man too. His podcast is great.

Ralph Nader was the guy who ran on a platform that Democrats and Republicans are the same and helped to get W elected.  I still remember Eddie Vedder stumping for him at MSG.  Boy did that hopeful moment on the fringe backfire into precipitating right wing court appointments who bolstered contractual binding arbitration clauses.    Ralph Nader talks a great game but has not delivered the goods in decades.  If you don’t like unfair corporate practices, ironically Ralph Nader played a material role in many of them being adjudicated into being legally unchallengeable. 

M Mobes wrote:

It's Obama's fault my pen ran out of ink. Thanks Obama.

Chicken Head wrote:

Ralph Nader was the guy who ran on a platform that Democrats and Republicans are the same and helped to get W elected.  I still remember Eddie Vedder stumping for him at MSG.  Boy did that hopeful moment on the fringe backfire into precipitating right wing court appointments who bolstered contractual binding arbitration clauses.    Ralph Nader talks a great game but has not delivered the goods in decades.  If you don’t like unfair corporate practices, ironically Ralph Nader played a material role in many of them being adjudicated into being legally unchallengeable. 

Sadly, you're the type of person that keeps the 2 (1) party system alive. You forgot about Jill Stein. She stole my vote (with, of course, the help of Russian facebook ads that I never saw), so surely she's to blame for something. If you dont like her, you're either intentionally ignorant, or just a terrible person; the type that can rationalize voting for Hillary. And anyone blaming Nader for any corporate immorality shouldn't be able to voice their opinion publicly. You're simply spewing bad beta, dude. He is literally the most pro consumer, anti-corruption advocate alive today.

Ma Ja wrote:

Sadly, you're the type of person that keeps the 2 (1) party system alive. You forgot about Jill Stein. She stole my vote (with, of course, the help of Russian facebook ads that I never saw), so surely she's to blame for something. If you dont like her, you're either intentionally ignorant, or just a terrible person; the type that can rationalize voting for Hillary. And anyone blaming Nader for any corporate immorality shouldn't be able to voice their opinion publicly. You're simply spewing bad beta, dude. He is literally the most pro consumer, anti-corruption advocate alive today.

So, how'd that last election work out for you?

ubu wrote:

So, how'd that last election work out for you?

Ma Ja is from Kentucky. He could vote for the Man In the Moon as a protest vote and he'd still be just another voice in the wilderness of Trump and McConnell Country. 

Señor Arroz wrote:

Ma Ja is from Kentucky. He could vote for the Man In the Moon as a protest vote and he'd still be just another voice in the wilderness of Trump and McConnell Country. 

This is the truth. But if more people were willing to vote FOR someone or something, things would change. In other words, if people gave a shit about people as much as climbers cared about backcountry babes, we'd have a much more just system, and country to live in.

Ma Ja wrote:

This is the truth. But if more people were willing to vote FOR someone or something, things would change. In other words, if people gave a shit about people as much as climbers cared about backcountry babes, we'd have a much more just system, and country to live in.

How about both?