Backcountry.com not playing nice

Letter I sent to BC.com:

Specialized makes pretty good bikes. They are also a company who have completely lost their soul. Mike Sinyard (president of Specialized) was a mountain bike icon, one of the founding fathers of the sport. Sadly, becoming a corporate giant can sometimes kill your spirit, as is the case here. Evidence of that? Despite “borrowing” much of their product design from other companies, they are the first to sue anyone who builds something even remotely similar to what they offer. Sad that they are now often known for this rather than building good bikes.
Sound familiar?
I will NEVER buy a Specialized product, EVER.

14ers.com removed backcountry.com links from their site this weekend... 

One of the things that i enjoyed about Backcountry was that they had real people on the other end, who know gear and want you to enjoy whatever you’re getting. I emailed one of them and they replied: “I have also passed along your response as we are tracking the feedback that has been coming in on this matter”. If they’re tracking it, it’s hopefully because it’s becoming a bit enough deal to cost them money.

Here’s to shopping at the local gear place instead. 

Brad Nyenhuis wrote: 
I will NEVER buy a Specialized product, EVER.

Thanks. Neither will I from what you say. 

Also, if they want to see true copyright infringment, I'm thinking stickers with the mountain goat logo with the circle/slash through it.
I'd rock one on each vehicle, each pair of skis, etc.

I just deleted both BC.com and S&C from my bookmarks

No messages on their instatwitbook accounts since this has come out. Deafening. 

Dave K wrote:

There is a big difference between protecting intellectual property and abusing the legal system to force smaller competitors out of the market.

In many of the examples cited in the OP, Backcountry is not defending their trademark, they are effectively forcing the smaller players to bear the costs of defense. Little mom and pop store gets sued, and they are forced into proving they have a legitimate claim on the name "backcountry." Civil cases are not "innocent until proven guilty" so mom and pop company has to match the big player's cost and effort in the courtroom. The little guy may clearly be the right, but it costs to much to prove, so they capitulate.

Don't try to frame Backcountry's actions here as a routine, legitimate business practice. It may be commonplace, but it's still sleazy.

Exactly this - when a company says they have to sue to protect their IP, they are correct in a generic sense. However, when you bully small businesses and tiny non-profits or groups, they simply can't afford the many hundreds of thousands of dollars minimum to defend a trademark suit, so they simply settle and change their name, which may have pre-existed the big company in the first place. When they settle - there is absolutely no ruling made and no precedent set in the courts - the case is never decided on the merits.

Also, when they talk about trademark dilution causing it to be "cancelled", your trademark isn't getting just cancelled without losing an extremely expensive lawsuit - like significantly north of a million dollars per side expensive to see a trademark suit seen through a decision on the merits and the inevitable appeals. If "Backcountry Jeans" wanted to go through the courts and argue the word "Backcountry" used in the outdoor industry is generic, and shouldn't be a trademarkable term, they are going to need to put up a couple million dollars to defend the case and the appeals that they aren't getting back and will almost certainly loose the case to boot.

Somebody should start a website backcountrydouchebags.com Back country would have the following options:

1 )Ignore it
2) Sue to stop using their name which would entail arguing that they were the only backcountry douchebags allowed
3) Sue for slander arguing that they are not douchebags.

You could even make it a non-profit business supplying feminine hygiene products for big city mountaineers or similar programs.

Brad Nyenhuis wrote: Also, if they want to see true copyright infringment, I'm thinking stickers with the mountain goat logo with the circle/slash through it.
I'd rock one on each vehicle, each pair of skis, etc.

I just deleted both BC.com and S&C from my bookmarks

Doug Foust wrote:Somebody should start a website backcountrydouchebags.com Back country would have the following options:

1 )Ignore it
2) Sue to stop using their name which would entail arguing that they were the only backcountry douchebags allowed
3) Sue for slander arguing that they are not douchebags.

You could even make it a non-profit business supplying feminine hygiene products for big city mountaineers or similar programs. 

Better yet,  any proceeds donated to legal fees of businesses dealing with said douchebaggery

I didn’t read every response yet (I will) and glad people agree but my initial reaction is:

What greed! Considering the whole reason they are using the term “backcountry” is because it’s an already established term with a meaning regarding the great outdoors. They did not invent this term. It helped them and now they are pushing everyone else off this widely used term? Wow, just wow

OK, I have just completed my trademark filing for the word "Climbing".

Now all you suckers owe me,...

Allen Sanderson wrote: Companies need to actively protect their intellectual property (IP). Failing to do so can be costly.

Here are the current PTO cases involving Backcountry.com: http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pnam=Backcountry.com,%20LLC%20%20

Just a couple of pages. Now check out the five pages each for North Face and Patagonia

The North Face:  ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v…

Patagonia: http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pnam=PATAGONIA,%20INC.%20%20

And a few pages from our sponsor REI: http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pnam=Recreational%20Equipment,%20Inc.%20%20 

Folks should learn about IP because the indignation being displayed will be of little consequence.

I see what you mean because backcountry.com having (gleefully) registered such a generic term is probably trying to strenghten their weak mark (unlike Prada, Gucci... backcountry is a dictionary term with the same meaning they are using it for) by suing everyone to be the only source and “avoid confusion” to the source. 

However, I still stand by my previous post that they used the term’s plain meaning to elevate themselves and now are trying to prevent everyone from using a generic term their customer base has been using for centuries, even as a descriptor (eg backcountry skis, a class for enjoying the great outdoors). 

THEIR marketing/strategy/IP folks should learn about how it’s unacceptable to take a common word out of the lexicon from people who have used it for centuries and the backlash it will cause. I bet their lawsuits started off from the high of actually getting a generic term registered and snowballed to even suing those using it as a descriptor. At minimum, customers and people who enjoy the backcountry boycott. At best, backcountry.com’s trademark should be de-registered. Even if they lay off the lawsuits due to greed of wanting to end a boycott, their true colors have already been shown.

Oh Great!!! I just had a pair of shoes in the cart with the 20% off and climbers link that I need for a comp next week and next month.

That's some BS.....F&%$ Backcountry!!!!   I get defending your trade mark but this is too far indeed..

Looks like I'm paying full price somewhere else or wearing my current shoes in desperate need of a resole.  

I'll send an email to the CEO as well. They've lost another customer and a few grand from me.

They will never get a dime from me ever again. Had a horrible experience with a potential purchase on a pair of LS G2s with them and ultimately cancelled the order and bought them elsewhere.

Not gonna get into the intricate details. Water under the proverbial bridge...

Knowing what they are doing from this feed and other research on my own affirms that I made the right choice. 

I think BC is harvesting email addresses from this forum and sending me personal emails to assure me they are my friend.

Seriously, I got an email that wasn't trying to sell me anything, just saying they are the good guys. I ONLY use that email address for this forum...

Happen to anyone else???

mpech wrote: bump to let people know there is a 20% off coupon at backcountry right now.... that was sufficient to pacify me. 

I could think of many actions BC.com could pacify me and thats definitely not one. Backcountrygear.com has my business.

I think it's odd that their auto reply to complaint emails basically talks you into shopping elsewhere. The Jedi mind trick usually is intended to persuade them in to the thing you want, not to plant seeds of doubt. It some how feels as if the employees responsible for creating the reply were attempting to deliver a subliminal message.

Tim Stich wrote: It was with extreme pleasure that I messaged them and told them to go fuck themselves.

Maybe they just didn't want to be held responsible for 'Backcountry Pizza' receipts left on the ground in Boulder Canyon, or anything nearby those? 

M Mobes wrote:

I could think of many actions BC.com could pacify me and thats definitely not one. Backcountrygear.com has my business.

For now.

I'm sure Backcountrygear.com is in their crosshairs

Don't forget to leave comments on the BBB too!!