Painkiller, Pusser's Rum and a Tiki Bar - General Tiki

J jokeiii Tiki Socialite Miami, FL Joined: Sep 18, 2010 Posts: 503	J jokeiii Posted posted on Thu, Jun 16, 2011 8:22 AM On 2011-06-16 07:16, dcman wrote: [snip]PKNY, a cool place from what I hear, chose to either 1. to infringe on this knowingly or 2. to not respond when they were made aware of the infringement and requests to resolve the issue were made by Pussers.[/snip] A third option -- and one I consider likeliest -- is that PKNY's proposals to resolve the issue were unsatisfactory to Pusser's. The latter, let's face it, by virtue of size and resources at their command, were in a position to dictate. I'm not convinced that (admittedly this is hypothetical) had this gone to trial, it would have been a slam-dunk for Pusser's. But Pusser's is able to marshal legal firepower to an extent PKNY cannot. To me the question "Is what Pusser's did legal?" sets the bar too low. Of course what they did is legal, and perfectly permissible. I don't think anyone is arguing that. My opinion is that meeting the standard of legality is insufficient for me to look favorably on Pusser's...which is now in a serious PR nightmare similar to Rep. Weiner's, of getting caught flatfooted and compounding the problem by responding in what many perceive as an arrogant fashion. So, still no Pusser's for me.

On 2011-06-16 07:16, dcman wrote:

[snip]PKNY, a cool place from what I hear, chose to either 1. to infringe on this knowingly or 2. to not respond when they were made aware of the infringement and requests to resolve the issue were made by Pussers.[/snip]

A third option -- and one I consider likeliest -- is that PKNY's proposals to resolve the issue were unsatisfactory to Pusser's. The latter, let's face it, by virtue of size and resources at their command, were in a position to dictate. I'm not convinced that (admittedly this is hypothetical) had this gone to trial, it would have been a slam-dunk for Pusser's. But Pusser's is able to marshal legal firepower to an extent PKNY cannot.

To me the question "Is what Pusser's did legal?" sets the bar too low. Of course what they did is legal, and perfectly permissible. I don't think anyone is arguing that. My opinion is that meeting the standard of legality is insufficient for me to look favorably on Pusser's...which is now in a serious PR nightmare similar to Rep. Weiner's, of getting caught flatfooted and compounding the problem by responding in what many perceive as an arrogant fashion.

So, still no Pusser's for me.

Post #593913 by jokeiii on Thu, Jun 16, 2011 8:22 AM