Their Twitter bio reads as...
Stinky Jim is one of Auckland's most respected DJs, having treated listeners to his Stinky Grooves show on Radio 95BFM for about 20 years now, even educating a younger generation of BFM DJs as they came thru the ranks. Hes also the man behind Round Trip Mars Records (SJD, Naked and Famous, James Duncan) and makes music as part of Phase 5 and Unitone Hifi.
In short, he has built an impeccable reputation as purveyor of the best in stonkingly good tunes. His legendary radio show is a testament to that. I've had the pleasure of knowing Jim for nearly 20 years, having first crossed paths via BFM and Planet magazine - he interviewed my band Hallelujah Picassos for Planet, it was a very mad interview. I've still got it somewhere.
The person who retweeted/reposted the above comment from Stinky Jims Brewing was Charlotte Ryan from 95BFM's Morning Glory show. She told me she had done so as she assumed that they had something to do with Stinky Jim. I emailed Jim to ask him. The answer was an emphatic no. Jim was very unhappy at having his name borrowed like this.
I tried to find out more today about what rights Jim had as far as protecting his name from this type of theft, via Twitter. One person pointed out to me that "That's not how trademarks work. Different industries can have the same marks. It's not theft, and it's not illegal." While it is morally wrong to take someone's name/brand, it may not be illegal to do so. I also had a lawyer offer to help out Jim for free, which was most kind.Twitter isn't just noise.
Someone then pointed out that their avatar using an image of rapper Savage was stolen too: "the Savage-cradling-kitten image was made by Tommy Ill - it looks like @StinkyJimBrew took that w/o asking".
Then, at approx 4.45pm this afternoon, Stinky Jim's Brewing posted these messages to Twitter...
"Alas, we have been found out. Stinky Jim's Brewing Co was a social media experiment to test the effectiveness of social media in creating..."
" ..a buzz for a new company. No money has changed hands, no one has profited from the use of a name or image. But we are impressed with the.."
"...tenacity with which you defended the use of the images/names. Happy Tweeting, Twits!"
This provoked a number of responses - mine was " wow, @StinkyJimBrew messed with someone's reputation for an experiment. Get the fuck outta here."
and then "We got punked by @StinkyJimBrew - yeah nah. not funny."
Simon Grigg wrote to me via Tiwtter "is @StinkyJimBrew serious? That is dorkish behaviour at the most dorkish."
And Kirk Harding responded with "whoever is behind the @StinkyJimBrew prank/social experiment/bullshit is extremely idiotic. Cheap thrills?"
Over the past two days, the Social Media Junction conference has been running in Auckland at Skycity Convention Centre. It may be possible that this experiment/prank/hoax is in some way connected with that conference - I hope not. As Andy Beal, one of the speakers said "Don't fake it; you get found out."
Or it maybe right now some "social media expert" is working away in a cutting-edge ad agency or marketing company on a Power Point presentation on how to create a buzz for your company, with this stunning example of bullshit as his/her illustration of success.
The Twitter account for Stinky Jim's Brewing was deleted early this evening.
Someone out there knows who did this. Know anything? Hit me up via email. The address is at the top right of this blog. Thanks.
This image below is from Google cache, before they deleted the photo collage stolen from Tommy Ill, featuring Savage - it's hard to see, but Savage is on front of a kid on a swing, saying "let me see your kid swing".
25 comments:
Wow. Whatever the motivation that's just an unparalleled string of dick moves on their part.
Nice new layout btw.
Experiment my arse. Just another day in the office for agency hacks.
http://twitter.com/KieranGreaney could be behind it. He was the first person to be followed by @stinkyjimbrews and also posted a similar tweet about the Phoenix Foundation origami.
not sure whats going on here, but continuing the story is just proving the point that any publicity is good publicity. - although i cant find a company actually registered as stinky jims brew so safe to assume this was a media test and nothing more...
with all the hype around this i bet everyone would still like a stinky jim brew... the system works.
Hey all, Stinky Jim's Head Brewer here. Just to set the record straight, we've never brewed a batch of beer in our life. In fact I'm more of a whiskey chap in all honesty. Craft beer is going through a resurgence at the moment, and as a result, became the object of this whole thing. We never set out to offend or make money from something that wasn't ours. In fact, the name was chosen due to the fact that we thought it would be laughable to actually commercialise a beer with that name. The actual DJ Stinky Jim didn't even factor in the thinking until someone brought it up on Twitter (an unfortunate association, I will concede). This whole debacle began as an advertising interns experiment, nothing more, and a great deal has been taken from it by us, and I'm sure by anyone with an interest in social media.
major fail - markerting people should never be allowed near social media
stop debasing everything you hacks
Heard of Google? If you put "Stinky Jim" in there as a search query you would have found several instances of the real Stinky Jim.
Hi Stinky Jim's Head Brewer,
thanks for coming clean, appreciate it. I'm surprised to hear you say "The actual DJ Stinky Jim didn't even factor in the thinking until someone brought it up on Twitter". Two seconds on Goggle would've saved you all this mess.
But I'm glad you concede it was an unfortunate association. Now apologise to Stinky Jim. That's the decent thing to do.
He's not hard to find on the net, if you want his email address, try Round Trip Mars Records website.
And thanks for the comments, folks. Glad you like the new layout, Felix. Onya, Bob D!
Way ahead of you Peter, have already fired an email Stinky's way to explain the whole kerfuffle.
Hi Stinky Jim's Head Brewer,
Glad to hear you've emailed Stinky Jim. Did you apologise?
mad men eh? Nah, just hollow
Ha ha ha. Kirk Harding criticising someone over misappropriating credit for something. Now THAT really is funny.
"Way ahead of you Peter"
Must be an advertising hack/'creative' to use such cliches...
It is ridiculous that this person thinks they have to apologize when they have done nothing wrong.
It is absolutely absurd that you wannabe musos and pop culture
dickheads are creating such a fuss over nothing. As far as I can tell this is nothing more than a pathetic attempt by Peter to increase the amount of traffic through his poorly written, nonsensical blog site, that isn't worth the data I've used to read it.
If this so called dj stinky Jim, had a problem perhaps he himself should have spoken up. Learn trademark and copyright laws before you have an opinion and have a go at the "brewer".
You talk about how a lawyer friend has offered to help dj stinky Jim. Well I would pay to watch a judge laugh at you as you attempt to sell him this trademark bullshit, about a dj who has no copyright and a company that isn't registered and pursuing work in a totally different field anyway.
Peter there is no law stating that I can't start an online account name which is exactly the same as a known company or celebrity, so long as I am
not using it for defamation or for profit. This is why most well known organisations will purchase and gather any relatable name on social mediums and internet web addresses, so that it is never an issue.
Get a clue... all of you.
P.S. I am not the brewer, I am a twitter account holder who was befriended by stinkyjimbrew and have followed this since you raised it.
Anonymous (At 10.37am) raises some interesting points, but why be anonymous? why be such a weasily coward? Did his/her parents give him/her an embarrassing name or something?
look all i want is a cool new drink
Wow, bit of a kerfuffle over all of this stuff aye?
Personally I don't know about the law and all of that stuff, don't really care. Just think it's pretty piss (excuse the pun) poor marketing planning, even for a made up product to something something social media? Way to create niche branding.
Chip
You talk about how a lawyer friend has offered to help dj stinky Jim. Well I would pay to watch a judge laugh at you as you attempt to sell him this trademark bullshit, about a dj who has no copyright and a company that isn't registered and pursuing work in a totally different field anyway.
Perhaps you could stop being such a dick, given that you clearly don't know as much as you think you do.
The offer of legal advice was presumably made while it still appeared that an actual product was to be sold under that name. In those circumstances, Jim would be very well advised to take such advice -- which is a wholly different matter from a judge hearing a claim.
As Peter actually pointed out (your reading comprehension needs work) "it's not theft, and it's not illegal," but Jim would be entitled to consider his common law right, given the distinctiveness of the name, the small market the other product would be released to, etc.
But basically, it was a rude and silly thing for the "interns" to do. That, largely, is what everyone here is saying.
And, really, given the state of your prose, you're not in any position to describe Peter's blog as "poorly written and nonsensical".
Hurry along now, troll.
Hi Russell.
Thanks for offering your viewpoint. I'll take it on board.
Now that ive done that...
I feel you've missed my main point. That point being that Peter is an idiot with a bunch of followers, that actually rate his opinion as being worthy, when in fact he lacks basic common sense.
My other point was that there is no requirement on the brewers behalf to apologise to the DJ, they did absolutely nothing wrong. Nothing immoral and nothing illegal, and they openly admit they had never heard of the DJ and are sorry if this caused confusion.
Now, to suggest I don't know what I'm talking about is hard for me to comprehend. As I said in my previous rant - not sure if you read it, oh you did? Good. - I was followed by stinkyjimbrew on twitter and therefore I have been involved in this debarcle since it first began. So to assume I am not sure of the back story, and then try to call me out on the fact I am a troll has really made you look like as much of an idiot as your mate Peter. Trolling is the art of coming in on a subject using defamatory remarks, anger and hatred to get your point across without any real knowledge of the matter at hand, I didn't do this, I offered valid points, none of which peter is willing to argue himself, it seems he'll leave that to his cronies.
To say that the DJ should seek legal advice, when a brewer of a similar name appears, is where the nonsensical part of my rant comes in to play. There is absolutely no legal matter here, DJ Stinky Jim has no legal grounds to halt a brewery from starting up with a similar name. None. Zip. Nada, A duck. This is where the judge laughing comes into play.
I could start up a company called DJ stinky Jim, or Stinky Jim records, tomorrow and still there would be minimal grounds for DJ stinky Jim to lodge a claim that I have stolen his label. In fact I might just do that, while I'm at it ill start a company called dubdashdot, difference there being ill have a valid point to offer.
The point I'm making here is that if you want a label or trademark to be yours, copyright it. Simple.
For fellow tweeters to whinge and whine about how DJ stinky jim deserves more respect and how stinkyjimbrew should apologise is absolute rubbish and really does speak volumes of the type of followers Peter has.
I am not condoning what these “interns” carried out on twitter. They wasted my time as much as they did anyone else. But it is very simple for everyone here to ignore them, and block all communications.
But I suppose that's what bloggers do. They whinge and complain, and hope that people actually care what they have to say. Its what they feed on.
This is the end of the discussion from my point of view. I wont be coming back here to view your responses as I've got far better things to be getting on with.
So again..
Get a clue before you offer an opinion.
Hi Russell.
Thanks for offering your viewpoint. I'll take it on board.
Now that ive done that...
I feel you've missed my main point. That point being that Peter is an idiot with a bunch of followers, that actually rate his opinion as being worthy, when in fact he lacks basic common sense.
My other point was that there is no requirement on the brewers behalf to apologise to the DJ, they did absolutely nothing wrong. Nothing immoral and nothing illegal, and they openly admit they had never heard of the DJ and are sorry if this caused confusion.
Now, to suggest I don't know what I'm talking about is hard for me to comprehend. As I said in my previous rant - not sure if you read it, oh you did? Good. - I was followed by stinkyjimbrew on twitter and therefore I have been involved in this debarcle since it first began. So to assume I am not sure of the back story, and then try to call me out on the fact I am a troll has really made you look like as much of an idiot as your mate Peter. Trolling is the art of coming in on a subject using defamatory remarks, anger and hatred to get your point across without any real knowledge of the matter at hand, I didn't do this, I offered valid points, none of which peter is willing to argue himself, it seems he'll leave that to his cronies.
To say that the DJ should seek legal advice, when a brewer of a similar name appears, is where the nonsensical part of my rant comes in to play. There is absolutely no legal matter here, DJ Stinky Jim has no legal grounds to halt a brewery from starting up with a similar name. None. Zip. Nada, A duck. This is where the judge laughing comes into play.
I could start up a company called DJ stinky Jim, or Stinky Jim records, tomorrow and still there would be minimal grounds for DJ stinky Jim to lodge a claim that I have stolen his label. In fact I might just do that, while I'm at it ill start a company called dubdashdot, difference there being ill have a valid point to offer.
The point I'm making here is that if you want a label or trademark to be yours, copyright it. Simple.
For fellow tweeters to whinge and whine about how DJ stinky jim deserves more respect and how stinkyjimbrew should apologise is absolute rubbish and really does speak volumes of the type of followers Peter has.
I am not condoning what these “interns” carried out on twitter. They wasted my time as much as they did anyone else. But it is very simple for everyone here to ignore them, and block all communications.
But I suppose that's what bloggers do. They whinge and complain, and hope that people actually care what they have to say. Its what they feed on.
This is the end of the discussion from my point of view. I wont be coming back here to view your responses as I've got far better things to be getting on with.
So again,..
Get a clue before you offer an opinion.
Thanks, Russell, Stuart. Anon at 10.37am - you make some good points, when you're not busy insulting me.
What a kerfuffle. I need a drink.- Jaq Tweedie
I could start up a company called DJ stinky Jim, or Stinky Jim records, tomorrow and still there would be minimal grounds for DJ stinky Jim to lodge a claim that I have stolen his label.
On this evidence, you'd be better off doing that than offering legal advice, I'll grant you that.
Good grief.
The point I'm making here is that if you want a label or trademark to be yours, copyright it. Simple.
Copyright is held by the creator of a creative work. You can't copyright a label or trademark - words, names and symbols are covered by an entirely different process and piece of legislation.
At least get your facts straight before you chastise others for the same sins. Motes and beams, James.
Post a Comment