To be tested by Nordstrom twice in a week is either a testament to the power of information or a demonstration of their corporate belief that we are such blithering idiots that we will buy any piece of crap they throw against the wall. Marc Randazza, a savvy lawyer, followed up on the Nordstrom attack on tiny little Beckons to crush them with a post entitled Nordstrom Redeems Itself.
It seems that Nordstrom has decided that perhaps it was being a bit dickish in its attempt to bully over a small business in a trademark dispute. It even went so far as to say that it is sorry.
“A customer of ours e-mailed us a copy of your story from yesterday expressing their unhappiness with how they feel Nordstrom has handled this issue. I’d like you to know our thoughts. Our intention from the beginning was to co-exist with Beckons in a manner that would enable Beckons to use their trademark on yoga merchandise, while we used the Beckon name for fashion apparel and accessories. We never intended to adversely affect Ms. Prater’s business and we are sorry if this has happened. We are reaching out again to Ms. Prater’s attorneys to reach a settlement that we are hoping she will find acceptable. When we have resolved this issue, which we are hopeful will be soon, we’ll get back to you to share the outcome.”
Maybe those new-dad hormones are still raging through Randazza’s tired body rendering him unduly kind, but saying sorry after costing two young women who were entirely in the right $70,000 in legal fees to fight over nothing just doesn’t begin to cut it. Now that Nordstrom was outed in this InformationWeek post and across the blawgosphere, they’re “sorry”. And it’s so sincere. And all is forgiven?
Not by me. Brooke White, Nordstrom VP of Corporate Communications (yes, they have a VP just for corporate communications), sent an email to Global CIO Blog, and spread around by Michael Atkins at Seattle Trademark Lawyer, His emails is crock of corporate nonsense. Not even a well-designed crock, but a rather text-book email on how to deflect responsibility while saying absolutely nothing of substance. Not even a cute little Hallmark Card, “Sorry we crushed your business, Have a nice day.”
The carrot is the amorphous hint of a settlement, with the self-serving stick of “our intention was to co-exist with Beckons in a manner that would enable Beckons to use their trademark on yoga merchandise, while we used the Beckon name for fashion apparel and accessories.” Unless I missed something, this was the point of their efforts to crush Beckons in the first place. They wanted 99% of the use of this tiny business’ trademark, and were willing to let them have the crumb they didn’t want in the first place? Woo hoo. What great guys they are.
So all they want now is everything they ever wanted in the first place. What a great basis for a settlement. Ann Sather and Becky Prater should thank their lucky stars that Nordstrom is such a gentle giant. And now that they’ve done the pro forma mea culpa, held out the promise of a settlement, let’s all forgive and forget Nordstrom’s disgraceful conduct and get back to buying chatkes at the mall.
Perhaps I’m being too cynical, too distrusting. Perhaps the empty, meaningless, utterly vapid rhetoric in Brooke White’s email masks a sincere desire to correct the injustice done to Beckons. Not that I believe that for a second, but I could be wrong. If so, here’s the “settlement” that I propose:
- Nordstrom drops any attempt to claim ownership of the trademark “Beckons”.
- Nordstrom pays Beckons $70,000 to cover its attorneys fees.
- Nordstrom licenses the name from Beckons for whatever clothing it wants to sell in its stores.
- Nordstrom orders the entire output of the Beckons line of clothing for the time it held them captive to litigation.
- Nordstrom publicly admits its abusive litigation practice intended to prevail by crushing small business.
Not only does this compensate Beckons for the harm done, but it puts the “Beckons” name inside Nordstrom. After all, isn’t that all they ever really wanted in the first place? Then I’ll believe they’re sorry. Until then, I’m not buying.
Update: Marc Jon Randazza (of the Gloucester Randazzas) has turned that smile upside down. Thank God he’s back. You were scaring me there, bro, all happy and nice and such. Eeek.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Pitiful sensationalism. (I am guessing you are personally or financially vested in the Beckons trademark, or just a foolish, overzealous, loyal friend, or have you just had personal problems with corporations? This sounds like a personal grudge.)
Most corporations have vp’s for corporate branches; you are insinuating they are a huge corrupt corporation. If Beckons had filed their application correctly, the application by Nordstrom’s would not have been approved. When the corporation has so many ‘house-owned labels’. why would they choose to go through the legal battle as a likely result of ‘targeting’, as you imply, a small company. Beckons is not a well-known or anything close to a household name, so Nordstrom would not gain from the association. Seriously? Be realistic. Nordstrom could have easily chosen another name had they known about the Beckons trademark application in advance.
Again, if Beckons had filed their application correctly, this would all be moot, as Nordstrom’s application would have been denied. Besides, I did not know of the Beckons name before this story; I did know of the Nordstrom stores. Look at the publicity Becky and Ann have gotten.
Yes, you seemed to have missed a lot, and no, I am not at all surprised you would not consider that you could possibly be wrong! Arrogant fools never do.
Wrong on all counts. Your assumptions are ridiculously off base. You’re clueless on the facts, and your conclusions are irrational. So I’m going to assume your just a shill trying to salvage a monumental screw-up. Does your mommy know that they pay you to roam the internet and write stupid things? Now go away.
i too have experienced corporate indifference, belligerence and all around poor attitude from nordstrom. a shame as i used to like the store, but i find that at the top, it is more of the same. indifference to customer concerns, aggressive protections of itself at the cost to the other person.
a bully, in fact.
just my experience and opinion, but it is vindicating to know that others have similar feelings after attempting to deal with them.
One year and a half later, things haven’t changed much since the last person who commented about this company. I couldn’t agree more with the comment I am replying back in response to. Unless they get money out of your strong efforts to help out their customers, they will attempt to intimidate and mislead you to thinking that they are there to support you. I couldn’t agree more…and could even add much more to show evidence of their unprofessionalism and VERY poor management on all sides of the spectrum. Not a good company to work for! I would not recommend working for them unless you want you strong efforts to be thrown back at you and go unappreciated! They will even go as far to instill fear in you and let you know in black and white (Literally) that your job is on the line everyday you go to work. Now what kind of company does that? except one that really is out to make every buck out of you that they can and treat you like a slave. It won’t matter how many customers are happy with you as a sales associate and no matter how much you do on the side that gets completed as assigned….your butt will get canned if you don’t meet unreasonable expectations when there are no customers that are in the store!