EARLY ROYAL CROWN GINGER ALE PAPER LABEL

Welcome to our Antique Bottle community

Be a part of something great, join today!

SODAPOPBOB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
11,502
Reaction score
49
Points
0
The answer to this mystery, or at least part of it, might have been staring us in the face this whole time. I can't fully explain the following, but there's something about it that doesn't sit easy with me. This link will take you to one of several sites where we find the 1902 Patent for ... Valaer ~ Royal Crown Ginger Ale http://tinyurl.com/mcurpv3 1. It opens on Page 553 where we find the Valaer Royal Crown Ginger Ale Patent 2. Scroll back to Page 545 where we find the title ... "Alphabetical List of Registrants of Labels" 3. Scroll back to Page 521 where we find the title ... "Alphabetical List of Registrants of Trade-Marks" ( The names Valaer and Royal Crown are not listed under Trade-Marks ) The only listing I can find for Valaer or Royal Crown are in the Labels section. A label is not a Trademark! So it appears that Christian Valaer only had a trademark on the label itself and nothing else. I've never encountered a trademark for just a label, but it could be a major clue regarding the connection between Christian Valaer and Claud Hatcher both using the same name for a brand of ginger ale.
 

SODAPOPBOB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
11,502
Reaction score
49
Points
0
Question of the day ... How do we explain being granted a patent on a label but not the product itself?
 

SODAPOPBOB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
11,502
Reaction score
49
Points
0
I spent several hours reading up on and trying to educate myself on U.S. Patent laws with my primary focus being on Trademarks - Designs - Labels - Prints. The language used for this type of information can be confusing, but I was able to make enough sense of it to determine that a registered/patented label does not automatically grant the registrant of that label a trademark. In other words, when someone patents a label for a particular product such as a brand of soda pop, the label is only intended to identify the product for the producer but it does not protect the name of the product. In order to have the product protected against infringements, the producer would need to register a separate patent for the name in the form of a trademark. For example; The name Coca Cola is a "Registered Trademark" but Coca Cola bottles are registered separately under a "Design Patent." I can't say for certain just yet, but it appears that Christian Valaer patented the label for Royal Crown Ginger Ale in order to identify his product but failed to follow up by registering the name itself as a trademark. Which, if my understanding of the patent laws is correct, means the name Royal Crown Ginger Ale was wide open for anyone who wanted to use it as a viable trademark. It could be this is what Claud Hatcher did and how he was able to secure the name for the Union Bottling Works in circa 1905. (To be continued)
 

SODAPOPBOB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
11,502
Reaction score
49
Points
0
Now I'm wondering why the labels under discussion do not have "REG. PEND. U.S. PAT. OFF." on them? I cannot answer this yet, but I do know my circa 1932 label does have that information on it!
 

Attachments

  • 695c294d1d264eca9e9ffd01dcba22f2.jpg
    695c294d1d264eca9e9ffd01dcba22f2.jpg
    85.8 KB · Views: 85

SODAPOPBOB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
11,502
Reaction score
49
Points
0
The Union Bottling Works label doesn't have that information on it either ... ???
 

Attachments

  • 3458a4007c0d4d3bb267072077d4c0df.jpg
    3458a4007c0d4d3bb267072077d4c0df.jpg
    76.9 KB · Views: 77

SODAPOPBOB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
11,502
Reaction score
49
Points
0
P.S. Its possible that Claud Hatcher didn't actually apply for any patents or trademarks for Royal Crown until the early 1930s.
 

SODAPOPBOB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
11,502
Reaction score
49
Points
0
I forgot to mention there is a clause in the patent/trademark laws which stipulates if a product is produced and sold continuously in commerce for a certain period of time that it constitutes what is referred to as a "fair use" of the product. This was often all that was needed to protect the brand in case someone ever tried to infringe on it.
 

SODAPOPBOB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
11,502
Reaction score
49
Points
0
Inconclusive/Conclusion Now I'm thinking ol' Claud Hatcher simply snatched up the name Royal Crown for a brand of soda pop, which he did a patent search on but discovered no one had a right to it, so he just ran with it and let the chips fall where they may.
 

SODAPOPBOB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
11,502
Reaction score
49
Points
0
Another thing I'm wondering about is this article in ... The American Bottler ~ 1906 I thought Union Bottling Works was established in 1905 by Claud Hatcher and his father. If so, then how do we explain this 1906 article?
 

Attachments

  • 303bad13752148ba927f4165a130bd9d.jpg
    303bad13752148ba927f4165a130bd9d.jpg
    72.8 KB · Views: 78
  • 54e0b832ce26403abc4c5f064852a1f9.jpg
    54e0b832ce26403abc4c5f064852a1f9.jpg
    120.7 KB · Views: 80

SODAPOPBOB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
11,502
Reaction score
49
Points
0
Like I said earlier, I'm just a cub detective on this case and simply post the evidence as I find it! To refresh our memories, here's the chronology again by Cecil Munsey ...
 

Attachments

  • dc8d2f357c914126b3733272e6581cb6.jpg
    dc8d2f357c914126b3733272e6581cb6.jpg
    105.1 KB · Views: 78
  • 3b9e8efb076949c38f124b4d7645caa2.jpg
    3b9e8efb076949c38f124b4d7645caa2.jpg
    54.3 KB · Views: 82

Members online

Latest threads

Forum statistics

Threads
83,407
Messages
744,196
Members
24,443
Latest member
jonnymanty
Top