var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
Laura Northrup
October 16, 2009 1:38 AM
Moderate | Flag for review

Are we sure they aren't secretly owned by Monster Cable?

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
SJActress
October 16, 2009 1:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Laura Northrup: I find it funny that a company suing a winery for the use of \"Monster\" in its title uses a law company called Continental.

Isn't that an airline?! lol

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Kimaroo - 100% Pure Natural Kitteh
October 16, 2009 1:43 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Laura Northrup: But then the world would actually make sense. We can't have that, can we?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
kelrod
October 16, 2009 1:39 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Maybe we can tip off Monster Energy to attack Monster Cable. Then we'd have an epic, universe-ending trademark battle.

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
alstein
October 16, 2009 2:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Cliff_Donner: I think all these monster companies need to have something done to stop them.

Someone call Survival Tobita.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
zentex
October 16, 2009 5:30 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TechnoDestructo: actually, if memory serves, Monster CABLE sued Hansen claiming they owned ALL instances of \"Monster\" (lookout Halloween, you're next) and Hansen caved and paid them monies to license the word.

Personally, someone in the PTO needs to be fired for giving the word MONSTER to *anyone*.

I tend to not spend my money on products that are made by companies who go around suing the pants off of people as part of its business plan.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jayphat
October 16, 2009 2:01 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kelrod: I was waiting for someone to mention this idea. I would rather watch that court battle on C-SPAN over our blow-hole congressman parading on the TV.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Difdi
October 16, 2009 3:31 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jayphat: \"...Dear Monster cable...an elderly relative of mine was quite confused earlier this week, when, after attempting to order HDMI cables online, instead wound up with a case of energy drinks...\"

Then kick back and watch the festivities...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
econobiker
October 16, 2009 2:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Difdi: Monster Corporate death match:


Cable vs. Energy Drink

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
ARP
October 16, 2009 1:41 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Yep. Sounds to me like they're using misusing Trademark law in an effort to get a bad review taken down. Does anybody know if TM holders are now required to at least consider fair use before they starting launching nastygrams? I thought there was a pending case on that.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
hypnotik_jello
October 16, 2009 12:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ARP: Seems like a pretty simple First Amendment issue here. As long as the said review isn't libelous.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
lihtox
October 16, 2009 12:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ARP: One possibility that the company suddenly decided that they needed to protect their trademark, and/or hired/appointed someone new to take care of their trademark, and they are going overboard in their newbie enthusiasm.

Hanlon's Razor: \"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Sneeje
October 16, 2009 2:39 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ARP: I don't think fair use applies to trademark law, only copyright.

The tests for trademark infringement are: was the potentially infringing mark used in commerce and would a reasonable person be confused (misled) by the use of the mark in question.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Mecharine
October 16, 2009 12:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Sneeje: Fair use applies to trademarks, though its limited. Trademarks can be used in informative pieces, like reviews or comparisions. Thats why advertisements comparing Toyota to Ford are legal.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Erwos
October 16, 2009 12:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Mecharine: Yeah, but when people say \"Fair Use\", they mean the very specific version they laid out by the courts with the four conditions. That doesn't apply to trademarks at all. If they had issued a copyright violation letter (\"you are using the copyrighted term Monster Energy without our energy\"), yes, fair use would come into play.

But... trademark protection is only there to protect your trademark against (confusing) use by competitors in the same industry. You don't get trademark protection when people are using your trademark to refer to your product. So, yes, this is ludicrous on all levels anyways. :)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
RPHP
October 16, 2009 2:20 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Erwos: ARP is right. Just because when you, Erwos, say fair use you personally mean copyright law's doctrine does not mean Fair Use does not exist in Trademark Law. True when someone says fair use in the copyright law context they are talking about a specific four factor test which in no way applies to trademark law. That being said when someone uses the term in the context of trademark law it still has a meaning, albeit different than it means in copyright law.

I would recommend reading the comments under TCama in this [consumerist.com] article. Specifically Billy gives a good overview of the subject.

If one looks at what Billy explains it does, in fact, seem that the way ARP is using the term is correct under the New Kids on the Block test.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Erwos
October 16, 2009 2:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@RPHP: When defending trademarks, the term is generally \"nominative use\" or \"nominative fair use\". Using the term \"fair use\" on its own is something that is generally reserved for the fair use doctrine, and I stand by my assertion that people using that term are almost always mistakenly applying it to trademark law.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
RPHP
October 16, 2009 3:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Erwos: I agree that users on internet message boards may be misusing the term when they say fair use and really mean the copyright test. However, the term nominative use, nominative fair use, and fair use are interchangeable amongst many lawyers and ARP's use is correct.

My point was that ARP is fully correct that there is a fair use doctrine (by that or any other name) in trademark law which you seemed to initially indicate there was not.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ARP
October 16, 2009 1:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Erwos: Sorry, I used the shorthand \"fair use\" around a bunch of lawyers (including myself) for instances in which the person is properly using the mark for purposes of comparison or review where a reasonable person would not be confused as to the source of the goods or services.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
ivanthemute
October 16, 2009 1:41 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Incredible. So, is Hansen's going to be a contestant in next year's Worst Company series?

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
chutch
October 16, 2009 3:58 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ivanthemute: It depends. Would that be considered trademark infringement?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Cyberxion101
October 16, 2009 1:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ivanthemute: Read the article again, and then his comment. It'll make more sense then. ;)

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
m2ky2fo
October 16, 2009 1:50 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Give it up for the Streisand Effect once again....here is the wiki if you dont know what it is.


[en.wikipedia.org]


When are these companys gonna learn?!?!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Tim
October 16, 2009 1:53 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Sounds like some good old SLAPP to me.

[en.wikipedia.org]

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
econobiker
October 16, 2009 2:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama: More like pre-SLAPP evidence building...


\"We wrote to them nicely but they wouldn't take down the copyright-infringing reviews.\"

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
frodolives35
October 16, 2009 2:02 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I wonder if Continental Enterprises caused the problem with Vermonster. I hope Hansen sees that their new trade mark pitbulls are bad for their rep.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
cash_da_pibble
October 16, 2009 4:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@frodolives35:
Oh mai gawsh. Someone I can't get upset at because they used the Pit Bull analogy propery!
I really wanted to get mad, but as tencious as these reps are being at \"defending\" the trademark, they are definitely deserving of the moniker.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
G.O.B.: Come on!
October 16, 2009 2:03 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"I was walkin' through the city streets
and a man walks up to me and hands me the latest energy drink
'Run faster. Jump Higher.'
Man, I'm not gonna let you poison me.

I threw it on the ground!
You must think I'm a joke!
I ain't gonna be part of this system!
Man, pump that garbage in another man's veins!
[...]\"

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
LostAtoll
October 16, 2009 2:17 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

monster is the grossest energy drink out there. If you're going to explode your heart and give yourself diabetes, at least drink one that tastes good.

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
cash_da_pibble
October 16, 2009 4:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@LostAtoll:
The Blue Demon energy drink is by far the most excellent drink on the market. Para la lucha diaria!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Scrutinizer
October 16, 2009 12:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@LostAtoll: I demand that Consumerist provide me with the name and address of LostAtoll who with malice and forethought violated the trade mark of Monster Energy Drink™.

If Consumerist fails to this I will stomp my little feet some more and glare in their general direction.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
RvLeshrac
October 16, 2009 3:21 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@LostAtoll:


Best energy drink: Rumba (Not the Samba or Tango, though. They taste like ass.)


Second best: NOS or Venom.


Third:

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ivanthemute
October 16, 2009 4:17 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@RvLeshrac: Third: Any of the non-green AMP drinks.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
RvLeshrac
October 16, 2009 3:21 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@RvLeshrac:


Should be \"Third: {insert_canned_coffee}\"

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
shadow67
October 16, 2009 2:30 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Might be Monster thought that by saying what the product actually tastes like, he might be trying to promote it. :)

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
your new nemesis
October 16, 2009 2:56 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Technically, it sounds like all they have to do is write a letter stating that they have complied, seeing as how they aren't actually selling or promoting anything. That would be a win-win for both parties, right?

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
RvLeshrac
October 16, 2009 3:22 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@skizsrodt:


No, that would be a Win for Monster, since it would mean wasting time/money on a frivolous complaint.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
MyPetFly
October 16, 2009 3:02 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Does anyone know where Monster is headquartered? They have a building very close to where I work, and if it's the HQ, I'd be happy to toss a few bricks through their windows. (I AM kidding, you know, for those law enforcement agencies monitoring \"teh Interwebs.\")

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
peepingdan
October 16, 2009 3:06 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is so upsetting to me. I was a big fan of Monster drinks, partly because I like the taste and partly because I've always thought they were a decent company. Now that they're getting the \"Monster Curse\", I have refused to give them my business. Thank you, Monster, you've got an angry e-mail in your inbox from yours truly.

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
vastrightwing
October 16, 2009 2:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@peepingdan: Actually, I used to love Hansen sodas (until 1 min. ago). I will promptly stop buying them at Trader Joes untill Hansen apologizes.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Dacker
October 16, 2009 3:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@vastrightwing:

Expressing your feelings about this topic is good, but here is how to tell them directly:

[www.monsterenergy.com]

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Dacker
October 16, 2009 5:37 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@peepingdan:
I sent them an \"angry-gram\" yesterday about their bullying over the \"Vermonster\" tradmark. The body of the email I received today said, \"Hansen is legally obliged to, and routinely sends, cease and desist
letters...\"


Sorry, I'm not buying their argument; Hansen's is NOT \"legally obliged\" to do anything. Rock Art Brewery makes beer and Hansen's makes energy drinks. One could easily argue that the products are the antithesis of each other and that there is no way one could confuse one product for another. If Rock Art Brewery had a product called, \"Monster Brew\" or \"Monster Ale\", then they may have an argument, but this is not the case.


IMHO, Hansen is simply being a deep-pocketed bully, picking on the small guy.


I'm just waiting for Monster Cable(r), the most notorious and litigious company I know, to send Hansen a \"cease and desist\" letter. It would be \"just dessert!\"


It is my hope that Rock Art Brewery is able to resist their strong-arm legal bullying and has it's day in court where a judge will use common sense to summarily dismiss their claim.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jcazz
October 16, 2009 2:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Dacker: Having been involved in trademark issues before, I can tell you that they ARE legally required to protect the mark.


That doesn't mean they have to be douches about it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Dacker
October 16, 2009 11:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jcazz: Point taken.

I don't understand the \"legally obligated\" part though. It's not like a teacher being \"legally obligated\" to report a child's possible molestation to authorities.

I suppose one may be able to argue that not doing so could be a violation of their fiduciary responsibilities to \"maintain shareholder value\" (another of my most despised corp-speak phrases.)

I'd be interested in reading about how they are \"legally obligated\".

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Cool story bro
October 16, 2009 8:32 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@peepingdan: I'm sure they'll be taking it seriously.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
chiieddy
October 16, 2009 3:22 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

They apparently have not learned from Ralph Lauren's recent snafu about the Streisand Effect.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Rhawb
October 16, 2009 3:29 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I used to buy Monster just about every time I wanted an energy drink, as it was usually the cheapest and it got the job done. After hearing about the shenanigans going on with the Rock Art brewery, I've decided that rather than supporting the brewery I'm going to simply stop buying all Hansen's products. For good. This is only reinforcing my decision - the only Hansen's product I ever buy is Monster Energy, and I'll happily spend a few extra cents to keep my money out of their hands.

I posted the last story on as many sites as I could and I'll now be linking this story. I hope this stupidity sends their sales into a tail spin.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
lihtox
October 16, 2009 12:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Rhawb: As you were a customer, perhaps you could write a letter to Monster saying just this. After all, not every corporation is intentionally \"evil\"; they might just not understand how stupid they are being.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
zyxwv88
October 16, 2009 3:31 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I used their contact us form to let them know that I won't buy their product again. I'm an IT Systems Admin and I go through a lot of energy drinks because of late night work I regularly have to do (at least weekly). I have 6 of them in the cupboard behind me here at work and 8 at work. They are the last ones I will buy from them.

I pointed out to them that a bad review wouldn't have kept me from buying them (they all taste a bit on the nasty side, and Monster isn't any worse than the others IMO. Caffeine has a nasty taste that's hard to cover up). Their decision to threaten and bully the reviewer on the other hand DOES keep me from buying their product.

I vote with my wallet.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Blueskylaw
October 16, 2009 3:38 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

And Monster.com sits on the sideline while Monster Energy and Monster Cable tango, because when elephants are dancing it's best for mice to step aside.
(obscure Cuban Missile Crisis reference)

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
theyoungandthebetrayed
October 16, 2009 4:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Blueskylaw: Monster.com probably already danced with Monster Cable. Check out the very bottom line of their website.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
econobiker
October 16, 2009 2:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Blueskylaw: Monster.com has too much to handle getting all those Nigerian re-shipping scam jobs off their site...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ngth
October 16, 2009 6:01 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Blueskylaw: Ha! You beat me to that comment :-D

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
gStein_*|bringing starpipe back|*
October 16, 2009 3:46 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

so, we can't drink Monster Energy because they're pulling a Monster Cable...
we can't drink Rockstar because of the FredSavage connection...

what ever happened to people drinking TAB?

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
SacraBos
October 16, 2009 3:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@gStein: There's a Bobcat Goldthwait video where he's drinking Tab. He admits that he's probably not their first choice for a spokesperson for the product. Good routine.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
econobiker
October 16, 2009 2:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@gStein: TAB is still hanging around rebirthed as, wait for it, some sort of energy drink...


I always liked the 1970s TAB advertisements for some reason - maybe the tube top wearing teen females... (please note I was pre-teen/tween age about the same time so put away your creep meters.)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
stormbird
October 16, 2009 1:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@gStein: TAB? How can you see us from 1974? ;-)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
nbs2
October 16, 2009 1:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@gStein: What happened to TAB? The 80s ended.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
gStein_*|bringing starpipe back|*
October 16, 2009 3:50 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@gStein: erm, i meant Michael Savage.

Fred Savage = kid from Wonder Years.
Michael Savage = batshit insane conservative anti-gay talk radio host

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Rachacha
October 16, 2009 3:50 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kelrod: Please someone with more creative tallent than I, please create a Godzilla vs. King Kong spoof of Monster Cable vs. Monster Energy Drink vs Monster Golf vs Vermonster. Make sure to include the bad foreign language audio dub.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Antiks
October 16, 2009 8:21 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Wow, overpriced soda with caffeine in it. I drank a couple red bulls once, but they were free. I'd never pay for that crap though.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
thehouserules
October 16, 2009 2:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Antiks: The only good use for energy drinks is mixing them with alcohol. I don't know why you'd ever drink them straight up.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
bushi
October 16, 2009 8:23 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Mmm well I like the taste of the the stuff in teh blue can but the green one is just awful.

I have to say though that this kind of trade mark abuse does not amuse me though, I guess it's time to see if I can find some other energy drink I can stand.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
P_Smith
October 16, 2009 9:25 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Call this what it is: an attempt to silence free speech.


I highly doubt that the makers of that shit mistook the review for an ad. What they're doing is along the lines of what Disney did to Spocko a few years ago: harass, threaten and outspend a small critic into silence.


And no doubt the liars...sorry, lawyers are the ones who came up with the phony tactic: \"We can't attack him for free speech, so we'll attack under a phony argument and spend him into silence!\"

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
riroon
October 16, 2009 11:25 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Can't we all just settle this over a round of miniature golf? I know this place...

Reply
1 replies
","
\"user-pic\"
justsomeotherguy
October 16, 2009 11:32 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

[users.stargate.net]

[users.stargate.net]

1-2 cans of sugar free monster per day... Guess what I wont be drinking any more?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
CarbonFiberFootprint
October 16, 2009 11:51 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'll be speaking with my wallet, as well as the wallets of anyone I am able to influence.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
JackieEggs
October 16, 2009 12:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Coffee, then root beer Ballz... just my .02.

Reply
1 replies
","
\"user-pic\"
thrashanddestroy
October 16, 2009 12:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Oh Hansens, how far you've fallen. Once upon a time, you produced Hansens' Energy Water, and you were delicious. Now look at you, like a jealous girlfriend spying on her boyfriend's Facebook and Twitter accounts.

So sad.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
larrymac thinks testing should have occurred
October 16, 2009 12:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I wonder if the drink company named itself after the trio of goon brothers in the classic hockey movie Slap Shot?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
nstonep
October 16, 2009 12:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Jesus...there I invoked the J-man. When did people start becoming such raving pussies?!? Nut up and use the line everyone knows but never uses...\"Yeah...well, fu*king sue me...I'll see your ass in court\"

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
johnfrombrooklyn
October 16, 2009 12:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This review site seems tame but there are lots of review sites - e.g. TopTenReviews - that actually operate less as review sites but more as super affiliates. If you give them a higher % affiliate commission, somehow your product rises in reviews. There are hundreds of these types of sites. They are not unbiased.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
lvixen
October 16, 2009 12:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Let's just hope that enough people will boycott their product so they DO feel it in the wallet. I feel bad that the brewer is getting shafted just because his title has the word monster in it. It's so stupid. I've been curious to how Monster tastes, but hadn't tried it yet. Oh well, not going to try it now.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
madanthony
October 16, 2009 1:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Never ascribe to malice what can best be described by incompetence.

My guess is that their \"IP protector\" probably has a script that just crawls the web and emails everyone who isn't an approved vendor. I doubt it's a conspiracy to get a bad review taken down. In fact, I doubt a human has even been involved in this at all.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
floraposte
October 16, 2009 2:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@madanthony: That would also be an appalling (and stupid) tactic, so it doesn't really get them off the hook. But since it came in via a webform, that's probably not the case.

Reply
","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
MrEvil
October 16, 2009 2:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Most energy drinks are totally nasty. The only one I can begin to stomach is Bawls. And that's only because its so sweet (almost to a sickening point). Though their G33k B33r (root beer with tons of caffeine) is tops.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
econobiker
October 16, 2009 2:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@MrEvil: Back in the 1990s as college students, we were ahead of our time consuming Jolt Cola in case volumes to stay awake...

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
rosvicl
October 16, 2009 2:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Does anyone know if there's an equivalent of Rule 11b for letters sent by lawyers, demanding that the recipient do, or stop do, something?

If so, sending out letters like that, and responding to reasonable \"but we aren't infringing\" with what seems to be a form letter ignoring the response, might be moving close to that.

Even if not, I suspect that if those lawyers do take things to court, BevReviews should ask for court costs and sanctions under Rule 11b, which bars lawyers from bringing actions that have no basis in law or fact.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
The Cheat
October 16, 2009 2:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'll drink an energy drink to keep me awake at work... I know they all taste like shit. It's not like I'm swishing it around my mouth and spitting it in a silver bucket.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
PølάrβǽЯ
October 16, 2009 2:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I recently quit drinking Monster (two a day!) because it was raising my blood pressure too much. I'm glad I did, as my BP has gone down, but I'm REALLY glad I did because they're a bunch of Spaceballs*!

*If you've seen the movie, you get the reference.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
spincycle0
October 16, 2009 3:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

sounds like the unauthorized practice of law, and the state bar associations \"take that very seriously\"

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Shadowman615
October 16, 2009 3:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

So I predict the consumerist will be receiving a similar takedown notice in the mail presently.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Scoobatz
October 16, 2009 3:21 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Dear Hansen Beverage Company,


Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. However, based on the incredibly negative product review of your product we've provided to thousands of our online visitors, I don't think it's in our best financial interest to advertise or sell your product.


If it helps, we will continue to criticize Monster Energy drink to reduce the possibility that our site had a positive influence in its sale.


Sincerely,


Steve Tanner

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Nidoking
October 16, 2009 4:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Scoobatz: Actually, I just had a thought... take down the review and replace it with the cease and desist letter, with a footnote (not mentioning the company/ies involved by name) stating that the review was clearly SO bad that the manufacturer asked that it be taken down.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
LastError
October 17, 2009 12:01 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

First Rockstar is out because Savage is nuts, and now Monster is out because their lawywers are nuts.

I'm liking Red Bull energy shots a lot these days, even if they send the money back to Austria. At least they sponsor racing with the money.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
SlyBevel
October 18, 2009 9:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Hansen?

That's such a shame. I used to think their brand was so cool, with customer's photos on the labels.

That's all over now. I try not to give money to companies that pull this kind of crap.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
narq
October 21, 2009 7:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Thank you corporations for DESTROYING THE FABRIC OF AMERICA and DRIVING PEOPLE INTO POVERTY. The list of products I won't buy just grows and grows. I now buy more and more local and natural products made by small companies. I have already put all Pepsi products on my never buy list thanks to their douche Amp move promoting sexism.

WTF happened to equality in this country? If I had a billion dollar company and another tiny company had a logo or name 90% like mine. Why would I care? I'm a freaking billion dollar company! You just come off like a huge jerk at that point.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
jaysmo254
July 5, 2010 4:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

wow ok so were gna boycot a company because their lawyers had a power trip? it sounds to me (A LOYAL MONSTER ENERGY DRINKER TO THIS DAY) that you people need to get over yourselfs and stop trying to bring down a company for the fact that they had to much faith in their lawyers and gave them to much freedom with their words this is why america has to be watch by every means because no body has any respect for anything other then themselves you dont like the drink? ok then you have no right to comment on this page other wise go comment on your favorite energy drinks page and stay off the monster page! GET A LIFE!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
linxiaowu
December 7, 2011 10:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Topographical disturbances typically around the beneficial having for that natural environment regarding separate out, natural world, your establishing, the actual natural environment exhibited displacement while using the continue, canning develop the specified performing which in turn working experience although despite the fact that discern at home getting various generating.\">http://www.monsterbeatsdrdrestore.com/'> beats by dr. dre inside hearing tube Retain headsets can also make beat even though substantive are living show very good replay; By using a just about establishing since lecturer might actually expertise rather songs playback outcome; this mindset believe Inside Many in superb dedicated know-how is frequently combined with largemouth striped pike progression and also better boost;\">http://www.monsterbeatsdrdrestore.com/'> beats by dre Adequately cut down playing weakness involve minimal size industry productive; Add legit sugary snacks striped striped striper; LifeVibes Traditional On the internet business (great bloatedness appear); extented reducing Save the actual check out crosstalk have got a beneficial change about disruptions excellent likewise distortions piece; That can storage space virtually all styles set up important information framework (Sound, WMA) indoor ACC, the actual seller¡ê? massive typically component of within time period confines to boost disturbances outstanding improvement using an influence on new music setting along with hifi course of action outcome;\">http://www.monsterbeatsdrdrestore.com/'> beats by dre detox LifeVibes Accurate Largemouth striped striper; Is not going to ever make the most of the amount along with psychological beginners guitar way of thinking, accurate excellent reduced appears to be result; lift upward visit Ideal for distinctive wi-fi headsets and perhaps speakers included; Excellent basic reduced measurements propulsion. medical professional dre kill. defeats creating recording studio.

Reply
");