Ammo For Sale

« « Syria’s Business | Home | Gun Porn » » would like me to know that not using the term “t-shirt gatling gun” and instead using the term “Gatling Gun T Shirt Launcher” is still grounds to sue me

This will be funny later. But, a bit back, I did this post in which I linked this video:

And used the phrase “Gatling Gun T Shirt Launcher”. Apparently, this is similar enough to their trademarked term “t-shirt gatling gun” that I should take that post down. Even though their resident genius actually referenced the site and not my site in his email. Attention to detail is his middle name. And that the video is for, what I presume, is a competitor of theirs products. I mean it may be their site but I doubt it.

So, wants to sue me (here‘s their facebook page) for not using their trademarked term on a site that I don’t own. And their trademark was filed over a year after a video on youtube appeared of their competitor’s product.

So, the resident genius is either threatening to sue me because his competitors google-fu is better than his. Or he’s suing me for promoting his product. I’m not sure. And I didn’t even use their trademarked term.

Either way, it’s stupid.

On a personal note, when getting threatened with being sued, I like to start my emails with “Well, giddy up”. Which is also, apparently, trademarked my

You’d think people would learn it’s not a good idea to sue bloggers. I’ll make you famous on the internet!

Update: It occurs to me that my have trademarked Oh, bother. I’m really in trouble now.

Update 2: Actual email exchange here.

Update: The nice people from ExcitingEvents have responded to me:

Today, I received a response from Dan at He was courteous and professional. He also apologized for his employees behavior; said his employee was overzealous; and took responsibility for not reviewing the emails before they were sent out.

Also, he sent me links to their actual shirt gun in use (its not the one in the video) and, let me tell you, its pretty awesome. Ill show it to you once he gives the OK.

Seriously, nice guy. I commend them for reaching out to me.

Thanks, Dan!

35 Responses to “ would like me to know that not using the term “t-shirt gatling gun” and instead using the term “Gatling Gun T Shirt Launcher” is still grounds to sue me”

  1. Scott Says:

    If you want to have some fun you might reach out to Ken at He and his buddies, lawyers all, have made a sport out of declawing overzealous attorneys trying to be all attorney-like.

  2. Samuel Suggs Says:

    I’ll git’ em’ for you Unc’

  3. SPQR Says:

    You need some advice on this frivolous letter, keep me an email.

  4. DocMerlin Says:

    Dude, they are probably just trying to up their pagerank by getting bloggers to mention them?

  5. Rivrdog Says:

    +1 DocMerlin. Also, if they have time for malarkey like this, they probably haven’t the business smarts that God gave a goose, and it’s likely that sales of their crew-served t-shirt machine are lagging the market for the devices.

  6. JD(not the one with the picture) Says:

    Have they trademarked “”?

  7. Cargosquid Says:

    I’m not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV, but THIS looks like they have failed to support their trademark:
    Status Date:

    So, not only are they bugging you in an incompetent manner, they are doing so over what appears to be a non-existent mark.

  8. nk Says:

    I think a t-shirt gatling gun would be a fun idea. I am going to design my own t-shirt gatling gun. Should I build a prototype of my t-shirt gatling gun to demonstrate that it is better than other t-shirt gatling guns? I am sure that there are any number of t-shirt gatling gun designs available for potential manufacturers of t-shirt gatling guns to choose from. And I will need a brand name fo my t-shirt gatling gun to distinguish it from other t-shirt gatling guns. Is ACKME brand t-shirt gatling gun catchy enough you think?

  9. nk Says:

    I also have a neat idea for buoyancy operated aquatic transport or travel over the water device. I was thinking of using the initials for the brand name. What do you think? B.O.A.T. or T.O.W.D.?

  10. Roberta X Says:

    Just as long as it’s not a Travel While Airlaunching T-shirts device; I’m petty sure has that semi-trademarked.

  11. Chris Says:

    They have a trade mark on the phrase “you can fuck right off with a sideways Gatling gun t-shirt launcher”?

  12. countertop Says:

    It sure would be an exciting event shooting a tshirt Gatling Gun
    Or even wearing a t-shirt shooting a Gatling Gun

  13. Sebastian Says:

    Is it just me, or are douchnozzles on the Internet getting a lot more assertive in their douchnozzlry these days?

  14. SPQR Says:

    Its not you Sebastien.

  15. SPQR Says:

    Cargosquid I would guess that the application for registration was abandoned in response to USPTO office action asserting it wasn’t protectable as descriptive.

  16. comatus Says:

    Yep, I’d get ’em down and not let ’em up until they say…oops, they can’t say that. You’ve got it trademarked.

  17. Sebastian Says:

    If this gets serious, as in you get an actual legal notice, contacting Popehat would be the next thing I’d do. I’d ignore any e-mail threat to sue. Any jackass can come up with that.

  18. y0te Says:

    Please sic Popehat on them!

  19. htom Says:

    Ken at Popehat might have fun with this one. I suspect one of Ken’s problems is that there are too many such idiots needing his attention.

  20. chris Says:

    Consider the irony of a company named Exciting Events slinging shirts at an indoor football league game.

    Indoor football reminds me of playing Smear the Queer during recess 50 years ago.

    Like bouncing a beachball around the crowd, shooting tee-shirts jumped the shark years ago.

    Not it’s an annoyance – like the wave.

  21. Obamao Says:

    Now, if the T-Shirt was just wadding for a free kitten, that would be something.

  22. SayUncle Says:

    If it gets to the point where I actually hear from lawyers, I may activate the popehat signal for the lulz. But my local guy seems pretty competent and confident.

  23. Monk Says:

    Ask them if this is their product

    If it is, tell them you won’t release this if they withdraw their suit.

  24. Jailer Says:

    @Obamao LOL, a paper patched kitten

  25. SPQR Says:

    SayUncle, if you have local counsel, great. This clown’s letter is utterly frivolous, the alleged mark is completely descriptive and unprotectable, if not actually generic.

  26. SayUncle Says:

    SPQR, thanks! I was about to shoot you an email too.

  27. CptNerd Says:

    “Kitten Wadding.” Just don’t tamp them down too hard, they get jammed.

  28. tim maguire Says:

    Among the many, many problems here, they have obviously confused trademark law with copyright law.

    Trademark is solely about items in commerce. To violate their (descriptive, and therefore weak at best) trademark, you would have to sell something with a confusingly similar name.

    Are you selling a T-Shirt Gatling Gun? No? Then you are not violating their trademark. Period.

  29. tim maguire Says:

    Never mind, he’s not complaining about trademark, but about copyright. I still can’t imagine what his legal argument might be (they do not, in fact, have copyright over the name of their product), but in the emails he uses the right term.

  30. Darwin Akbar Says:

    The reason that the trademark application was refused is that the term T-SHIRT GATLIN GUN is not sufficiently distinctive so as to be an indicator of source or origin of a product or service. The term GATLIN GUN is generic and the term T-SHIRT is descriptive. Consequently, there is nothing that can be considered proprietary. Whoever wrote that cease and desist letter/e-mail is counting on the recipient not knowing anything about trademarks. There is no copyright issue involved in the use of a trademark/brand name, although there might be a copyright issue involved in connection with the YouTube video.

  31. JorgXMckie Says:

    The next appropriate email to him would be popehat’s “Snort my taint.”

  32. JKB Says:

    Gatling gun \Gat”ling gun`\ [From the inventor, R.J. Gatling.]
    An American machine gun, consisting of a cluster of barrels
    which, being revolved by a crank, are automatically loaded
    and fired.
    [1913 Webster]

    So they think they have a trademark on a phrase so common it was in the dictionary in 1913.

  33. Charlie Says:

    #Clueless. 🙂

  34. Ursus Maritimus Says:

    An volley gun is an volley gun regardless of how the barrels are stacked: in a circle or in a square. For it to be a GATLING it has to AUTOMATICALLY LOAD fresh cartridges, or t-shirts as the case(shot) may be.

    No automatic load – not a gatling.

  35. 1911Man Says:

    If Tam doesn’t award today’s copy of the internets to Obamao, there is no justice in the world. “Wadding for a free kitten” is about the funniest damn thing I’ve ever read.

    Perhaps the plaintiff might apply for a trademark on “7-shirt Gatling Gun – for crowds of people with only one arm”.