Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Mead Lovers Digest #0885
Subject: Mead Lover's Digest #885, 26 November 2001
From: mead-request@talisman.com
Mead Lover's Digest #885 26 November 2001
Forum for Discussion of Mead Making and Consuming
Dick Dunn, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Underground Restaurants. (Mark Ottenberg)
Letter to Rocky Mtn Meadery (Mark Ottenberg)
Re: Mead Lover's Digest #882, 14 November 2001 (Phil)
Rocky Mountain Meadery (Calvin Armerding)
Rocky Mountain Meadery (Calvin Armerding)
Safe to bottle? ("Geoffrey T. Falk")
Re: Mead Lover's Digest #884, 21 November 2001 ("Michael Yacht")
Re: bad precedent for commercial meaderies (Dan McFeeley)
Hello.. new to the list (Tom Murphy)
NOTE: Digest appears when there is enough material to send one.
Send ONLY articles for the digest to mead@talisman.com.
Use mead-request@talisman.com for [un]subscribe/admin requests.
Digest archives and FAQ are available at www.talisman.com/mead. There is
a searchable MLD archive at hubris.engin.umich.edu/Beer/Threads/Mead
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Underground Restaurants.
From: Mark Ottenberg <mark@riverrock.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 22:44:03 -0600
>Subject: Re: Mead Lover's Digest #883, 17 November 2001: Starting a meadary
>From: butcher <butcher@drizzle.com>
>Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 20:49:34 -0800
>
>There are many
>institutions in this country operating very legally, called
>Underground Restaurants. Don't bother doing a google search on them
>:) They work through word of mouth (often referred to others by
>existing customers, or local waiters tipped off). There is no
>required fee for the meal, but donations are accepted. Mead is even
>served, tho it may be brought by the customers.
Anyone know of any in the Colorado / Wyoming area???
------------------------------
Subject: Letter to Rocky Mtn Meadery
From: Mark Ottenberg <mark@riverrock.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 23:42:25 -0600
Hi folks:
Dick's report about the cease and desist order to Redstone Meadery has
really gotten me steamed up. I and my acquaintances will be boycotting RMM
products until 3 months after they stop and apologize.
I have sent a letter to Fred and Connie Strothman (owners of RMM) stating
this and would appreciate your doing similar actions. I have posted a copy
of the letter I used at <http://www.nhpress.com/public/rmm.doc> Please
feel free to send a similar letter, but please do not resend the same
letter. The letter has both their address and phone number included.
"I find meadmakers to be an extremely honorable people. I hope that Rocky
Mountain Meadery is honorable as well."
Namaste:
Mark Ottenberg
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Mead Lover's Digest #882, 14 November 2001
From: Phil <dogglebe@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 04:46:12 -0800 (PST)
> P.S. has anyone made a maple-honey mead? I've got a
> batch (small) going at
> the moment as a bit of an experiment, and would like
> to know if anyone else
> has tried such a thing, and what the results were.
I have two batches of maple-flavored mead in carboys
right now. The first one (a six gallon batch)
consists of 10 pounds of wildflower honey and 1 gallon
of dark amber maple syrup (added to secondary). I was
surprised that it cleared up completely after only two
months. I've taken a taste of it and it's very crisp
and well; it's fairly balanced with the maple
dominating the batch. Unfortunately, I made this for
a friend's wedding next year so I really can't too
much of it.
The second batch is a fifteen gallon one, which I've
mentioned earlier in the MLD. For this, I used 36
pounds of tupelo honey, nutrient, acid and topped it
off to 13 gallons. I added 1.5 gallons of surup into
secondary. In both batches, I used Lalvin K-1116
yeast.
When I rack this batch to tertiary, I'll be adding an
additional half gallon of maple syrup (there's no room
in the demijohn now).
Unfortunately, this larger batch is not clearing like
the earlier one.
Phil
=====
visit the New York City Homebrewers Guild website:
http://www.pipeline.com/~dogglebe/nychg.html
------------------------------
Subject: Rocky Mountain Meadery
From: Calvin Armerding <cutter64@cio.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 08:11:40 -0800
Rocky Mountain Meadery can be reached at:
3701 G Road
Palisade,CO 81526.
I recommend keeping your comments polite and respectful. Ask them why they
would be hurting the mead industry in this way, and why they feel that they
have the right to trademark a common noun, against all legal
precedent. Might be worth sending a copy to the Colorado governor at:
136 State Capitol
Denver, CO 80203
Ask him why this is being allowed, and ask him to forward your request for
information to the appropriate Colorado agency.
"A man's country is not a certain area of land, of mountains, rivers and
woods, but it is a principle; and patriotism is loyalty to that
principle." --General William Curtis
John Calvin Armerding - cutter64@cio.net
------------------------------
Subject: Rocky Mountain Meadery
From: Calvin Armerding <cutter64@cio.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 08:37:18 -0800
Here is the letter that I sent to them.
Fred and Connie Strothman
Rocky Mountain Meadery
3701 G Road
Palisade, CO 81526
Dear Mr. And Mrs. Strothman,
I am writing to you concerning your trademark of the word "meadery" and
your subsequent notification to other meaderies to prevent them from using
the word in their name. I don't understand why you would be taking this
action.
First of all, you must know that the word "meadery" is a common noun, and
as such, not available for trademark, any more than the word "winery" would
be. Although someone in the Colorado government showed a level of
ignorance in allowing the trademark, I would expect that you would know
better and refrain from accepting the trademark designation.
Secondly, why would you wish to hurt an industry as small as yours by
initiating a litigious atmosphere? Having a second meadery in Colorado can
only help your business by increasing the number of customers who are
searching for quality commercial meads. Making it more difficult for them
to operate not only reduces the spread of mead drinking in your state, but
it also engenders a negative atmosphere in a business that until recently
has been limited primarily to home-brewers. I think that your contentious
attitude towards fellow mead drinkers will only hurt your business in the
long run, as well as hurting the mead-drinking world in general.
I call on you to drop any pursuit of the legal issues concerning the word
"meadery", to renounce your trademark on the word, and to help us expand
the popularity of mead in general by joining us in promoting a sense of
community among mead drinkers. I would refer you to the Mead Lovers
Digest, available on-line, and to rec.crafts.meadmaking, a newsgroup
devoted to mead lovers.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I hope to see you at one of
the above communities, participating in the goals that we all share for mead.
Sincerely,
Calvin Armerding
Mead brewer and drinker
And here is the letter to Governor Owens.
Governor Bill Owens
136 State Capitol
Denver, CO 80203
Dear Governor Owens,
I am writing to you from out of state concerning the actions of one of your
agencies. Apparently, a Colorado State agency saw fit to grant a trademark
to Rocky Mountain Meadery on the word "meadery". Obviously the individual
responsible for this trademark was not aware that the word meadery is a
common noun designating a place where mead, a wine fermented from honey
instead of grapes, is made. I am assuming that your agencies would not
grant a trademark on the words "winery" or "brewery", but these are
functionally identical in meaning, only differing in the product being
fermented.
I would appreciate it if you would have this matter reviewed and corrected
as quickly as possible as it is causing legal difficulties for businesses
attempting to operate as meaderies within the State of Colorado.
Sincerely,
Calvin Armerding
Mead brewer and drinker
"A man's country is not a certain area of land, of mountains, rivers and
woods, but it is a principle; and patriotism is loyalty to that
principle." --General William Curtis
John Calvin Armerding - cutter64@cio.net
- -----PGP PUBLIC KEY ----- Available from keyserver pgpkeys.mit.edu -----
------------------------------
Subject: Safe to bottle?
From: "Geoffrey T. Falk" <gtf@cirp.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 13:50:55 -0700 (MST)
I have a traditional mead that started on June 9. My plan was to aim for
a sparkling mead with just a hint of sweetness (dry but not bone-dry).
This mead started at SG 1.068. When it reached 1.006, the yeast pooped
out. It was still too sweet for my taste, so I repitched with some more
Lalvin D-47, which went along for a while. Now it has gotten down below
1.000 and has cleared. There is just a hint of sweetness left, which is
what I want.
The problem is, it appears that the yeast in the lees is still active.
It is bubbling noticeably. The sweetness is greater than a test mixture
of 341ml water + 1/2 tsp sugar (recommended amount for proper
carbonation), which makes me worry about exploding bottles.
My question: Is it safe to bottle it now? Will I get some bottle
carbonation from the residual sugar, or end up with glass grenades?
On the other hand, when I rack it for bottling, won't all the active
yeast be left behind?
Thanks
Geoffrey
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Mead Lover's Digest #884, 21 November 2001
From: "Michael Yacht" <yacht@sgi.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 16:24:00 -0500
Re: bad precedent for commercial meaderies
[DISCLAIMER: THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE, I AM NOT A LAWYER.]
I can say this as someone that has gone down the path of trademarks,
patents and copyrights in the software industry. Trademarks are
universal across any business.
You _CANNOT_ trademark a common english word. Whichever government
agency allowed it screwed up. What does this mean? It means the
trademark holder can send you letters and threaten you, but once it goes
to court, they will lose the trademark.
Probably.
Why probably? Because the legal system is not always exact. The
trademark should never have been awarded, but once it is in place, it is
the defendant's responsibility to prove that, not the prosecutor's. The
legal process can bog down indefinately costing both sides a great deal
of money. The best way to handle this would most likely to send a
letter to the trademark holder, informing them that if they continue to
persue this trademark, you will seek a legal injunction against them to
remove the improperly awarded trademark as well as sue for monies
equalling the legal fees involved in legally defending yourself against
them. You can strong arm them as much as they can with you. Maybe
someone will blink. If not, prepare for a legal battle.
- -Michael Yacht
------------------------------
Subject: Re: bad precedent for commercial meaderies
From: Dan McFeeley <mcfeeley@keynet.net>
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 04:38:13 -0600
I guess I'm having a hard time taking this in. According to Dick Dunn, "in
fact "MEADERY" is registered as a trademark in Colorado, to Confre Cellars,
which also operates as Rocky Mountain Meadery." In other words, it's not
the business name "Rocky Mountain Meadery," but the word "Meadery" itself
that is trademarked. This is the kind of thing that makes you do a nonverbal
cognitive doubletake -- "say what?!?" On the face of it all, it certainly
looks like the kind of business stifling moves that got Microsoft a rap
on the knuckles.
For the record, in 1995 when Rocky Mountain Meadery opened its doors, there
were already three establishments in existence using the word "meadery" in
their business name. These were As You Like It Meadery in Fitchburg MA,
The Meadery at Greenwich, Greenwich NY, and Coventree Grove Meadery in
Newark DE. The Meadery at Greenwich received a grant from New York state
in 1988 for $20,000 as a boost towards starting production, seven years
before Rocky Mountain Meadery opened. Although these three meaderies are
no longer in business, other meaderies having the name in their business
title have opened up, such as Heidrun Meadery and Earl Estates Meadery.
And, as Dick Dunn privately reminded me, the late Susanne Price, director
of the former American Mead Association, briefly ran Green Mountain
Meadery in Colorado on or about 1992, although I don't think production
ever went past sale of meadmaking supplies.
Certainly the word "meadery" is a familiar word, a general descriptive no
more significant than "winery" or "brewery." "Meadery" has that same easy
familiarity in the literature of the former American Mead Association from
the very start, 1986, with articles using the word as it's meant to be used;
a simple noun and a noun in the name of a specific business establishment
dedicated to making mead, never as a proper noun that could possibly be
trademarked. Given the recognized use of the word "meadery" in everyday
language and as a general descriptive in the business name of established
facilities prior to 1995, it's hard to see this as anything but a move
intended to cut off competition. I'm not a lawyer but I would guess
that David Myers and Julia Herz have an option of pursuing protective
legal action if they wish.
Unfortunately, everyone loses here. The publicity that could result will
likely hurt the reputation of Rocky Mountain Meadery, a meadery that may
have been one of the first to use the ultra-filtration method developed
by Robert Kime for commercial mead production. Much has been said about
the importance of small business for the economy, yet this issue presents
itself as a cutting off the otherwise legitimate use of the word "meadery"
in order to reduce business competition. The development of commercial
meadmaking is also a needed stimulus for the beekeeping and honey production
industries. At the present, honeybees are being decimated on a global level
by the varroa mite, something little known to the general public. Imagine
if mead were as well known as wine, and as commercially available. The
funding and research drives to solve the varroa mite problem would be
vastly accelerated, and maybe a solution would even be in sight.
I'd be very interested to hear if the Strothman's at Rocky Mountain
Meadery might have any public comment.
<><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><>
Dan McFeeley
mcfeeley@keynet.net
------------------------------
Subject: Hello.. new to the list
From: Tom Murphy <freyason@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 19:50:08 -0800 (PST)
Hello there!
My name's Tom and I've just signed onto the list. I just made my
first batch of mead with a good friend of mine helping me out (who's
been brewing for 10 years.)
I had a couple of questions about the fermentation process. Two days
after pitching, the must was bubbling away like mad with a kind of
weird bubble scum on top. Now, a week later, fermentation seems to have
dropped off to nearly nil. I pushed down on the stopper with the
airlock (because it looked like it had pushed up a little bit) and
suddenly it started bubbling through the airlock.
I hope no air got in through the top. I had e-mailed my friend and he
told me not to worry.. that the fermentation does drop off quickly
after the initial pitch.
I hope the must is OK. The yeast look like they're asleep. There's no
scum on the top, yet it does bubble. I suppose this is normal. It's
just that this is my first time and I hope I don't mess it up!
BTW, the mead in question is a simple, plain dry sack mead. 15 lbs of
honey with 5 gallons of water. I didn't boil the honey, only heated the
water up to about 100 F to make it easier for the honey to mix in with
it. I know a lot of people boil it, but I had read that this can take
away some subtle flavors and notes in the honey, so I decided against
it.
Thanks!
Tom
------------------------------
End of Mead Lover's Digest #885
*******************************
