Hacker News Reader

Comment by mullingitover | Hacker News Reader

> That said more media coverage around this could paint Trader Joe's as a bully and be more damaging to their brand than an unauthorized seller.

It's certainly damaged their brand in my eyes, and it's not painting them as bullies: they're being bullies.

This is a person who's buying a product fairly, taking it to a place where that product doesn't exist, adding a minor markup, and selling it. There's absolutely nothing grey about this practice, it's 100% honest and legal. For Trader Joe's to sue him for doing something that's completely within his rights is beyond loathsome. He's a customer who's buying a huge amount of their products at retail price, they should be sending him thank you letters.

I think I might actually stop shopping at Trader Joes over this, as much as it pains me. It's just utterly repugnant behavior on their part.

View on HN

What makes Trader Joes Trader Joes is that they carefully curate the entire experience and having a loss of control over how they are presented to the customer is a big deal.

What if, one of the buyers transporting food improperly chills some steaks and 15 people come down with food poisoning. Then, you have the media blaring out "OVER A DOZEN PEOPLE SICKENED BY TAINTED MEAT FROM TRADER JOES"?. It doesn't matter that the media report is inaccurate, all of a sudden, you have people associating Trader Joes with unsafe food handling practices and the PR damage from one incident alone is more than any possible profit they derive from this tiny store.

So, while I understand how the practice is entirely legal, I can also see how it's a nightmare from Trader Joes perspective and how they'd rather it all go away.

Trader Joe's has had quite a few food recalls lately.

The meat example is a good reason, but it doesn't apply in this case.

> "Pretty much anything I can buy in the U.S., I can legally import into Canada. There are permits required for meat, seafood and dairy. We stick to vegetarian packaged nonperishable items."

> "I would prefer Trader Joe's accept my long-standing offer to follow guidance on how they would like me to operate," Hallatt says in an email."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/30/217210915/bag...

It's really difficult to change the quality of unopened, non-expired, pre-packaged food. The more I read about this, the less reasonable the company behind Trader Joe's seems. Even companies like Apple allow other channels to sell their products.

> Even companies like Apple allow other channels to sell their products.

Not really. Well, Only channels that Apple allows will are allowed to resell their products. Apple does not take too kindly to the 'gray market' products and unauthorised resellers.

Here in the UAE there are a tonne of unauthorised resellers. Mostly importing products as they are cheaper and don't come with local restrictions (FaceTime is blocked on iPhones bought in most of the Middle East). Apple has authorised resellers, an online presence, and next year are opening a retail store, so you'd think they would try and do something about it...

> Well, Only channels that Apple allows will are allowed to resell their products.

That's not true. There's a huge grey market for Apple products. Just look at Ebay. When you go international it's much bigger.

> Apple does not take too kindly to the 'gray market' products and unauthorised resellers.

They may not be happy about it but they don't sue anyone over it as long as the sellers aren't trying to pass counterfeit merchandise as Apple products, or fake Apple stores as official Apple stores.

> What makes Trader Joes Trader Joes is that they carefully curate the entire experience and having a loss of control over how they are presented to the customer is a big deal.

Ha! Every Trader Joe's I've ever shopped at has actually been a pretty miserable shopping experience. I keep going back because their stuff is so good, but it's not a carefully curated experience, unless the curators are sadistic. They're ruthlessly efficient, and have sales per square foot figures that are the envy of the grocery industry.

their food is just a more "Kraft food" version of hippie food you find in regular "organic" markets.

basically pump oils and sugar. instant tasty,

"If it tastes good, spit it out" may be an exaggeration, but there's a lot of truth to it...

I don't think there's any truth in it. We developed taste buds to guide us to what we should eat and what we should avoid. That evolution has been usurped by food science.

On the other hand, "if it has an ingredient list, it's not food" is much closer to a truism. It's obviously an exaggeration as well; nonetheless, I tred cautiously with ingredient lists.

And now the situation we use our taste buds in is so different from the situation they were trained in that our taste buds are behind the biggest health issue in the world after aging.

I have yet to find a hippie market that has their selection of beer, wine, and spirits (TJs started out as a wine shop).

>loss of control over how they are presented to the customer is a big deal.

As there people presumably wouldn't be customers of Trader Joe's products without this store, I'm still not sure I understand the issue.

I'm sure plenty of businesses would rather it all go away when it comes to things they can't control. But this guy isn't breaking any laws, and filling in an economic desire. Tough luck for Trader Joes, and I think they're behaving reprehensibly.

> What makes Trader Joes Trader Joes is that they carefully curate the entire experience and having a loss of control over how they are presented to the customer is a big deal.

Apparently not in Germany, where you can buy a small selection of Trader Joe's products at Aldi (they are owned by the same parent company / foundation).

He calls it "Pirate Joes" and resells their products. If nothing else your legally required to defend your trademark or you lose it. They also lose out on quality control issues which could be a major issue.

Now their unlikely to win, but by suing and losing they gain some protection. If nothing else if someone get's sick they can say look we tried to stop him but we don't have a choice. On the other hand if they say it's ok that's going to open them to liability.

"Right to Parody"

from wikipedia (USA law but fuck it let's go for it): n Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music Inc[22] the Supreme Court recognized parody as a potential fair use, even when done for profit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#Fair_use_and_parody

Technically, you could probably do it in the states in a location that trader joe's isn't. Although I'd definitely have a very good lawyer on retainer if I was thinking of that :/

Parody requires that it be a work of art.

Are you implying that his buying their products, transporting them, and reselling them is some kind of performance art which is criticizing Trader Joes in some fashion?

And that this guy is going to stand in front of a judge and claim he's not in the business of selling merchandise, he's a performer?

I'm pretty certain fair use doesn't apply when you're making money off the trademark you're using in "fair use".

From the link posted above: In Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music Inc, the Supreme Court recognized parody as a potential fair use, even when done for profit.

> They also lose out on quality control issues which could be a major issue.

I don't feel that this is an issue in this case. Hallat only buys pre-packaged foods and I'm sure that Canada's food regulatory bodies don't allow the sale of expired food.

"Pretty much anything I can buy in the U.S., I can legally import into Canada. There are permits required for meat, seafood and dairy. We stick to vegetarian packaged nonperishable items."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/30/217210915/bag....

>I'm sure that Canada's food regulatory bodies don't allow the sale of expired food.

I don't think they sell anything that needs an expiration date. Best before dates are not expiration dates: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/food/information-for-consumers/f...

So 'Trader Joes' owns 'Joes' as well. I'd better tell the local bar up the road called 'Jumping Joes' that they are infringing on copyright.

Trademark.

No, but courts generally do consider a thing called "context" in these cases.

Repugnant? That's pretty severe language coming from someone who is being as...(how to put this politely?)...as economical with the facts as you are

Seriously, why not save the outrage for cases where you can restate the case without having to gloss over the bits that make your outrage seem ridiculous?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com