On another board, there is a pretty livid conversation about C-I using a name in an advertisement of a cigar. Given, most of the people on that site are a bunch of mindless lemmings that have no idea what they are talking about, but out of fear of retribution from their own "family" spout off at the mouth.

So I ask you C-I, please give your side of the situation so that a well informed opinion can be formed.

Doh! I posted that under a friends log-on. I don't hide under anothers handle. It should have been posted under DELAROB.

Posted this over there, figured I'd put it up here too:

1. The Biarritz cigar in question is called the "Coffee Break".

2. The Biarritz cigar in question is shaped like a "Fuente Hemingway Short Story"

3. The Biarritz cigar in question does not nearly have the same blend as the Fuente Hemingway cigar in question (of all people,

cigarfamily members should know this). One blatant difference is the wrapper. The Biarritz has a Sumatran and the Fuente

Hemingway has a Cameroon.

4. Even if the Biarritz cigar in question was called a "Short Story" it violates no trademarks or copyright of the Fuente or J.C. Newman

family. You can trademark and copyright the Fuente name, even the Hemingway name, but the term "Short Story" is too general a

phrase on its own merits to claim to have coined it. Therefore, "Arturo Fuente Hemingway Short Story" and even "Hemingway Short

Story" are protected, but "Short Story" on its own is public domain. Any court of law would hold these statements to be true and it

would be a waste of money and effort to even bring such a situation to court (especially with the chance of being counter-sued with a

"frivolous case" suit). -Seriously, are you going to sue people for selling "Robustos" or "Churchills"? To this date, there have been NO

patents on cigar sizes or shapes, or names of shapes. Obviously, Carlito has created a great size which caught on and is now popular

enough to emulate. It's a pat on the back, not a slap in the face.

5. CigarBid/Cigars International has since change the description to "Biarritz Perfecto". Obviously in a friendly gesture of

understanding to the Fuente family and CigarFamily in general. I would say that's very classy, especially since they legally do not have

to.

6. The Biarritz cigar in question is actually a good smoke. It's not some dogrocket produced to make a quick buck. It's a brand that

has been low-key up until these threads, and has increasingly gotten better over the past 5 years. It does not emulate the blend of

the Hemingway line. -Does the Fuente line even have a cigar with a Sumatran wrapper?

I appreciate you guys/gals taking the time to read my rant. Now I'm off to smoke a "Salazar Perfeccion X" =======>

Great rant and most informative! I am off to watch the beginning of the end of the Taliban and the Terrorist and smoke a Montecristo #2 ISOM as I watch! Charlie

Hegemonic has most of it there. It's silly. Here's the rest:

We purchased a few hundred bundles of a brand called Biarritz. It's not a closeout, it's simply a good cigar made by Augusto Reyes, and distributed by a company run by an industry veteran. The size we bought was a little perfecto shape. Whenever manufacturers or distributors want us to buy something, they usually send a handful of singles to test out. We tried this one and happened to like it. So at the RTDA show in Tampa, almost as an afterthought, we committed to a purchase of about 400 bundles. The distributor called the shape a Short Story, and that's also exactly what it says on the invoice - Biarritz Short Story. A few weeks after that, someone claims on another board that we're "ripping off" a Fuente trademark. First off, short story is the name of a size. It's sort of like saying that the first cigar company to name a size a "Churchill" owns the right to use that name for a size. In fact, there are other brands that use the name short story as a size, one example is that boom brand called Nicole Miller. We didn't christen it with that name anyway. Regardless, we've all got better things to do than make an issue of some BS like this, so we decided to modify the name of the size as it appears on the site to reduce confusion and to avoid making a mountain of a molehill. It's a simple situation, and we acted right away to try and fix it on our own accord.

What I've said above here is fact, and I'd swear that on a stack of bibles. Instead, a group of 5 or 6 bootlickers on that other BB get themselves worked up into a tizzy about it. I've heard about that board getting malicious and attacking other manufacturers and retailers before, but I was truly surprised at some of the insanity I read there. I can appreciate a search for the truth and an inquiring mind, but not some lemming with an agenda. Those handful of drama queens that make this out to be a disaster clearly have an agenda, so I don't read it or respond to it there because people like that don't listen to reason. If they want to see a real disaster, I'll drive them 70 miles east to NYC to see the damage from the attack. Like many of my cbid friends here, I know people who were directly affected by that attack. Contriving a drama about something inconsequential like this, and without regard to facts, is ridiculous.

I no longer frequent that 'other' board. the bickering there makes me sick.

Sounds like they got their panties all bunched up.

Well said Keith. As if the cigar industry weren't under enough stress as it is, there has to be petty in-fighting. No ass-kissing here, you're handling yourself like a professional and an adult through this whole thing. I loathe sycophantic zombies, whether they're here or there. It is however, a nice diversion from the f_(#ing horror-show that is my home, NY, so it gives me something else to think about and occupy my mind with. Regarding the "other board", I'm still there, lurking... Some peoples' noses are so brown, their heads so far up their cigar gods' asses that they are able to look through the rear of their demagogue's eyes. It's these mafioso-esque tactics they use against people that they disagree with that pisses me off the most. There are a lot of good eggs over "there", but the mob mentality that runs rampant with the few fanatic/fascists gets most of the herd stampeding. You're right Keith, there's no reasoning with the stubborn.

Yes, well said Keith. A few of us have raised the issue that there was a completely one sided situation getting blown out of proportion by a lynch mob who had no facts what-so-ever, yet whenever you raise a point that favors anyone other than "The Family", you are called a shill, a fool, or worse.

Thanks for explaining the situation Keith.

Gee, I almost forgot to mention the Class-less atitude by the cigar maker himself. He attacks CI & C-bid without giving any benefit of doubt, annnd he attacks anyone who dares post otherwise and use their own judgement, calling us Chupacabra's (Goat Suckers). Thankfully, his piss-poor personality is not refected in his cigars.

Now the most important question....Are the cigars any good????

After all of that, I would hope the damn things are good! By the way, what is the other board in question?

Charlie

The one that is a family.

Hi guys. I'm a member of both BB's and I feel like I can transition between all of the BB's I frequent, pretty easily.

Most of those guys over on CF are a pretty good bunch. Some of course are not. Those that are not will spout off with reckless abandon and without any forethought at any perceived slight against the Fuente/Newman name.

What they're not realizing (as was mentioned) is that the term Short Story cannot be trademarked or copyrighted. What they're also missing is that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Nobody who knows even a little bit about cigars is going to confuse this "Short Story" with a Fuente product. To think otherwise is foolish. Maybe it is a blatant rip-off of the name. Who cares? The Hemmingway line is one of the finest cigar lines made. Having another mfgr. name one of their sizes a Short Story isn't ever going to detract from that. Sort of like the "Fuerte" craze. Lots of mfgrs. are using that buzzword in their cigar names these days.

So, out of respect for the Fuente's, the name has been changed anyway. So what's the big deal? Lighten up folks. Tend to your own business and let Fuente tend to theirs.

well iron, i feel safe in saying that your reception over here will be much better that what i received over there--and thanks being a voice of reason like delarob...my beef with this mess is (1) no one will ever mistake this "story" for the fuente, (2) Keith and the guys didn't nickname it, as the invoice will prove shortly (thanks Keith), (3) the shameless, a**-kissing, hero-worshipping, "Of Mice & Men" routine going on over there between several of the posters and carlito...it's down-right embarrassing...maybe I should start a Keith & Gonz fan-club...Hey, Keith...any freebies if we start shamelessly sticking our heads up your behind on the board????????

Like a few Indian Tabac's or La Gloria's!~ I will be a shameless schill for the board! Charlie

Loyalty and Unity Integrity....I do love that Charlie fella!!!!

JBG, agreed 🙂 I saw your post over at CF and responded to some rhetorical questions, my responses are for the board there, not you, so don't take it the wrong way buddy 🙂 take care.

No-good, shameless, bootlickin', a**-kissin', lemming, whiney, back-biting, lap dogs.

God forbid you should have an original, well thought out opinion over there.

Iron Bar ... everything you said here, I said in the original thread that was pulled. I was called a chuppa. a shill, a ****** ... you name it.

I was even getting emailed at home ... and probably would have been run off the site, had it not been for a few 'old timers' with some pull that backed me (not agreeing with me, just saying I didn't understand the ramifications of what I was saying), and calmed them down.

The original thread got so vicious, that it was pulled, after more than 80 posts! Of course ... someone had to start it all over again. I asked that that one be pulled also, but when Carlito posted (twice, I believe) it still remains.

Oh well ...