Rogov Wine from Sea Horse Winery

Sea Horse Winery (http://www.seahorsewines.com/) has announced the launch of a new wine dedicated to the memory of Daniel Rogov.

Rogov 2009 is 50% Syrah/50% Grenache, 550 individually numbered bottles were made. Queries and orders to Ze'ev Dunie by phone +972-2-5709834 or e-mail info@seahorsewines.com

The photograph below shows Daniel Rogov on the right and Ze'ev Dunie (winemaker and owner of Sea Horse) on the left-

Dunie and Rogov.jpeg

Voluntarily removed

[David M. Bueker]

Craig,

Rogov means a great deal to many on this forum (and probably elsewhere). I might suggest that your post is rather hard hearted, and some of it (notably the end bit) is in very poor taste. Any consideration to revising would likely be appreciated.

To put this into context, nearly all of Ze'ev Dunie's wines are named for artists, intellectuals or winemakers that he would like to honor. Rogov wine is joining a line-up that includes Camus, Gaudi, Antoine, Fellini, Lennon, Munch, and James.

As to Craig's comments, frankly they say more about Craig than about anything or anybody else...

[David M. Bueker]

Mike - would appreciate it if you did not get personal. It only escalates bad feelings. If you two have an issue with each other then take it off line.

Let's all be civil here. We Jews have been writing tributes to Rogov ever since Bob Dylan penned the last stanza of Desolation Row.

All joking aside, Dunie was a close friend of Rogov and he has a history of naming wines after his heroes. If I personally can abide a !@#$-ing Zinfandel named after John Lennon, I think we live with a South Rhone blend named after Rogov.

Craig,

I will delete this if and when you delete/revise your post.

Done

Naming a wine after one's hero is fine, except that one now owns the rights to that name, not only for that particular blend or varietal as a proprietary name, but for any expansion of the product line under that proprietary name. I am surprised that Carmel would allow it without a fight-- in the USA, at least, they would have a good chance of winning, because their brandy, like wine, is a beverage alcohol product, and that is their defensible trade name, but I don't know about Israel's trade name laws. And it's not like Saintsbury, long dead, whose name has long since become a historic artifact, because Rogov's boots are still warm. Perhaps I should have named my wine Tchelistcheff after my hero (don't know what Dmitri would think about my usurping his last name- not the same, I know, because Rogov was his nom de plume and not his real name, and there were not a lot of Rogovs waiting to make their name in the wine industry). The first to take a name acquires the rights, unless specifically under limiting license. Do you remember the war between Walter S. Taylor and the Taylor Wine Company, which would not allow Walter S. Taylor's name on Bully Hill Wine's label? Having acquired the right to Rogov's name as a proprietary product name, will others be allowed to use it for their own purposes as their own tribute to their hero as well?

Be that as it may, that's not even my main objection. Andre was important to me, too important to morph into a trade name, even if I could (While for Dmitri, Tchelistcheff is his name. ). Presumably, Rogov was important to Dunie. Far from being a tribute, it's commercialization of the name. Its use as a trade name indicate's it's lack of importance, from my perspective. Thus my previous comments about putting his name on other things hedonistic in which Rogov took pleasure, or in the case of what I edited out, presumably took pleasure. It's called hyperbole.

[David M. Bueker]

Craig,

Are you aware of whether or not Rogov's family was asked prior to the naming of the wine? I would think that is important information.

David:

I'm not aware of whether the family consented, nor would it matter from the perspective of either of my arguments. I believe they were contacted by Carmel prior to use of the name for their brandy. That's a nice and sensitive thing to do, but I do not believe it would be necessary from the perspective of any legal standing the winery would have in the use of the name, unless the name had specifically been registered as a wine or brandy trade name (for subsequent licensing) by the family prior to its use by Carmel. The same holds true for Ze'ev Dunie, except that if there had been no licensing agreement between the family and Carmel, then Carmel would probably have the rights to that trade name, due to their use of it for their brandy, and use of the name might be actionable by Carmel, but perhaps not even by the family. Even if Ze'ev had gone to the family first for their blessing of the endeavor.

Trade names are trade property and have value, and rights associated with them. Businesses presumably exist to make a profit, and business decisions are presumably made to further that goal. I can think of scenarios where such presumption is not reality, but the result is voluntarily giving up profit for the sake of a specific purpose. If, for instance, a winery wished to produce a wine, a significant part of the profit of which were to benefit another entity. Like using the profit of this product to provide an income stream for the widow or heirs of Rogov's family, or some other beneficiary. That becomes a noble purpose from a Judeo-Christian perspective, supporting widows and orphans, etc. I don't know that that isn't the case, but I tend not to immediately presume nobility.

[David M. Bueker]

Craig,

As far as I am concerned, if the family gives consent then it's over and done regardless of what anyone else thinks. It's certainly possible to get wound up considering the impication, but it changes nothing.

My last word on the subject. Stay well.

1. If anyone owns rights to Rogov's name in the wine business, it's probably his widow (i.e., his estate). That's assuming that Israel recognizes a proprietary right in one's name after death (not all jurisdictions do).

2. So if she agreed to Carmel's use, which I understand she did, it's analogous to her giving them a license for that particular product.

3. Have no knowledge of whether Sea Horse obtained similar permission but certainly hope that they did.

4. The Walter Taylor story was a fairly common situation where, after selling a company that includes one's name, the owner wished to remain in the same business using his own name and reputation in some manner. The issue in that particular case was whether a consumer was likley to be confused as to the source of the Bully Hill and Taylor wines by Taylor's using his name in that way.

5. I should note that there is no absolute right to use one's name in one's business. It depends on whether or not this use wouuld be likely to cause confusion with an existing use of a similar name in someone else's business.

1) The assumption you make is that he was in the wine business. He was in the journalism business, being neither a producer nor marketer of alcoholic beverages. I hear what you're saying, though. And I might be more in agreement with you if his full name were used, rather than Evgeni Aleksandrovich Rogov's (my favorite footballer) last name. And if you look up Rogov.com, it's novel design, not wine.

2) and 3) no comment

4) Bully hill established in 1970, Taylor Wine Company fired Walter S. Taylor in 1971, Coke bought Taylor Wine Company in 1977, and Coke sued to force Walter S. Taylor to remove his name from Bully Hill wine labels, because Taylor Wine Company was older, owned the trade name first, and there was no known licensing agreement (why should there be, when it was his name and he was family?) Adverse possession of the name didn't occur until Coca Cola bought Taylor in 1977, 7 years after Walter S. Taylor's name had originally been printed on the label.

5) Understood

Dear Craig:

Wine's your business, intellectual property's mine. What I have said, and am saying below, of course, is only my opinion, for what it's worth.

While Rogov was not in the wine business per se, he was associated with it by virtue of his being, among other things, a wine journalist. That could be good enough to establish possible proprietary rights in his name in connection with wine or similar beverages (e.g., brandy). And as far as I know his assumed last name was distinctive enough to refer only to one individual in the context of wine.

The fact that rights are not asserted does not mean that they don't exist. When Walter Taylor separated from the Taylor winery, a conflict occurred when and if he decided to use his name in promoting his wines (whether or not one agrees with the court's decision in that case). If he had not decided to use his name, no trademark conflict.

Similarly, if Rogov's widow doesn't choose to assert any rights she might have, doesn't mean they don;t exist.

I visited Sea Horse this morning. Zeev Dunie told me that the Rogov wine name was of course fully coordinated both with the family and with Carmel. As to the wine itself, it is undoubtedly a fitting tribute to its namesake.

[David M. Bueker]

I visited Sea Horse this morning. Zeev Dunie told me that the Rogov wine name was of course fully coordinated both with the family and with Carmel. As to the wine itself, it is undoubtedly a fitting tribute to its namesake.

Thanks Mike.

Happy to read that everything was done properly. Now, how to get a bottle of that wine?

Hi Yoel,

Ze'ev will gladly ship overseas, and friends of mine in the USA have received wine shipments from him recently. Alternatively he might be willing to hold purchased wine for shipment after the summer or for collection at a later date. Call or e-mail him for details.

Anybody interested in the wine should note that this is a one-time memorial cuvee, and Ze'ev is not planning to release any further vintages under the Rogov name.

best,

Mike