Cigar Forums banner
1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
949 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
What is the deal with this. Now I am not against ISOM's but really. A US Court found that the Cohiba Brand was owned by CubaTobacco and not General Cigar because of how well known the product is.

Maybe it's me but this is really not a cigar issue. Am I the only one who is patriotic enough to find a problem with this.

The Judge said that General Cigar was not alowed to sell Cohiba anymore because the copyright is owned by a cuban company. We have a trade embargo against Cuba. Is it me or is that ludacris.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
kamikaiguy said:
What is the deal with this. Now I am not against ISOM's but really. A US Court found that the Cohiba Brand was owned by CubaTobacco and not General Cigar because of how well known the product is.

Maybe it's me but this is really not a cigar issue. Am I the only one who is patriotic enough to find a problem with this.

The Judge said that General Cigar was not alowed to sell Cohiba anymore because the copyright is owned by a cuban company. We have a trade embargo against Cuba. Is it me or is that ludacris.
Better stock up on Cohibas while we still can! I like 'em.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Considering we have an embargo against Cuba...yeah I would think on the copyright end it is ludacris.

....but.....

On the cigar end I don't think that the General Cohiba product is fit to carry the name. There is only one Cohiba and it sure has heck doesn't come from General Cigar.JMO Seems to me they are capitalizing on Cuban product with an over-priced cigar that's not up to par. The name is world renouned because of Cuban cigar makers...not because of General Cigar. Should they really profit from anothers work just because we have an embargo against the country that built the name and the world known product? Tough call...I see both sides. I'll have to let the smoking be the tie breaker. ;) :w
 

·
MoTheMentor
Joined
·
3,075 Posts
mr.c said:
Makes you wonder if Punch, Partagas, Padron will have the same fight?
Thought I'd give some input here.

The Padron line, I'd expect no legal contest since I don't think it ever existed as a Habano.

Now here's my understanding of some of the legalities of the cigar world. When former Cuban tobacco plantation & tobacco factory owners first started producing cigars for the US market, they used the names of the respective home brands they were associated with in Cuba citing that since their private possessions were taken from them w/out due compensation they still had legal ownership of those brands. The US courts held up that argument and have allowed these name brands (made in non-Cuban locales) to be marketed & sold in the US. The Cohiba name & brand is post revolution and did not exist before the revolution and therefore no one can copy or impinge on it w/out approval of Habanos. Besides,I wonder how many countires worldwide carry the Habanos Cohiba vs. the Habano Cohiba. From that perspective, I think that the Habano line is the more recognized one worldwide.

I think there's another power play here and that's the right to distribute Cuban brands in the US once the embargo is lifted. That right mostly belongs to Altadis (which owns the Dominican R&J lines, Santa Damiana, H. Upmann, Montecristo, etc...), but I don't think that Swedish Match, which owns the likes of Partagas, Ramon Allones, Punch, and H de M, to name a few, has the same exclusive permission to market or sell those respective brands here in the US. I see this as a power play for Cuba Tobasso/Habanos so that they have more say so as to how their products get marketed or sold worlwide.

MoTheMan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
130 Posts
Mo great explaination on this subject from the old brand owners to present... it's all about money and positioning for when the embargo ends :w :w
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,431 Posts
I think General Cigar will continue to sell their Cohiba line under a different name. I like this cigar and think a new name, marketed well will not hurt General Cigar at all.

On a political note, I think it is typical of the progressive courts to issue a ruling like this one. Here is a country the USA doesn't have any trade with, and the US courts are protecting them. Strange... but expected.

Yet, I think the embargo is pointless - I think it is time the USA end the embargo and begin preparing for post-Castro Cuba. I also think MoTheMan has correctly anylyzed the entire controversy in his post - Excellent job Mo!

:sb
 

·
MoTheMentor
Joined
·
3,075 Posts
Good to hear the feedback!
You know, I agree, the Dominican Cohibas are a good cigars, so whatever name they're merketed under should still sell well. I'm in for a box of Churchill.


MoTheMan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,431 Posts
Count me in too on those Churchills! Very good cigar! :cool:

I wonder if people will start grabbing the D.R. Cohibas to have as momentos?
:confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Does any other country in the world besides the USA have a trade embargo against Cuba? We trade with Communist China, Viet Nam, the Arab countries that love us, etc.

There is no logical reason to have an embargo against Cuba except to get those Cuban votes in South Florida! I bet that everywhere in the world except maybe the USA that a Cohiba means a real Cuban cigar.

Its time to end the failed Cuban embargo. Its OK to sell Cubans plenty of chickens from the USA but not for us to buy cigars from them. Crazy America policies!
 

·
DymOnamic
Joined
·
966 Posts
pumbaa said:
There is no logical reason to have an embargo against Cuba except to get those Cuban votes in South Florida! I bet that everywhere in the world except maybe the USA that a Cohiba means a real Cuban cigar.
Welcome aboard pumbaa! :w Maybe just a few more months and this embargo will finally settle in and Castro will see the light! :D At which decade do you think it failed? :D Nothing like spending taxpayers dollars to wage embargo. I am amazed at how unenlightened some policies are, yet more than likely some part of this electronic conversation touched upon Chinese Labor and we all know how charming their policies toward the USA and Human Rights are.

If anything is to come out of the embargo with Cuba, I would say it sends a message to different regimes what the consequences will and have been for defying the USA and putting us in harms way. IMO

Hey, I have had a USA Cohiba.....uh uh, sorry, no way, not a Cohiba.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,431 Posts
Personally, I don't think embargos work for the most part. If everyone in the world is trading with Cuba except the US, what does it do to them?

I think the USA would have been better served trading with Cuba and letting the people see what great stuff USA freedom delivers. But of course, that is only my humble opinion... :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
949 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Personally I love Cuban Cigars. And true the D.R. Cohiba however good are not the same as a Cuban Cohiba. I would buy the D.R. Cohiba under another name no problem Maybe the price will come down since we don't have to pay for the name.

What we should have done is invade Cuba kick out Castro. Put a real Cigar smoking Governor in charge and make Cuba a state. Arny if your listening!!!!
 

·
MoTheMentor
Joined
·
3,075 Posts
Re: General Cigar, Cuban Cigars, Foreign Policy & Embargos

Got to thinking (& brooding a bit) about this string and had to finally put in (my sometimes infamous 2 cents worth) and present additional arguments to both sides of: The Embargo and Cuban Cigars.

pumbaa said:
Does any other country in the world besides the USA have a trade embargo against Cuba? We trade with Communist China, Viet Nam, the Arab countries that love us, etc.

There is no logical reason to have an embargo against Cuba except to get those Cuban votes in South Florida! I bet that everywhere in the world except maybe the USA that a Cohiba means a real Cuban cigar.

Its time to end the failed Cuban embargo. It's OK to sell Cubans plenty of chickens from the USA but not for us to buy cigars from them. Crazy America policies!
AND

relaxnsmoke said:
If anything is to come out of the embargo with Cuba, I would say it sends a message to different regimes what the consequences will and have been for defying the USA and putting us in harms way. IMO
Well, relaxnsmoke makes a good point. For three & a half decades the revolutionary regime of Fidel Castro (which is how they see themselves) has been a major destabilizing influence in the Western Hemisphere and a thorn in the side of various American presidents and a potential threat to the USA.

They were the first to allow the stationing of Soviet nuclear warheads this side of the Atlantic, a very hostile act in itself. Whether they did this out of a need of safety (after the Bay of Pigs) or to flex their muscles, it's not certain. And during this time period Cuba's biggest export (in notoriety and probably in real $$ terms) wasn't its sugar cane, nor its tobacco, or its tourism, it was its revolution!!!

Many will discount this, but let's not forget that from the early 60's to the mid 90's, Fidel Castro and Cuba were an inspiration to two generations of Latin American youths fueling their passions against what they saw as the corrupt European/Yankee/White policies that their governments and economies were modeled after. In just about every revolutionary movement, internal strife, or civil war, during this time period in Central and South America or Africa, Cuba had a hand in what was going on. Whether or not Cuba instigated this, didn't matter, they eventually became involved, and sometimes heavily so. Revolution WAS Cuba's biggest export. This in itself creates a lot of destabilization and threat. IMHO, if I have a neighbor making such hostile noise and provocation, I would let them know in no uncertain terms that I will kick their f-----g ass if they continue to be a threat!!!

BUT, a lot of that has now changed. In 1994 the communist party was outlawed in Russia. It still exists as a shadow of its former self, but its party members are currently barred from high public office. That, and the Russian financial crisis in '98, took a big source of the economic and political support away from Cuba leaving it to look for other means of economic growth. Their attention for the past seven years has been much more internal, with emphasis on infrastructure, education, industrialization and a lot of technology investment (please correct me if I'm wrong on this robmcd, and please feel free to add some input). Their biggest industry appears is now tourism. Their military has been downsized considerably and is nowhere the destabilizing threat it once was. The biggest investors in the Cuban economy, are not formal Communist states, but Western European countries (France and Spain lead the pack), Canada, and even Australia. But has this changed Cuba's entire political regime, moderated it, and allowed it to open its doors more. It doesn't look like it.

Fidel Castro is still full of rhetoric and likes to continue blaming his country's hardships (and shortcomings) on the American Embargo. Doesn't make sense to me! How in the world could such an embargo, currently being observed by only one party, the US, cause so much hardship. A few hardships, I can imagine, but to put so much blame on a single party, sounds like scapegoat to me; and an excuse not to admit your own failures and corruptions.

A few years ago, during the latter years of the Clinton Administration, President Clinton had negotiated with congress to ease some of the embargo provisions against Cuba. It surprised me that just a couple of short months later Cuba shot down two Cessna aircrafts, piloted by Cuban Americans out of Miami, members of a free Cuban movement, over open waters. Now this isn't 9/11 where you have jet airliners flying into buildings. These were two Cessnas, who had logged in flight plans to fly to Cuba as a show of solidarity for those seeking a more open Cuba, flying and intercepted by military jets over open waters. Whether or not the Cuban air force issued warnings to these aircrafts isn't clear, but these aircrafts were shot down. No explanation was offered by the Cuban government as to why they did this other than citing that they considered these aircrafts a threat. No explanations were given if any warnings were issued or other measures were taken. The message to the world was pretty clear, that if Cuba wanted to flex its muscle it had an absolute right to do so, and to heck with what the rest of the world thinks.

I guess the point of the last two paragraphs is this. While Castro may complain that he isn't being treated well in the eyes of the American public or its politicians, he certainly isn't making much effort to address their concerns or create a positive image for himself. He still comes across as a self righteous dictator.

Now, I'm not Cuban, or even Latino, and personally, I would love to see normalized relations with Cuba. BUT, American Foreign Policy is a fickle thing, and, to my dismay as an American Citizen, often very one sided. Being a fan of Political Science, two things stand out about American Foreign policy. First, it is often propelled more by monetary gain than by humanitarian or social drives, and second, it is unduly influenced by specialty groups, often making it very one-sided.

The best example of the latter is what pumbaa said,
"There is no logical reason to have an embargo against Cuba except to get those Cuban votes in South Florida!"
. Probably right, the Cuban-American vote in South Florida has a lot of weight in shaping our foreign policy toward their heritage island home, and sways the policy in that direction. No doubt that many of them lost a lot when the communist regime came to power and they don't want that to be left unfinished!! I sure hope that US foreign policy towards Cuba isn't being held hostage to quarreling cousins (those who left and those who stayed in Cuba).

Let me mention another example.
First, I want to avoid the US policy towards Israel and its Arab neighbors, as this is a most thorny issue!! I do want to bring attention on another recent issue, nuclear proliferation and terrorism. The Bush administration has been citing Iran and North Korea as being potential threats because of their strong Anti-American stances and their known interest in acquiring nuclear technology. North Korea has openly admitted to having nuclear weapons and has closed its borders to nuclear inspectors. Iran, on the other hand has denied having any nuclear weapons and has complied with nuclear inspections by international nuclear inspectors. What strikes me as strange is that our government continued calling both nations rogue states, terrorist states, and potential threats to the US. Although both nations have shown their dislike for the US, one nation has taken clear a provocative stand while the other one hasn't. To a non-American looking at this situation from the outside, one would wonder if there's any favoritism here. In the post-9/11 era, are we being harder on Iran simply because they're Islamic (and therefore possibly guilty of terrorism by association) while letting North Korea slide a bit.

I really don't have many answers here, but I can clearly say that foreign policy and such matters as embargos are complex issues with no easy answers. Nonetheless, I am proud of bring an American because I live in a country that tries very had and often succeeds at giving Liberty and Justice for all. But, sometimes I'm very ashamed of our Foreign Policy, which sometimes doesn't make sense to me, and smacks of favoritism, prejudice and one-sidedness.

As a fellow senior herf I know (this is to you Dale) said, "Can't we all just get along . . . and share a good stogie." One thing stands clear to me. I don't think that the embargo will end until Castro finally goes 6 feet under and a more moderate government steps in.

MoTheMan

:)
 

·
MoTheMentor
Joined
·
3,075 Posts
Re: My .02

DAMN!! This has to be one of the longest replies I've written to any string posted on any bb that I've been on. Well at least I got some of that stuff off my mind, maybe this ape's point of view might give some fuel for thought.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
"Last October, Bush announced the creation of the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba and set a May 1 deadline for completion of a report. The concept and the timing appeared to be linked to maintaining in the November elections the solid support Bush received in 2000 from Cuban-Americans in Florida. Without their backing, the election would have gone to Democrat Al Gore." Quoted from: today's msnbc.com/news site ****
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
949 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Mo

Thanks for that reply. You said it. The Embargo is still the Embargo. Here is the issue. The courts of this country grant a judgement to a business that sole purpose is to sell and illegal product and do business with a country that is considered an enemy of this country. As opposed to General Cigar which is a US traded company which is marketing a legal product in the US. There is something wrong with the courts. Like I said before I love ISOM's but I love the United States even more and the courts rulling in this way some how takes a little bit of the US away and makes us just a little more global some how. That is just my feeling.
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top