Rant About Vodafone
  
I don't often rant.
At least, I don't think I do.
But I just couldn't let this one go unreported.
And yes, there is an actionable lesson in this, which is really why I am posting it.
Anyway, as you know, I just got back from Barcelona, where I spent a week meeting with thousands of trademark attorneys from around the world at the International Trademark Association annual meeting.
First thing I did when I arrived was I bought a local SIM card so I would not have to depend on my ability to steal free Wi-Fi while I was using my phone outside of my hotel room, which was 90% of the time.
After reading some reviews I decided to go with Vodafone.
(Note to self: sometimes you can't trust reviews.)
Got their SIM card with 2.5GB of data and 15 minutes of call time for EUR 25.
Call time felt humiliatingly limited but all I really cared about was data—and I assumed that 2.5GB should be plenty for 5 days, given that I would have access to Wi-Fi in my hotel and in the convention center.
Well, the data ran out in about a day. All of it.
No, this rant is not about how expensive data plans are in Spain.
Or how unsophisticated their data tracking is.
I would have gladly paid EUR 25 a day to have reliable access to the internet while I was there.
Here's where the rant begins.
I called the support to see how I could pay to get more data. Problem is, they only speak Spanish.
The automated phone menu also only works in Spanish.
My daughters speak Spanish, one of them fluently. I don't. All I can say in Spanish comes from an old Beavis & Butt-Head episode, where Butt-Head shares his proficiency in Spanish by proudly declaring, "Burrito" and "Uno Buck."
I get it.
I'm on their turf.
As much as I think it would make sense for them to have an option for people who wanted to pay while talking to someone in English, I understand that they can't necessarily have support speak all world languages.
Here's where the real fun begins.
I go to my hotel's reception and I ask them to call support on my behalf.
The receptionist spends 35 minutes talking to someone in perfect Spanish.
Finally, he asks me for my credit card.
I give it to him—and he reads it back to the support rep.
Twice.
They speak for about 10 more minutes.
My savior hangs up the phone, gives me back my credit card, and tells me that they couldn't accept the credit card payment at this time.
Hmm...
Curious, I check with my bank to make sure my card is not blocked and has enough limit. Everything is fine.
I got to run to a meeting in a different hotel.
There, I find a few moments and ask another person at a reception to call Vodafone support and pay on my behalf.
30 minutes later, they ask me for my credit card, and 10 minutes after that, they say that they can't make a payment over the phone with my card.
What can be done?
Oh, easy, I can just go to an ATM and recharge my phone credits from there.
OK.
About the fifth ATM I used had an English menu AND an option to pay for the phone.
Glory-Glory-Hallelujah!
Added funds to my account.
Got a notification from Vodafone that they got my payment.
What I did not get is data connection.
I may just as well not have paid them at all.
For three remaining days, I had no data.
It was probably one of the most frustrating customer experiences in my life.
And there was one thought that kept coming back to me.
Why in the world would a business create a system that makes it difficult for people to give you their money?
And then I looked back at all the innovations I created with Trademark Factory® and realized that the things that worked best were all about streamlining the process for clients. They were all about making it easy for brand owners to order our services.
So here's a big lesson from this rant.
If you're running a business, look at it from the perspective of your customers. How can you make it easier for them to buy from you.
Don't be Vodafone.
P.S. And if you're wondering, yes, it's a real Vodafone.Sucks tshirt. I had it made in Barcelona. Getting it was much easier than paying Vodafone.
Don't Ask—Don't Get
If there's one thing I realized recently is that if you don't ask for something you want, chances are, you ain't getting it any time soon.
This is something I've been teaching my kids.
And every single time I forget about this principle and just assume that people will somehow guess what I would like from them, I get reassured why I should never, ever, never-ever forget this principle ever again.
Let's face it.
Most people are not preoccupied with thoughts that revolve around figuring out the one thing that would make you happy right now.
I'm not saying they don't care about you.
Some do.
But it's your job to make it easier for them to make you happy.
It's your job to tell them what you want from them.
Even in situations that have little to do with expecting others to make you happy, such as disputes and contract negotiations, it's your job to not only know exactly what you want from the other side but also to let that other side know about it.
Being upset in the hope that someone to whom you're demonstrating your discontent will miraculously figure out the solution that would make you happy almost never works.
In fact, it just makes you even more upset.
Because now you're upset about the original problem AND also the inability of the other side to make you happy.
But chances are, the other side is not going to do anything about you being upset until you tell them you're upset and, most importantly, provide suggestions how they could make it up to you.
If you haven't tried telling people exactly what you'd like from them—try it. You'll be surprised how well it works.
And it makes it easier for them, too.
Remember I said, I was teaching this to my kids.
One way we did it was when we were all driving in my car.
Masha would say, "Daddy, can I please listen to this song?"
And I'd answer, "Sure!"
But I wouldn't do anything about it.
In a few seconds, she would ask again, "Daddy, I would like to listen to this song. Can I?"
And I would say, "Of course! No problem..."
But I would still not turn on the stereo.
This could go on a few times until she would ask, "Daddy, can you please turn on my song?"
And then, I'd immediately turn it on.
Do you see the difference between "I would like to listen to the song" and "Please turn on my song"?
Most people ask questions of the first kind and they never get what they expect.
Try asking more questions of the second type. You'll be surprised how well it works.
P.S. In case you're wondering why I posted this photo at the top of this article, I have an explanation for you.
This photo was taken at one of the receptions in Barcelona a few days ago. As part of the annual International Trademark Association meeting, there are dozens of parties and receptions every night.
This one was organized by a German law firm, Meissner Bolte.
It was one of the finest receptions this year.
They even had a band all dressed up Bavarian style.
The moment I saw the band, I had this idea that I would really like a photograph with the conductor. But not just any photo. I wanted to hold the horn.
No, I don't play the horn.
I play the drums.
But that's outside the point.
I just thought that a photo of me holding the horn would be the perfect end of the night.
And guess what, I knew that no one else in that room knew my thoughts.
I knew that unless I ask them specifically that I wanted to hold the horn in the photo, I would not have a photo of me holding the horn.
Well, I did the only thing that could get me that photograph.
I asked.
And now I have it!
Trademark Screw-Ups of the Month
Eagles Sue Hotel California for Trademark Infringement: OK, so let me get this straight. The hotel originally opened under the name Hotel California in 1950. Eagles released their song in 1976. And now it's the hotel that's infringing on the band's trademark? Hmmm... At least they got some fresh publicity, I guess...
Prey for the Gods forced to change name after trademark complaint from Bethesda: It's a happy resolution to a silly problem. If you're caving to the demands of a larger company that claims you can't use the word "Prey" in the name of your game, if you thought about fighting this but chose not to, why in the world would you pick a name, Praey, that could STILL get you in trouble? You say you didn't want to spend your precious kickstarter funds, but you picked the name that was close enough for the bully to still have a viable argument that your new name is confusingly similar? Good news for the startup is that they were able to settle with Bethesda. But it's a trend that I see a lot. Someone gets a demand letter. They don't want to go into a direct fight, but they pick way to meet the demands and also insult the rich and powerful IP owner. This is typically a very bad strategy because rich and powerful IP owners usually do not enjoy being insulted.
N.J.'s Halo Farm sues Halo Top ice cream over trademark infringement: What's interesting is that both HALO FARMS and HALO TOP were registered as trademarks with USPTO. So the Trademarks Office didn't think they were confusing, HALO FARMS didn't oppose HALO TOP's trademark application, and now they're trying to go the litigation route. What is even more interesting is that there are two more registered trademarks, MEET THE MILK SO GOOD IT HAS A HALO and MRSD SHAVED ICE HALO-HALO SWEET & CREAMY owned by two completely unrelated companies. In these circumstances, HALO FARMS would have a hard time proving that they should be granted the monopoly over the word HALO.
The State of Trademark Protection in Fashion and Luxury: Some very trademarking stats here. In a nutshell, the number of trademark applications filed every year is growing significantly—both as a result of growing entrepreneurship and the rise of China, Korea and other countries.
Targeting your competitor’s brand name – shady practice or just business?: As much as the practice of using a competitor's brand to advertise your own is shady or in some jurisdictions even illegal from the trademark infringement perspective, to say that it never works is misleading.
In fact, the reason this practice is shady and illegal is precisely because, in many cases, it can be very effective since often, people who are looking for something from a specific brand are also open to learning about alternatives.
There is a legal theory called "Initial interest confusion" doctrine that is designed to prevent such misleading advertising. The idea is that even when the customer KNOWS that the ad does not come from the trademark owner whose brand was used as a keyword, the consumer ends up CHECKING OUT what they would not have checked out unless they were looking for the hijacked brand.
Usually, in order to win a trademark infringement case, the trademark owner needs to prove that customers are likely to be confused into believing that the competitor's products and services and those of the trademark owner's come from the same source. This is, of course, problematic, when those who click on the ad know, without any doubt, that the competitor's website is not linked with the brand they were looking for. The "Initial interest confusion" doctrine allows you to sue for trademark infringement even no confusion exists AFTER a visitor lands on the competitor's website.
Intel’s processor business was massive, but a lengthy legal battle with a former business partner exposed a major flaw in its CPU designs—a trademark flaw.: Wow, a fascinating story you probably didn't know about. And to know that trademarks played a significant part in the development of the CPU maker giants is even more fascinating.
New York steakhouse sues Scranton steakhouse for trademark infringement: Famous since 1887 or not, the only active trademark registration for "Carl von Luger" was registered in 2009 by the defendant, which incidentally is now considered incontestable—unless the plaintiff can prove that the registration was fraudulent. Which brings me to my favorite point, if you have a brand that you claim has been famous for 130 years, how in the world do you not trademark it for 130 years? A brand with even the minimal potential for becoming known and valuable must be trademarked ASAP.
Amazon sets sights on U.K. grocery with checkout-free trademark: Isn't it interesting how the media finds out about plans of successful businesses through trademark applications that they file? Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, and many-many others. Filing a trademark is usually the first step on the way from an idea to making this idea known outside the company. The reason is, the last thing successful businesses need is having to deal with someone stealing their brands. We're taught to emulate successful businesses. And in case of trademarks, it's really an easy and inexpensive thing to do.
Scalebound Trademark Renewed by Microsoft: The headline is misleading. You can only renew a registered trademark. What Microsoft did is they requested and received an extension of time to file the statement of use after Microsoft's trademark application was allowed. In the U.S., a trademark will not get registered until the applicant provides evidence of use to the Trademarks Office. But the applicant may request several extensions of time to file the statement of use, each extension lasting 6 months. During this period, the trademark application is still considered "live" and will prevent anyone else from getting the similar trademarks approved by the Trademarks Office. If the applicant fails to file the statement of use by the time the last extension of time expires, the application will be considered "dead"—and anyone will be free to use or even trademark it, unless the former applicant can prove that they somehow established a common-law right in the name, which is a lot harder than filing the statement of use to satisfy the Trademarks Office. We'll see how this one turns out.
Marvel reportedly trademarks 'Hail Hydra' after site redirects to Trump's bio on the White House website: The real question here is, how come they haven't trademarked it before. Knowing Marvel's strategy to trademark everything remotely trademarkable, you would think that the phrase that is found in many of their comics would have been trademarked long ago.
ENTOMBED Trademark Ruling Paves Way For New Music, Live Shows From HELLID, CEDERLUND, ANDERSSON: Yep. Another dispute among band members as to who can use the band name after the band composition changes. You would think that these bands would have management that would have some semblance of reason and business knowledge to make sure that the band name and logos are trademarked in such a way as to allow the band to carry on if a band member departs. It's not a question of which of the members is more important (although sometimes it is), it's a matter of HOW do you determine the rights of current and former band members to use the name of the band after there is a change in the band. It's really three things: (1) incorporate a company that will own the band's assets, (2) register the trademarks in the company's name, and (3) have a simple agreement that regulates what happens to band assets, including the trademark, if something goes wrong. It's not like it's a completely unpredictable scenario, is it?
Warriors' Daymond Green files for 'Dray Day' trademark: When it comes to trademarks, with hardly any hard costs, you get an asset that can easily be worth millions. When you look at trademarking as an investment that the potential of giving you the highest possible ROI, it all suddenly starts to make sense.
|
