Law & Business

It is our final episode with the Nessa Group, even though our relationship will last a long time. In this episode, the Nessa Group discusses a business with a unique and very special product. The product has the ability to help other businesses greatly. However, the business is built on shaky ground and the discussion revolves around that a business needs more than just a unique product. Anthony Verna: (00:00)Welcome to our eighth and final episode of our special mini-series with the NESSA Group. We'll start. Hi, Jim Huerta. How are you? Jim Huerta: (00:08)I’m doing well and I'm happy that we've accomplished the eight episodes and I hope that they draw a lot of attention. Anthony Verna: (00:14)Thank you, sir. And Barry Kolevzon, the other principle of the NESSA Group. How are you doing? Barry Kolevzon:I'm doing fine. Getting educated. Learning more than we know now. Anthony Verna:All right. Wil Jacques, our patent professor. Wil Jacques:Yes. Always a pleasure to be here. Anthony Verna:Justin Tripodi, our branding buddy. Justin Tripodi:Pleasure to be here, Anthony. Anthony Verna:I'm sorry I couldn't do better than that on the illiteration and Scott Mautner, our corporate attorney. How you doing? Scott Mautner:Doing well, thank you. Anthony Verna:And which firm are you with, for attorney ethics? Scott Mautner:Harrington, Ocko and Monk. Anthony Verna:I'm managing partner of Verna Law also. So on this particular case study is a former client of the NESSA Group and one that most of us here have experience with. So, let's talk a little bit about the software that this particular client had made. And it did really work very well. It made that client, and that company, I should say a leader in online shopping experiences. Jim, why don't you take it from there? Jim Huerta:Just give it a backdrop. Sure, sure. The company had been up and around for a while. They actually had established a quite a bit of patents. I'm going to say it's somewhere in the 30s. I'm not totally positive right now how many patents they had. But it was, I think ahead of its time. It was a way that shoppers online cannot lose track of what they had been looking at or what they had been shopping for. You were able to have like a cookie sitting inside the shopping process where it would take you right back to where you left off of what you were interested in depending on the store, whether it'd be a jewelry store or a clothing store. The utilization and the possible additional utilizations were non-ending. I mean, you can keep on thinking about how many things you can do with it. Anthony Verna: (02:13)So Jim, a user would be able to leave the website store and come back to it with the cart exactly as it was. Jim Huerta:Correct. Anthony Verna:And then would the user also see remnants of this cart, for lack of a better word, around the web? So if I close this cart and this store and I went like onto Facebook and I went to Twitter, would I see other ads targeted to me to go back? Jim Huerta: (02:40)I think it would be more specific and driven to the establishment that were using the app. Anthony Verna: (02:45)Okay. So, there were also a special ways that if I recall correctly that an ad could be shown to a user as well. Jim Huerta:Correct. Anthony Verna:I mean, so there was something unique with this particular, absolutely. And a lot of the, the shop, a lot of the online shopping experience was unique for this particular company as well. What did you think some of the benefits were to the user? Jim Huerta: (03:12)Well, I just thought the whole concept of the way it would track your history and browsing and your shopping experience was very unique. I mean, until I saw this product, I wasn't someone who shops online, but this really created a point of interest for me. The things that it could do in the areas that it could tackle. It didn't have to stay solely based on shopping.

It is the seventh and penultimate episode of this special mini-series with the Nessa Group, in which the discussion is about a plush toy company that is a start-up. The toy company has been able to services from Verna Law and the Nessa Group in order to get started - a mixture of intellectual property and business know-how. There was even some highly creative market research done at Toy Fair. Anthony Verna: (00:01)Welcome to the seventh episode of our special mini-series with the NESSA Group. Jim Huerta, how's it going? Jim Huerta:It's going well. I think we're making great progress. Great conversation. I hope the audience will enjoy some of the points that we're making. Anthony Verna:I hope so too. Barry Kolevzon, how you feeling? Barry Kolevzon:Feeling better every time we get involved in this area. And actually, … Anthony Verna:You've got more… Barry Kolevzon:where I think that we've got a nice length of time to build relationships. Thank you. Anthony Verna:Thank you. Barry. Wil Jacques, patent connoisseur. How's it going? Wil Jacques:Another great day. Great to be here. Anthony Verna:Wonderful. Justin Tripodi, brand king. Justin Tripodi:I was wondering if I was going to get a title this time. How you doing, Anthony? Anthony Verna:Wonderful. Thank you. Scott Mautner, corporate attorney. Scott Mautner:I'm doing well. Thank you. And I am with Harrington, Ocko and Monk before you ask. Anthony Verna: (01:03)And I am managing partner at Verna Law. So let's talk about a little bit about the plush toy industry. Wil and I have lots of plush toy experience. Wil, you have written one patent or is it multiple patents… Wil Jacques:Multiple patents. Anthony Verna:For the plush toy you're currently holding? Nobody can see that you're holding it. So props don't do very well on audio, but, but you are holding the product. Wil Jacques:Well, the audience can hear him. Squeaky Voice:Hi. Anthony Verna: (01:48)Let's talk about the patent because it's been published. So it is public. So let's talk a little bit about the patent application that was made for this particular product. What makes it so unique? Wil Jacques:Ah, very interesting. And actually only one of the patents has been published, but, the plush toy industry, you know, has seen some innovation obviously over the last 80 years. But there's been very little has been done recently I think we would look to Jennifer Telfer’s pillow pets as an example of an innovation in the plush toy space. This particular toy actually tells a story, you know, around let's say a fairy tale figure that kids are familiar with, but it provides that story by putting some elements or features as we patent folks like to call it into the plush toy. Anthony Verna: (02:44)Okay. So, so yeah, just tell us a little bit about what the patent discloses. Wil Jacques:Okay. So essentially what the patent discloses is that this little bear allows you to take an object, let's say it's a tooth for instance, you're able to put this thing into the mouth of this little bear and it drops down into a little chamber, let's call it a heart section. And then the child is able to kind of, as we would like to say, it's a teaching toy - share and care. So they're sharing and carrying their fallen tooth into this little toy. Anthony Verna:And there are some people who might have a problem wrapping their head around it, but a lot of people do have their baby teeth saved. And so this is a container that can do that as well as be a toy. Wil Jacques:As well as be a toy, as well as allow the parents or the child or the user to be able to access and take that tooth or that object out of the toy later on, which is something that generally is not seen in a plush toy. Anthony Verna: (03:50)I mean it's a plush toy. It's a patent. I have to admit that combination is rare. To me that sounds like a unique selling proposition. Wil Jacques:Yes, it is.

Be well, everyone. Thank you for listening. Do not forget to rate the "Law & Business" Podcast on your podcast app! In this roundtable episode with the Nessa Group, we discuss the importance of accredited investors in venture capital, what it means to be an accredited investor, what the possible pitfalls are if the investors are not accredited, and solutions from various disciplines in the case that a business looking for venture capital happens to fall into this trap. Enjoy the episode. Anthony Verna: And welcome to episode six of our special mini-series with the NESSA Group. And let's just start this off. Jim Huerta, how are you doing? Jim Huerta:Hi, I'm wonderful. Enjoying the company and enjoying the conversation. Anthony Verna:Thank you, sir. Barry Kolevzon, how's it going? Barry Kolevzon:Going very, very nice. And we're very excited at the movements that we're making to go forward again. Anthony Verna:All right. I only like going forward never backwards, but I practice law. So, Wil Jacques is with us. How are you doing, Wil. Wil Jacques:Very good to be here. Hello to our listening audience. Anthony Verna:Justin, how's it going? Justin Tripodi:Doing great. Compliments on that joke. Anthony Verna:Thank you, sir. Justin’s buddy over there, Scott Mautner. How you doing Scott? Scott Mautner:I'm doing well, thank you. Anthony Verna:And since you and I are attorneys, what firm are you with? Scott Mautner:I'm with Harrington, Ocko and Monk. Anthony Verna:And I'm managing partner of Verna Law, as well. So let's start here. Scott, this situation came from you. An entrepreneur had a great idea. Some friends worked on source code with this entrepreneur to launch an app. There were some issues there and I believe they came to you with already $2 million raised. Scott Mautner: (01:13)And with unaccredited investors. Anthony Verna: (01:16)Yeah. So that $2 million came from unaccredited investors. Scott Mautner:Not all of it, but some of it, yes. Anthony Verna:So, all right, let's start here. What's the difference between an accredited third party and an unaccredited third party? Scott Mautner: (01:30)So under the securities laws to be accredited, you need to have income individually for $200,000 per year or with your spouse of $300,000 per year or have net assets excluding your home value of over $1 million. And so when you're raising money, it's a lot easier because you don't have to provide the amount of information for accredited investors that you would for unaccredited. So, when we raise money, we always want to do it with accredited investors. And if you don't meet the security laws, exceptions and rules relating to that, what happens is your investors can rescind their investment at any time. So, you could be running a company for four years and someone finds out that you didn't meet the exemptions you need under the securities laws. And they could say, I want my money back and you have to give them their money back. So it becomes a much bigger problem than just, “Oh, I forgot to give them financials.” or “I forgot to give them this or you know, other information.” So that's the first thing. And, and you know, every sort of company when you're dealing with venture capitalists and angel investors, they're always going to want to deal with accredited investors. It makes it simpler. Anthony Verna: (02:45)So is that what the definition of bad securities exemptions are, is the ability to take that money back? Scott Mautner: (02:51)Effectively if you have a bad offering? Yes, it would be rescinded. Rescission of the offering. Anthony Verna:So basically if somebody is not accredited, could take the money back and if you said a company is working for four years and maybe they're burning through capital, they don't have that. Scott Mautner:It's a problem. Yes, yes. Yeah. I mean there's ways to fix it, but the best way to fix it is just to make an offering from t...

In Episode 51 of the "Law & Business" Podcast, we take a look at a company that makes a plush product that is also a curtain tie-back. It is a very useful product, but one that also features the ability to be very fanciful. So the group takes a look at how the Nessa Group improved its sales and revenues from many different aspects, and also looks at what to continue to improve. In this episode: Anthony Verna, Wil Jacques, Jim Huerta, Barry Kolevzon, Justin Tripodi, and Scott Mautner. Enjoy the stimulating conversation. Anthony Verna: (00:00)Everyone, welcome back for our fifth episode of the special mini-series with the NESSA Group. I'm Anthony Verna. Chances are you already knew that by listening to this., With us, Jim Huerta, principal of the NESSA Group. How you doing? Jim Huerta:Hi, I'm doing well. Thank you. Anthony Verna:And Barry Kolevzon second principle of the NESSA Group. Barry Kolevzon:I’m listening to all of this. Anthony Verna:I'm glad. I'm glad that you are. Also Wil Jacques. How are you, Wil? Wil Jacques: Very good. Anthony Verna: Justin Tripodi… Justin Tripodi: How are you doing Anthony? Anthony Verna: I’m well, thank you. And the well-dressed Scott Mautner there. How you doing, Scott? Scott Mautner: I'm doing well, thank you. Anthony Verna:All right. And for attorney ethics since you and I are a part of firms, what firm are you with as well? Scott Mautner: I'm with Harrington, Ocko and Monk. Anthony Verna:All right. And, of course, I'm the managing partner of Verna Law. But again, chances are you knew that. All right. So today we're going to talk a little case study here. And NESSA Group had a client, one that I'm familiar with as well. We won't mention it by name, but we will just say that their product is a curtain tie back. Jim, how'd I do with describing the product? Jim Huerta: Perfect. Anthony Verna: The current tie back has a plush cover and on top of that plush cover, I would say, is a plush figure as well. How am I doing? Jim Huerta: You're doing well. It's amazing how well you are doing . I'm just listening. Anthony Verna:Thank you, Jim. And basically, the plush part of this, what makes it attractive is that it's in different animal shapes. Again, how am I doing with describing the product? Jim Huerta:You’re doing very well. Anthony Verna:Okay. Jim, Barry, let's start with you two. This company, when you met them, was having problems. Can you describe, let's start here a couple of the problems that this company was having? Barry Kolevzon: (01:55)Oh, there, there are a bunch of issues that are involved. I don't believe that they were staffed to carry on what they had. They’re in business 15 years, 20 years, 30 years. I'm not sure. And basically they were evidently happy with where they were. Then they woke up and said, “Hey, you know, we got a problem.” Anthony Verna: (02:19) Well, I think a lot of a lot of business owners are like that. You're in business for a while and it seems okay. Barry Kolevzon: (02:25) Well that's a problem. That's a big problem there. You know, they go to their buddies and talked to them and hey know everything, and the problem is evidently they don't. Anthony Verna: (02:39) All right, so what would be another problem? Barry Kolevzon: (02:42) Well, could be the problem of whether they make the product or the sample or whatever it is in house or out house. It depends on getting… Anthony Verna: That sounds like a supply chain issue. Barry Kolevzon: A supply chain issue, yes. Anthony Verna: (02:57) All right. So let's start here. When you say that the company was in existence for 10 to 15 years, but not exactly where the business owners wanted you're talking revenue? Barry Kolevzon: Yeah, they were short on revenue. That was a problem. Anthony Verna: Okay. So let's start here. Was there a sharp decline in the revenue or was it just the revenue wasn't good eno...

In our big 50th episode of the "Law & Business" podcast, Anthony sits down with Amy Birks, a strategic growth advisor for businesses. Amy has over a decade of experience in corporate finance, developing strategies and managing projects, and six years creating digital marketing and growth strategies for online businesses. That's what makes her the purposeful CEO’s secret weapon for growth and results. Amy and Anthony talk about how the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19 has caused a "new normal," debate whether this is around for a long time, how businesses are already quickly adapting to it, and how businesses need to continue to adapt, regardless of what a "new normal" looks like. After all, no matter what happens, technology will continue to develop and change business. Enjoy! Anthony Verna: (00:19) Welcome listeners to the Law and Business podcast. Once again, I'm Anthony Verna, but you knew that if you've been listening to the podcasts. With me is Amy Birks. How you doing, Amy? Amy Birks: I'm terrific. Thank you. Anthony Verna: Amy, I see you as a business consultant, somebody who is helping people to think of ways to grow. Am I being too wordy about what you do? Amy Birks: Am I too wordy or are you too wordy? Anthony Verna: No, am I being too wordy? Amy Birks: No, I think you summarized it really well. I think you did a great job. Anthony Verna: Well cause you have people just go intellectual property lawyer. You can get me in a couple of words. I can never see if I can get you in a couple words. So let's start here. A lot of us are hunkered down. A lot of us are cooped up. You are. I am. And I guess a lot of businesses are changing because of that. Amy Birks: (01:19) Yeah. At the time that we're recording this right now, we're kind of in the height of all the unknowns around the coronavirus and so everything is uncertain and it seems to keep changing on a day to day basis, hour by hour, really. I mean right now, especially in our country and really across the world. So we're seeing this very, very interesting shift in how everything is done. And what I'm noticing is that there's a couple of different opportunities. One is that we can all react from a space of fear of the uncertainty because unknowns and change and uncertainty create a good amount of discomfort for most people. But I think the other opportunity is looking at how we can, as business owners, especially how we can respond creatively to what's happening. And rather than seeing it as like, Oh, wow, our business could be in danger. Our economy could be in some real danger to seeing what the possibilities are instead. And that's what I'm most excited about because I am somebody who sees opportunities. I find them like a heat seeking missile and so I just keep seeing them everywhere I go. I see them and especially for small businesses cause that's who I support. Anthony Verna: (02:45) I've always seen you seen you, Amy as a bit of an optimist as well. Amy Birks: (02:49) Yes. That is also true. That is also true. But I think that's needed right now. You know, like you said, we're all hunkered down. I'm sitting outside on the back porch of my home right now because the children are home from school and they're very noisy which is also wonderful. Like it's great that we're all getting opportunities to connect more with our families, but there's a lot of uncertainty and I think that if we can find those moments to be optimistic and hopeful, then that is what is really required. I think for all of us right now to move on and to continue to grow. Growth is my business, right? That's what I do is I help companies grow. And so in order for us to grow, we have to be able to adapt to change and be willing to do that. And that's sometimes hard when we're afraid. Anthony Verna: (03:36) So let's get into specifics. What are some really specific things about change that businesses have to do? I mean number one.

In Episode 49 of the "Law & Business" podcast, we have a chat with John Knebels. Knebs - as he is affectionately known - is a long-time local sports journalist in the Philadelphia metropolitan area. Anthony and Knebs sat down in the public view in a local Panera and talked about: How has his job changed as technology changed? What keeps him going in journalism? How are journalism and law - and being a journalist and being a lawyer - similar? Enjoy! Anthony Verna: All right. We are live and kicking in our favorite Panera. Welcome to the Law and Business podcast. Everybody out there knows I'm Anthony Verna. With me, John Knebels. How are you doing, sir? John Knebels: I'm doing well. Nice to be here. Anthony Verna:  Thank you very much. And look, just to get everybody up to speed… You've got local journalism in your blood, right? Who are you writing for right now? John Knebels: So right now I'm doing Catholicphilly.com. It is a diocesan website in Philadelphia. I've been doing that since 1982. Basically covering all of Catholic stories: Catholic schools, personality profiles, features, news stories, sporting events, and then I'm writing for a wonderful website and it’s called Philadelphiasportsdigest.com and it's run by a mother-daughter team. Like every human being on the planet should have bosses like this. They just really, really great people. And that covers in Philadelphia the Philadelphia Catholic league, and inter-academic league are the two that have maiden leagues. So, the boys and girls they cover and there's a tremendous amount of opportunity for people who get involved with them because there's so much to do. Anthony Verna: Sure. I mean, I've totally forgotten the Philadelphia high school athletics in my time. So, what else needs to be covered? If you're saying there's a lot of work to do in the local scene, what else wants to be done? John Knebels: There's a couple of different things. It's interesting like the Philadelphia Inquirer no longer really has a high school sports section. Anthony Verna: That's still amazes me. John Knebels: Yeah. Now let me be clear, they'll do stories and they have a couple of really good writers, but they no longer do things like standings and updates and previews and we'll do a preview for maybe a tournament. But back in the day you would get so much information about what happened the night before: who did what, the box scores. They don't have that anymore. Anthony Verna: Sure, sure. I remember when I was first home from college and in law school I was part time at the Bucks County Courier Times and that's all they had me do was go write high school sports. John Knebels: And, and you know, it's interesting because 95% of high school athletes are not going to play in college. So, mom and dad are going to really like seeing Bobby Schmidt's name scoring two points in the box score. There's something to be said for that. I'm sure if my kid had scored two points for St Joe's prep, I'd be like, Oh my God, I'd be taking pictures and sending them or his name mentioned somewhere. So, what you're finding is that a lot of these companies are desperately trying to find good strategies to get readers, but the problem is the monetary part of it. So, people are not making a whole lot of money doing this, obviously from the advertising standpoint is the most important part of it. But you're seeing these people, you have a lot of people who are pretending to be journalists. And I would say that they have no training and they're like, you know what, how hard is it to sit there and cover a wrestling event and they'll go up and you know, say, Oh this one did that, that would that with no training which is a little aggravating for people who've done it for their whole life, but some companies are just taking whatever they can get. Anthony Verna: But there still is a bit of a hole in the market for people who are invested in high school sports.

On Episode 48 of the "Law & Business" podcast, it's Tina Vignali of the blog Traveleidoscope. We have a friendly chat about what the blog means from a business model standpoint and some hot travel topics as the world is beginning to not be friendly to travel for the time being. Here is a lightly-edited transcript of the conversation: Anthony Verna: All right. Listeners, this is Anthony Verna back with you for another episode of the Law and Business Podcast. We are with today, Tina Vignali. How'd I do? Tina Vignali: Pretty good. Anthony Verna: All right. That, that silent G in Italian always throws me. Tina Vignali: Well, you're Italian. You should… Anthony Verna:  I know, but that silent G always gets me. Tina Vignali: That's okay. Anthony Verna: You know, even when I was taking Italian lessons, that silent G just gets me a little. Tina Vignali: Well, I won’t hold it against you. Anthony Verna: Thank you, my friend. Thank you. Tina is the main blogger at the Travelidoscope blog. All right. And my tongue is not caught up yet. So, Tina talk to me a little bit. Let's start here. What specific niche and travel do you blog about? Tina Vignali: So, Anthony, thanks for having me. I typically blog about active travel, so that folds in with my personal interests. I'm an avid skier. I like to scuba dive, I like to hike, anything active, but I also keep in mind that there's a broader audience. And so, I also like to blog about good food, great restaurants, and there's even a travel related recipe in there from time to time. Anthony Verna: So what does active travel specifically mean? Tina Vignali: It can mean a lot of different things. As I mentioned, my personal interests are in very sporty activities, skiing, scuba diving, hiking, kayaking, anything like that. But it doesn't have to specifically address those topics. It can just mean I'm not passive. So not in a tour group perhaps. But that's not to say that I exclude going on a tour. I've done tours myself and they're frequently very active. So, it can mean a lot of different things. Anthony Verna: Let's wake up at 6:00 AM to catch the bus. But, I'm not working. I don't want to wake up at six. Tina Vignali: You need a vacation from your vacation. Anthony Verna: Yes. I think I've made that joke a few times after tours. So, let's move to the business side of this. Since this is the Law and Business podcast, how do you make money as a blogger? That's always the first question around the blogging industry. Tina Vignali: Sure. I think it depends on what your personal goals are. Anthony Verna: Oh, and absolutely. That's correct. Cause everybody's blog is different. As we know, this podcast is a supplement to my law practice, same with my blog. I mean, all of that is in a way advertising, but for some people, blogging is their career. Tina Vignali:  And I admire that. That ability to do that. Unfortunately, I think that it's better for me to supplement my career as a blogger. the way that I take a couple of different approaches. So, we know each other from PHL bloggers and that's a great way to network because while traditional networking is more face to face, as we are today, but, you can also network through social media and I think that's a really important way to find business, create business help others in the blogging world. And so, I think that's a valuable way to produce and assist others. The other thing that I like to do is I like to get out and do work with libraries. So for example, I've done workshops at libraries where I discuss how you can use your library as a travel planning tool, not just for guidebooks but for things like if you are interested in finding out what kinds of foods you'll like, get a recipe book from the destination that you'll be traveling to or even music. Frequently libraries have CDs or records. So, you can find out what kind of music you'll be hearing or even what kind of different movies or books.

Anthony Verna and Wil Jacques visited Toy Fair 2020. This is Anthony's eleventh Toy Fair and Wil Jacques' fifth Toy Fair. They opened the phone and recorded their thoughts for intellectual property trends they saw from the smaller businesses. Anthony Verna at Toy Fair 2020 Anthony Verna: Welcome to the “Law & Business” podcast. I'm Anthony Verna, Verna Law Managing Partner. Chances are that if you're listening, you already knew that. I am here at toy fair, 2020 with Wil Jacques, my patent agent. Wil Jacques: Good afternoon listening folks! Great to be here. Anthony Verna: All right, well, so let's talk a few items, a few big idea items for intellectual property and toys. One item that I noticed from maybe a patent side is the fact that there are plenty of companies that have patents filed, or at least they told us they had patents filed, but the patent is number is not noticed on the packaging. So let's talk a little bit about what that means for them. Wil Jacques: Yeah. Kind of disturbing, actually, but, as you said, a lot of companies claim that they had a few utility patents that were filed and or issued. But, the designation of those patents or markings were not on the packaging that they had. And what I wanted to bring out to them is that it really plays significantly or importantly in whether or not they were able and how much damages they might be able to capture from market infringers if in fact they never notified the market that the product that was being copied in fact had patents on it. And so that's the whole idea of marking your product, with your patent numbers: so you send a signal to the market that if you copy this particular product, you're copying one that's already patent protected. Anthony Verna: I would also be worried from an infringement standpoint that, without giving notice of the number that a defendant would possibly have a complete defense to patent infringement anyway, because without that particular notice. Wil: It is onus on patent owners to notify any infringer, of copying or infringing on their patents. I mean, there's, there's no patent police, you know, there's no one that goes around to see whether or not people are actually infringing on your patent is actually your responsibility to, to police that. So, you know, there are many strategies that you need to employ. But one of the first strategies is you can't extract damages from someone until you notify them that they are actually infringing on your patent. Part of the marking of your product is a notification to the marketplace that you have a patented product. Anthony Verna: And, remember, “There is no patent police” is a trademark of Wil Jacques, because if you listen to this podcast you have heard “There is no patent police” at least 10 other times from, from Wil in past episodes. So let's talk about the utility versus design issue. We spoke to several companies that said they had design patents, but I think you and I probably wanted to try to push them a little further to see if that design actually had utility. Wil Jacques: Yeah. Actually, it was very interesting conversation with a number of people that we talk to and, you know, again, in full disclosure and without disclosing what they were, telling us there were a number of companies that had what we thought to be utility features for their toys, their products, their inventions. And for whatever reason they never sought, they never looked into the opportunity to exploit the potential value of those utility, of potential utility claims and those patents. And I was kind of surprised to hear that there were various excuses, some around cost and what it would potentially cost to do something like that, which can be somewhat erroneous. It's almost like asking how much is a brain surgery going to cost before you get, before you get the x-ray. And so, you know,

It is Episode 46 of the "Law & Business" Podcast. This is a continuance of our mini-series with the Nessa Group. Here, the group talks about businesses who are resistant to change. One trademark infringement lawsuit comes to Anthony's mind on the topic, because after the trademark infringement lawsuit, Anthony sent the client to Nessa Group because the client had a loss of one million dollars a year. Anthony Verna: Welcome to our fourth episode of our special mini-series of podcasts, a series on the NESSA group. And, once again, we're here with the same team. My name is Anthony Verna. Jim Huerta, how are you doing? Jim Huerta: I'm doing fine. I'm glad to be here. Anthony Verna: All right, Barry Kolevzon, how are you doing? Barry Kolevzon: Great. Anthony Verna: Wonderful. Wil Jacques, what's happening? Wil Jacques: Oh, not a whole lot, but I'm glad to be here. Anthony Verna: Glad to have you here as well. Justin Tripodi. Justin, how's it going? Justin Tripodi: Doing great. Excited for the conversation today. Anthony Verna: Yeah, me too. Me too. So today we're going to be talking about clients who are resistant to change and businesses who are resistant to change. And hopefully we will find businesses who are not resistant to change because change sometimes, especially when you bring in a group like us is what helps a business grow. Jim, Barry, the three of us worked on a particular business a few years ago and I know it's more than a few years ago, but let's talk about that for a second. This was a client, a company that was sued for trademark infringement. This was a case where it wasn't a full brand, but it was an apparel company that was using a design on its clothing that was similar enough to a registered trademark where the trademark owner filed a lawsuit. It really wasn't worth defending. We were able to settle. The good news is that we were able to settle for $20,000 over a period of time and the company was able to destroy the offending products, we'll call it that cause I don't necessarily think it was infringing and move on with life. That part was I think was a great settlement. The three of us looked at this particular company's books and the three of us saw a company that was $1 million in the red. They're selling jeans. A company that is selling jeans, in my opinion, should not be $1 million in the red. One area that I noticed was that they were buying too much product from their factories. They were not selling the product fully. And when they would sell their product, they would sell it over at overstock.com for a loss from what they bought it from the factory. So, Jim, let's start here. What are some ways to avoid that red number when you know you're purchasing too much from the factory? Jim Huerta: No, in this case it was tricky. I mean obviously inventory becomes a very important thing. I think a lot of companies don't realize that if you have an excessive amount of inventory and you're carrying too much inventory, that you're not moving, it starts working against your P. and. L. it just has to you releasing prices that you can't really work with. This company had more unique things going on when it came to this red number. They had a parent company offshore and the parent company was trying to move their inventory back to the local company. So, in order for them, the parent company to look better that they will be moving inventory, they will house it back into the local company who was getting beat up and was going into the red. But there was no communication what was going on. There was no idea where the stages of different inventory levels were at. There were an incredible amount of transportation costs. When we looked at it and we looked at some of it, we didn't get enough information, we started to realize that a lot of this inventory was in transit because of the way they were structuring this movement. You couldn't really track the inventory and the dollars just kep...

Our special mini-series at the “Law & Business” Podcast with the Nessa Group continues. In this special episode, we take a case in which a company must rebrand. The company's actual name is changed, but the situation is based from a real case. Quite often, in trademark infringement lawsuits, companies are facing a difficult choice: Rebrand or Fight. Fighting trademark infringement lawsuits are quite expensive with many procedural moves in federal district court. These procedural moves raise legal fees so that smaller companies have issues in fighting these infringement lawsuits. How can a business consulting group help a company rebrand? Or at least begin to see the benefits of rebranding? This podcast episode starts that discussion. Anthony Verna: Welcome to episode three of our special podcast mini-series. I'm Anthony Verna and we're here with the gang from the NESSA group. Jim, pleasure to see you again. Jim Huerta: It’s a pleasure of being here. I find this will be very interesting. Anthony Verna: Barry, thanks for being here. Barry Kolevzon: Well, thank you for having me here and I think that we have exciting discussion to discuss. Anthony Verna: Good. Thank you. Wil, great to see you, sir. Wil Jacques: Yeah, I got a ditto that from Barry. But yeah, this is going to be exciting. I like real live case studies. Anthony Verna: We like dittos. We don't like mega-dittos. Justin, it's a pleasure. Justin Tripodi: I'm not going to hold this up. Let's get into this. Jim Huerta: Good follow up. Anthony Verna: All right, so let's start doing our case study section of our mini-series. So, let me tell you a little story about a client of mine. And the names here are changed to protect not just the innocent but what is private as well. So, we're going to call this Bronze and Bourbon. And I wish I'd thought of that in real life. But Bronze and Bourbon is a company that was sued for trademark infringement. They're an apparel company. They make not revolutionary materials, but they make apparel. So fancy, fun tee shirts, fun sweatshirts, caps, a lot of caps, a lot of accessories. And some of them do have sayings. The aesthetic, the Uber of this apparel is very traditionally manly. Certainly cars, certainly a lot of motoring type of imagery in it. The plaintiff was a Bronze and Coke and so, from that particular standpoint, they're also an apparel company. Totally different type of apparel though. I would say that they sell a very expensive apparel, very good dress shirts, very good dress, pants, shoes, ties, things that are very much more upscale than the client in this case. So Wil, let's start with you as to some thoughts here. Wil Jacques: You know, again, I'm a novice and certainly don't understand trademark law as you would. But the first thought that came to mind was you gotta be kidding me. Anthony Verna: So let's talk about that for a second. No, and I understand exactly where you're coming from because a lot of people don't understand trademark law and a lot of people don't understand what the what the reasoning is for a trademark infringement lawsuit like this. So let's talk about that for a little bit. The plaintiff needs to have one) a trademark that is registered with the United States patent and trademark office. So that trademark has the brand in it. That trademark will have the goods and services listed in it. And obviously the owner is listed in it. So, those are keys. And then when you're filing a trademark infringement suit, you obviously have to listen to the defendant as to why is there infringement? So you're going to have to discuss some of those areas. The trademarks are similar. The goods and services are similar in a very simple explanation, similar trademarks, similar goods and services equals trademark infringement. Now you're probably saying, you gotta be kidding me because the trademarks do have some differences to them.