Brookston Beer Bulletin

Jay R. Brooks on Beer

  • Home
  • About
  • Editorial
  • Birthdays
  • Art & Beer

Socialize

  • Dribbble
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Flickr
  • GitHub
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • Pinterest
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Powered by Genesis

Patent No. US 2731027A: Beer Dispensing Apparatus

January 17, 2015 By Jay Brooks

patent-logo
Today in 1956, US Patent 2731027 A was issued, an invention of Carl L. Daun, for his “Beer Dispensing Apparatus.” There’s no Abstract, but in the description, he describes as an “invention relat[ing] to [an] apparatus for dispensing carbonated beverages without there by changing the gas content of the beverage while eliminating the losses customarily encountered in dispensing such beverages. He continues:

This apparatus is particularly useful in dispensing beer from barrels but is, as will be apparent, suitable for all liquids. According to present practice barrel beer is dispensed from a faucet connected to a tap rod projecting to the bottom of the barrel through a tap which serves to provide a fluid tight seal at the tapping hole. Beer is forced up the tap rod to the faucet by the gas pressure in the barrel. A pressure regulated gas (air or carbon dioxide) source is connected to the interior of the barrel through a gas check valve in the tap. Theoretically such a system will maintain the carbon dioxide gas content of the beer constant and the drawing should be uniform. In practice, however, various losses attributable to variations in the gas content caused by temperature and pressure deviations from the ideal are encountered to a greater or lesser extent.

Keep reading here.
US2731027-0

Filed Under: Beers, Breweries, Just For Fun, Politics & Law, Related Pleasures Tagged With: Kegs, Patent, Science of Brewing

Wine vs. Beer, Big vs. Small, More Trademark Woes

January 17, 2015 By Jay Brooks

cambria
Opened in 2012, the tiny Cambria Beer Co. is located in the equally small town of Cambria, described more as a “seaside village,” boasting about 6,000 residents. It’s located along Highway 1, in San Luis Obispo County, midway between San Francisco and L.A.

The brewery uses a small 3bbl brew sculpture system, and operates a small tap room on Cornwall Street. They offer a wide variety of beer styles, continually rotating. A recent list included five on, with two in the fermenters and three more scheduled right behind those. Beers sell out quickly, but they try to keep up. Owners Aaron and Jennifer Wharton decided that since they were the only brewery in town, that Cambria Beer Company was the right name for their decidedly local enterprise.

cambria-beer-company

Not everyone agreed. The Jackson Family Farms is best known for Kendall-Jackson wine, but that’s just one of the more than a dozen wineries that they own. Another one of their labels is Cambria Estate Winery. So you’re probably thinking that makes sense, probably located right down the street. Nope. To get to the Cambria Estate Winery from the brewery, you’ll need to head south on Highway 1, then pick up Interstate 101 at the junction in San Luis Obispo. Drive south to Santa Maria, turn left in downtown and drive west out of town to the winery. All told, it will take you about one hour and twenty minutes to get there, because it’s nearly 80 miles away outside the town of Santa Maria, which is even in a different county (Santa Barbara County), too.

I first saw this on Grub Street, but the local newspaper, The Cambrian, naturally has the most complete account in When is Cambria not in Cambria? Apparently, the Whartons have been trying to negotiate to keep their name since they received the C&D letter from KJ’s lawyers on New Year’s Eve.

Unfortunately, as I understand it, when it comes to trademark law, alcohol is alcohol; they’re in the same class of goods as far as trademark is concerned. This is hardly the first time this has happened. Another small brewery in the Bay Area had to add a letter to their name because a spirits company was using the original spelling. A San Francisco brewery not long ago had to change the name of one of its beers, because there was a rum of the same name.

So there is some precedent here, it’s not totally out of left field. The Cambrian author wonders if every business in Cambria using Cambria in their name should be worried, rightly concluding no. But the fact that the winery is so far from the town and they serve largely a different demographic makes it not so cut and dry. A commenter on Reddit who claimed to be close to the parties involved mentioned that the brewery’s attorneys believed they had a strong case, but the $50,000 (minimum) price tag to fight it was too much for them, as it would be for almost any small company. So the brewery did what most people would in this situation, and decided to change their name. Last week, they posted that decision on their Facebook page, asking fans and customers to help them come up with a new name by leaving a comment. They’ve had a lot of suggestions so far, including several funny ones.

I’m starting to think that trademark law may need some modification. Clearly, alcohol is not alcohol anymore. Maybe there was a time when that made sense, but I think most of us can agree that we can tell the difference between beer and wine. And it seems to me geographic truth should trump whatever reason this winery is using a name that has nothing to do with where it’s located. I seem to recall another trademark case where the Boston Beer Company (Samuel Adams) sued Boston Beer Works and lost, the court ruling that “Boston” was too generic a term, ditto “beer.” Komlossy Law has a nice overview of the case, if you’re interested in learning more. And those were both beer companies, so it does seem like Cambria Beer might have had a decent shot at keeping their name. Still, you have to understand not wanting to spend a fortune going to court on an uncertain result. As we learned in “War Games,” sometimes “the only winning move is not to play.” If nothing else, I hope we can all support whatever new name they decide on and stop by and spend our money there the next time we drive by on our way to or from Los Angeles or the Bay Area. Success is always the best revenge.

Filed Under: Breweries, Editorial, News, Politics & Law Tagged With: California, Law, Trademark

Patent No. 3298835A: Process For Production Of A Hop Concentrate

January 17, 2015 By Jay Brooks

patent-logo
Today in 1967, US Patent 3298835 A was issued, an invention of Murray Peter John Andrew, Clarke Brian James, Hildebrand Robert Peter, and Harold Frank Vincent, and assigned to Carlton & United Breweries, for their “Process for Production of a Hop Concentrate.” Essentially it’s a “process for the production of a hop concentrate wherein the flavour imparting constituents of hops are increased by extracting and then converting inactive constituents to active flavour imparting constituents.” There’s no Abstract, but this is from the description:

The process of this invention involves the utilization of those constituents which are regarded as relatively inactive or which do not normally impart the desired flavour characteristics to brewed beverages and which are not converted to any substantial degree to active flavour-imparting constituents during treatment by existing. processes. In the process of our co-pending application the relatively inactive hop constituents of a-acids known as humulones are converted to the more active iso-humulones by the process of isomerization. It is an object of the present invention to provide an improved process for the production of a hop concentrate for brewing purposes, whereby the lupulones content of the p-acids of hops may be utilized in addition to the humulone content of the a-acids, thereby increasing the flavouring or bittering characteristics of the hop concentrate final product for the production of a brewed beverage.

US3298835-0

Filed Under: Breweries, Just For Fun, Politics & Law, Related Pleasures Tagged With: Hops, Patent, Science of Brewing

Patent No. 20140017354A1: Beer Brewing System And Method

January 16, 2015 By Jay Brooks

patent-logo
Today in 2014, just one year ago, US Patent 20140017354 A1 was issued, an invention of James Joseph and Brandy Callanan, for their “Beer Brewing System and Method.” Here’s the Abstract:

The present subject matter relates to systems and methods for automated, whole grain brewing. In one configuration, such a system can include a base, a boil kettle positioned on the base, a first heating element in communication with the boil kettle and configured to selectively heat fluid contained in the boil kettle, and a mash tun positioned on the base, the mash tun configured to receive one or more solid or fluid materials therein. A pumping system positioned at least partially within the base can be connected to the boil kettle and the mash tun, the pumping system being operable to selectively pass fluid into, out of, and among the boil kettle and the mash tun. In addition, a control system can be positioned at least partially within the base and configured to selectively control the first heating element and the pumping system.

Essentially it’s an “automated, whole grain brewing system” for homebrewing, but you read a lot more about it in the description.
US20140017354A1-20140116-D00000
US20140017354A1-20140116-D00002
US20140017354A1-20140116-D00003

Filed Under: Breweries, Just For Fun, Politics & Law, Related Pleasures Tagged With: Brewing Equipment, Patent, Science of Brewing

Patent No. 3364033A: Method Of Preparing Hop Extracts

January 16, 2015 By Jay Brooks

patent-logo
Today in 1968, US Patent 3364033 A was issued, an invention of Lars O. Spetsig, assigned to Sweden’s Stockholms Bryggerier Ab, for his “Method of Preparing Hop Extracts.” There’s no Abstract, but here’s his introduction in the description. “This invention relates to a new and improved method of preparing hop extracts for flavoring beer and other fermented malt beverages, in which a more complete utilisation of the hop constituents is achieved.” And further along there’s this:

It has now been discovered that better utilisation of the valuable substances is achieved if the hops are extracted in the following manner. The hops are first treated with Warm water to obtain a tannin extract. This is followed by leaching out the readily soluble bitter substances (among them hulupones) and isomerizing the relatively insoluble humulones to readily soluble isohumulones: by boiling the hops in an aqueous solution of neutral pH to yield a first bitter extract. Rapid boiling at this stage is preferred to counteract oxidation. The vapour boiling off is condensed to form an aromatic extract. Since the most valuable aromatic substances are the last to be distilled off, however, fractionation may be employed to collect two or more separate fractions. Finally, the partially spent hops are oxidised by customary means, e.g. see Swedish Patent No. 150,997, to form a second bitter extract.

US3364033-0

Filed Under: Breweries, Just For Fun, Politics & Law, Related Pleasures Tagged With: Hops, Patent, Sweden

Patent No. 3422448A: Tapping Device For Beer Kegs And The Like

January 14, 2015 By Jay Brooks

patent-logo
Today in 1969, US Patent 3422448 A was issued, an invention of Mack S. Johnston, for his “Tapping Device for Beer Kegs and the Like.” There’s no Abstract, but here’s his introduction in the description:

The present invention relates to a new improved tapping device for drawing fluid such as beer from containers such as beer kegs or barrels, using a gas to drive the fluid from the container. In particular, the invention relates to a new improved tapping device usable with conventional beer kegs and comprising a sub-unit, called a keg adapter, which constantly seals the keg, and a subunit, called a coupler, which is attached to the beer dispensing apparatus in a restaurant or tavern and is readily connected to the keg adapter so that the tapping device is automatically in operating condition.

US3422448-0
US3422448-1
US3422448-2
US3422448-3
US3422448-4

Filed Under: Beers, Breweries, Just For Fun, Politics & Law, Related Pleasures Tagged With: Kegs, Patent

Patent No. 718253A: Concentrated Hopped Wort And Process Of Producing Same

January 13, 2015 By Jay Brooks

patent-logo
Today in 1903, US Patent 718253 A was issued, an invention of Herbert Amos Hobson of London, England, assigned to the Concentrated Beer Company Ltd., for his “Concentrated Hopped Wort and Process of Producing Same.” There’s no Abstract, or any drawings filed with the application, but here’s the introductory overview:

This invention relates to the production of a hopped wort from which beer, either alcoholic or non-alcoholic, maybe produced by the mere addition of yeast and water or of water alone, as the case may be.

In the ordinary brewing process the malt is first mashed and the hops are then added to and boiled in the wort or extract of malt, with the result that the bitter of the hop is unfavorably affected, objectionable resinous matters are extracted, and the volatile aroma of the hops is to a great extent lost, and these undesirable results are partly due to the length of time for which the boiling is continued and partly to the high boiling-point of the liquor in which the hops are boiled. It is the object of this invention to avoid these defects and to produce a hopped wort, preferably in a concentrated state, possessing the keeping qualities necessary for export purposes and adapted for the production, in the locality or country of consumption, of beer possessing the characteristic qualities of beer brewed in the ordinary manner.

While there weren’t any images in the filing, this is a flowchart of Alternative Sources of Hopped Wort from a homebrewing website in South Africa.

sources_for_hopped_wort

Filed Under: Beers, Just For Fun, Politics & Law, Related Pleasures Tagged With: Patent, Science of Brewing, Wort

Patent No. 1328079A: Process Of Mashing

January 13, 2015 By Jay Brooks

patent-logo
Today in 1920, US Patent 1328079 A was issued, an invention of Charles B. Davis, for his “Process of Mashing.” There’s no Abstract, and there’s not much of an introduction or overview, he just dives right into a detailed explanation of his invention. It’s curious that the patent office approved it three days before Prohibition took effect in 1920, although he first applied for the patent in 1915. Davis probably didn’t make too many sales over the subsequent thirteen years.
US1328079-0

Filed Under: Beers, Breweries, Just For Fun, Politics & Law, Related Pleasures Tagged With: Brewing Equipment, Patent, Science of Brewing

Patent No. D69235S: Design For A Bottle Opener

January 12, 2015 By Jay Brooks

patent-logo
Today in 1926, US Patent D69235 S was issued, an invention of Everett Irving Rogers Jr., for his “Design for a Bottle Opener.” There’s no Abstract, and in fact there’s very little text in the application at all, save for that he “invented a certain new, original, and ornamental design for a bottle opener, of which [is] substantially as shown. It’s an odd looking opener. Was there really a burning demand for bottle openers shaped like the head of a camel?

USD69235-0

Filed Under: Just For Fun, Politics & Law, Related Pleasures Tagged With: Beer Accesories, Patent

Ponies, Puppies & Pac-Man, Oh My!

January 12, 2015 By Jay Brooks

pony dalmation pac-man
The Super Bowl propaganda machine is already out in full force, even though the teams that will play have yet to be decided. I’m not talking about the NFL, or even football in general. The propaganda machine I’m referring to is the prohibitionist group Alcohol Justice, who each year uses the Super Bowl as an opportunity to talk about the ills of beer and other adult beverages, since — horror of horrors — fans who are on both sides of the arbitrary dividing line that is the minimum drinking age will most assuredly watch the game.

And more horrific and worrying, is that advertisers are keen to reach the more than 112 million viewers watching the game. Of those 112 million Americans, roughly 90 million are potential beer customers. (That’s a rough guess based on several data points from various sources, made all the more difficult because Nielsen and others break down age groups into the 18-34 range for the very reasonable reason that they’re all young adults, except when it comes to drinking alcohol.) Yesterday, Alcohol Justice, tweeted the following regarding Anheuser-Busch InBev‘s plans for advertising during the Super Bowl.

Budweiser Super Bowl ads target youth with puppies, ponies & Pac-Man http://bit.ly/1BMFsft Self-regulation failure

AJ-tweet-15-01-11
So as far as I can tell, according to AJ, if there are any children present, it’s a family event, and that means — you guessed it — anything to do with alcohol is aimed directly at the under 21 crowd. Because unsurprisingly, their statement is ridiculous on several levels. First, the idea that advertising during an event with 80% adults is “targeting youth” is absurd, especially when you realize that the demographic statistics include 2-17 year olds. How many two-year olds are corrupted if they even, undoubtedly by accident, happen to see all three minutes of ABI’s ads during the fours hours that the game is televised. The Budweiser ads comprise 1.25% of the total Super Bowl experience, and that’s down 25% from last year, when they aired four minutes’ worth of ads. ABI is, as usual, the only alcohol advertiser among the 21 major advertisers for the Super Bowl. But that’s still too many as far as the wingnuts at AJ are concerned. Zero is the only number that would satisfy their loony way of viewing the world.

They close their tweet with “Self-regulation failure,” which is to be expected. AJ seems to think Budweiser is “targeting” kids just by showing ads during the Super Bowl. But the self-regulation they believe is failing (presumably the Beer Institute Marketing and Advertising Code) states that the criteria to be followed is that “at least 71.6% of the audience is expected to be adults of legal drinking age.” Here, the Super Bowl viewership will most likely be at least 80%, and frankly higher since children below a certain age who happen to be present aren’t likely to even be paying attention. So how exactly is following the code a fail?

But moreover, where exactly did Alcohol Justice get the idea that ABI’s ads were using “puppies, ponies & Pac-Man,” and what exactly is wrong with that? That line comes, sort of, from the link in the tweet, which takes you to an article on MediaPost, “an integrated publishing and content company whose mission is to provide a complete array of resources for media, marketing and advertising professionals.” That article is merely reporting on what ads ABI is planning and is entitled Budweiser’s Super Bowl Line-up Includes Puppies, Kings, And Pac-Man. Why AJ changed “Kings” to “ponies” is undoubtedly to make it sound worse than it really is. It’s a favorite propaganda trick of Alcohol Justice, bending reality to their agenda.

But what really pisses me off about AJ’s propaganda, a tactic they use time and time again, is the idea that if something might appeal to someone who’s under 21 then it’s only for kids and is therefore “targeting youth.” For example, the BI’s advertising code specifically forbids beer companies from depicting Santa Claus, which personally I think is utter rubbish. Beer labels and advertising by beer brands all over the world use St. Nick, and few people seem to have a problem with it. And that’s because many adults love the idea of Santa Claus, too. I know I do. I get that Santa is aimed primarily at kids. I already miss the time when my kids were still young enough to believe in him. But the idea of Santa Claus is really for all ages. Every time someone tries to put a cartoon character on a bottle of beer, prohibitionists go nuts, but adults love cartoons, too, they’re not just for kids, and there are many, many cartoons aimed specifically at an older audience. Have they never been to a comic book convention? The idea that people simply stop being interested in the things they enjoyed as children the day they cross over into their alcohol years on the day they turn 21 is completely laughable.

As I mentioned, there will be three ABI ads during the Super Bowl. According to AdWeek, they will be the following:

1. Lost Dog

This is the “puppy” referred to in the article and the tweet. It’s the sequel to last year’s Puppy Love.

A Bud spot called “Lost Dog” from Anomaly will show how “only your best buds are the ones who always have your back,” [Budweiser VP Brian] Perkins said. It’s a sequel to last year’s “Puppy Love,” the most shared ad on Facebook of all time, and once again will feature a puppy and the brewer’s iconic Clydesdales. Jake Scott is back as director.

And while yes, it does include a puppy, the only way this doesn’t appeal to all ages is only if someone watching it doesn’t have a heart. Since when do only kids like puppies? Seriously, what’s wrong with these people? If you don’t find that adorable, you should probably consider becoming a prohibitionist.

PuppyClydes

2. King of Beers

Not much is known about this ad specifically, just the general idea has been reported, and according to the AdWeek piece from January 7, it won’t be shot until this week coming up. But it’s the “King” in the article and what AJ replaced with “ponies” because it made what Bud was doing sound more sinister.

Another Bud spot, which Anomaly will shoot in the next week, will focus on how A-B brews the King of Beers. As scripted, the ad “talks with real pride and real attitude about Budweiser quality,” Perkins said, adding, “A lot of brands try and do that and there are prosaic ways to talk about that kind of thing. This one is going to do it with pride and swagger.”

But let’s go back to the “ponies” Alcohol Justice was referring to, which in reality, of course, is the Budweiser Clydesdales. These are big damn horses. I suspect that even Clydesdale ponies are probably the same size as regular horses. They’re draft horses, one of several breeds used to pull heavy things. They’re also used in equestrian vaulting, a little-known sport my daughter has been doing since she was six. The best way to describe it is gymnastics on the back of a moving horse. So you want a big horse to give you more room to work on and also because they’re more stable, too. I’ve taken my daughter to see the Budweiser Clydesdales when they visited the Fairfield brewery a few years ago. She’s into horses, as you’d expect, and like Lisa Simpson she puts down a “pony” on her Christmas wish list every year. But again, is that unique to children? Hardly. My wife informs me that one day we will own a horse, if not a pony. And that’s because like many, many adults, she loves horses, too. Liking ponies, and horses, is not unique to childhood and no one over the age of 21 stops loving them. If so, wouldn’t we think of rodeos as events just for kids?

ClydesdalesBrewerPennNational2-6-26-13

3. Coin

This is the ad where “Pac-Man” will appear that was referred to in the article and the tweet.

A Bud Light spot called “Coin” from EnergyBBDO will tell the story of a drinker of the light beer who steps out for a night of fun with 1980s icon Pac Man as he enters a life-size, interactive Pac-Man game. The ad will be supported by a House of Whatever event that the brewer will set up for three days in Phoenix, the host of this year’s game. Steve Aoki will serve as DJ at the house.

But again, does Pac-Man appeal exclusively to children? Pac-Man debuted in 1980. My kids, especially my 13-year old, loves video games. But my son Porter, who even loves older retro games, thinks Pac-Man is really old school and wants nothing to do with it. So who does love Pac-Man? If you assume that the youngest kids were maybe ten years old when Pac-Man first came out, those same kids would be 45 today. It’s apparently hipster Millennials that ABI is hoping to target with Pac-Man. In an earlier Advertising Age article, they explained the changing focus of Budweiser advertising. “The Super Bowl ads come as Anheuser-Busch begins a new media strategy as it seeks to remain relevant with millennials in an age where smaller craft beers are the rage among young drinkers.”

pac-man

So it’s younger drinkers that ABI is hoping to reach with their advertising in 2015, but they are pointedly not targeting youth under 21, as Alcohol Justice would have you believe. But this is what they so often do. They take a relatively innocuous article and twist it just enough that it sounds like something entirely different. Not once in the MediaPost they linked to did it mention targeting underage youths. They just made that up. They also failed in their characterization of a self-regulation fail since the ads during the Super Bowl fall within the industry guidelines. And changing the headline to the catchier, alliterative “puppies, ponies & Pac-Man” may have sounded clever, but as is so typical of the prohibitionists, it’s misleading and inaccurate. And that’s the problem with agenda-driven propaganda. It’s more important to be provocative and push an agenda than it is to be truthful, accurate or reasonable. And it’s that very devotion to fanaticism that makes any honest discussion nearly impossible.

I’m going to watch the Super Bowl again this year, even if my team (the Green Bay Packers) ultimately doesn’t play in the big game (Go Packers!). My kids will watch it, too, and several adult members of my family will undoubtedly drink a few beers during the game. And I have one prediction I can almost guarantee will take place on Super Sunday. It will be a typical day, and nothing bad will happen as a result of my kids seeing a few Budweiser commercials. Because a true family event is one where both adults and kids can be together, it’s not where every adult has to hide or forgo adult pleasures because children might see them and get the idea — in the prohibitionist’s own words — that such behavior is normal. The problem is that adults drinking alcohol is one of the most normal activities people have ever engaged in, having been doing so non-stop since the beginning of recorded history.

We saw this recently when prohibitionists, specifically again — sigh — Alcohol Justice, opposed a California law that would allow local beer, cider and winemakers to sell and sample their goods at farmers’ markets alongside local farmers and craftspeople as just another locally made product. They criticized the law saying that farmer’s markets were for families and therefore no alcohol should be allowed because it made such behavior look normal. Unfortunately for them, it is normal, and happily they lost that battle and it did become a law in California. If you’ve made it this far and still haven’t had enough of me shouting in the wind, you can see AJ making the same arguments in What Does Family Friendly Mean?

But I really think it’s important to push back on this idea that family-friendly and alcohol are mutually exclusive. Alcohol is in the world, and the more we can do as adults and parents to teach our kids the proper way it should be consumed, modeling our best behavior, the better adults our children will become. Pretending it doesn’t exist and separating kids from learning about the adult world in the end does more harm than good, and doesn’t prepare them in any way to join the world at large once they’re chronologically old enough to be considered adults. Watching the Super Bowl with three minutes of beer commercials during four hours with their family and friends is, and quite rightly ought to be, a non-event and the fact that millions of Americans don’t give it a second thought should convince anyone how out of touch Alcohol Justice is with the world.

bud-clydesdale-postcards

Filed Under: Breweries, Editorial, Politics & Law, Related Pleasures Tagged With: Advertising, Football, Prohibitionists, Sports, Super Bowl

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Find Something

Northern California Breweries

Please consider purchasing my latest book, California Breweries North, available from Amazon, or ask for it at your local bookstore.

Recent Comments

  • Bob Paolino on Beer Birthday: Grant Johnston
  • Gambrinus on Historic Beer Birthday: A.J. Houghton
  • Ernie Dewing on Historic Beer Birthday: Charles William Bergner 
  • Steve 'Pudgy' De Rose on Historic Beer Birthday: Jacob Schmidt
  • Jay Brooks on Beer Birthday: Bill Owens

Recent Posts

  • Beer In Ads #5213: Bock Beer Cascade Quality April 9, 2026
  • Historic Beer Birthday: Otto Schinkel Jr. April 9, 2026
  • Historic Beer Birthday: Johann Sedlmayr April 9, 2026
  • Beer In Ads #5212: Metz Bock Beer April 9, 2026
  • Historic Beer Birthday: Ralph Thrale April 9, 2026

BBB Archives

Feedback

Head Quarter
This site is hosted and maintained by H25Q.dev. Any questions or comments for the webmaster can be directed here.