Confirmation of who constitutes average whisky consumer helps resolve dispute The average consumer of Scotch whisky is reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and circumspect member of the general public who has an average level of attention, the EU's General Court has confirmed in ruling over a trade mark dispute. The determination by the Court helped whisky manufacturer William Grant & Sons …
Part common sense (the average whisky drinker is an average person, on average) and part head-scratcher - I'm interpreting this as "no other whisky maker may use 'Clan' in their branding as it may be confused by a humble whisky drinker with 'Clan McGregor' branded whisky".
If that's the case, then I give you:
Or is it just "Clan", in which case I give you The Clan Malt.
Now I'm confused, and I drink whisky. Might have to have one or two to settle the nerves...
I still chortle at the memory of Sun Microsystems telling the inhabitants of Java that they were allowed to use the name (trademarked by Sun, of course) when referring to their island. If any of the inhabitants of Java ever heard of that portentous pronouncement, I hope they greeted it with some choice specimens of Indonesian vernacular.
This post has been deleted by its author
While I could easily be called a whisky snob, ruling out a whisky immediately because it's blended malt has it's flaws. I agree that in 90% of cases blended malts are foul, there is the odd exception.
Blending malts is actually a perfectly reasonable thing to, it's no more obscene than switching to different barrels during maturation to achieve a different flavour. The key point with blending malts though, is to pick the right malts not just throw any old shit together in a bottle a call it "Finest blended whisky".
Supermarket own label piss, and stuff like Bells and Teachers is only suitable for use as a cleaning fluid. But then there are things like Monkey Shoulder which while technically a blended malt, is blended by people who actually know what they're doing which is pretty decent.
In general I'd always choose a nice single malt first, I'm always open to bribes that have a Balvenie label on them, but I'd certainly rather drink a bottle of Monkey Shoulder than throw it away (which is what I'd most likely do if someone gave me a bottle of Teachers).
Also the other blended piss does serve a purpose, it gives the idiots who like to mix "whisky" with coke something to use instead of wasting a perfectly decent malt.
@Phil W - never really been a fan of whisky, much rather have a good bourbon. And by that I don't mean a bottle of Jack Daniels (which is neither good nor bourbon). That said, I do drink Jack Daniels, but that's more down to the price and the fact that my favourite bourbon is increasingly rare to find (varies between 50 to 75 squids whenever it does show up on the speciality import sites).
@Phil W
"Supermarket own label piss, and stuff like Bells and Teachers is only suitable for use as a cleaning fluid."
Actually, I quite like a good measure of supermarket grain piss in my no-name ground coffee on mornings this cold. Gets the circulation moving and no sense wasting the good stuff.
Lately I'd say there was a Renaissance in blended whisky since the likes of compass box came onto the scene. They even go so far as to inform not only of the whiskys in the blend but of the staves used (they ezpeirmented with mixed woods and changing cask lids lately).
You just need to find a good liquor merchants who stocks such finerees.
I won't doubt the word of fellow commentards, that blended whisky is probably very good and all, but... "Monkey Shoulder"? Really?
That name sounds like it was taken from a "hip" microbrewery. Seriously, those stupid "trendy" names for beers get on my nerves. They make me want to punch a mustached hipster in the balls.
Now get off my lawn!
""Monkey Shoulder"? Really?"
Yes really, apparently it's a historical term from the whisky industry for a condition the malt turners would get from using their arms heavily all day, where their arm would hang like a monkey's. Not just a weird 'hip' phrase in this case, presuming it's true.
Well there are blends and there are blends...
Not long ago I attended a whisky tasting. The host told us about one of his hobbies. He lives about half of the year on Islay. When he's there, he meets with a couple of friends, usually 4 to 6 people. Everyone brings a bottle of single malt. Everyone concocts a blend using the bottles they brought. The blends are extensively tasted until the best blend is determined. The guy who made the best blend on that evening gets all the bottles.
I'm not a whisky drinker, but other half is. When I'm getting her a prezzie bottle of whisky & ask preference, it's never brand name but a price point (single malt) and a location e.g. Speyside (that way it sets a price point (hopefully approximating to quality) and an indication of the type of flavour (I'm told that generally a particular area has distinctive flavour elements - other half long knows asking me to get something with a particular flavour be it smoky, peaty etc. is far too fraught with screwup possibility)
That way partner gets a balance of some element of surprise & some control over the whisky flavour & quality.
I'm not convinced by average drinker of anything as being useful, for most things (be it coffee, wine, beer, whisky) some people will be enthusiastic and knowledgable, others "meh", there will be a whole lot of different knowledge "buckets" to find a spot for different drinkers.
For most things, the more knowledgeable will, by definition, be smaller in number anyway.
Kudos to Speciality Drinks for coming up with such an audacious argument: it's fine to tread on someone else's trademark, as long as the people buying the product are especially clever.
I suppose the flip side of that would be that The Sun newspaper could sue a butchered zebra for trademark infringement, on the basis that their typical consumer would have a hard time telling them apart.
As a keen single malt drinker, I think I would notice (a) if it was a blend and said so right on the label (b) if it said 'Clan Hogmanay' or similar on the label. So a discerning drinker (she said modestly) would notice that Specialist weren't pushing anything I'd be willing to put in a glass.
Connoisseurs my a***. At least in Eastern Europe, ex-Soviet Union and large portions of the 3rd world.
Once upon a time whiskey there was imported rarity unavailable via normal retail channels. It was given as a "lubricant" to sweeten a deal, had special place on the wedding table and till this day is essential part of the a special variety of Connoisseurs' diet. The FAT NECK Connoisseur. The one that comes to you to collect the debts you are behind on. None of this lot can distinguish a single malt from blend and for them mass production like Johnnie Walker is The Whiskey.
Does Scotland like to admit it or not the majority of its production ends up down the throat of such "Connoisseurs". They have the buying power today and they buy most of the annual production. Compared to that the real "Connoisseur's choices" are a microscopic quantity. As far as ridiculous arguments for a court decision this probably takes the prize of the year for maximum ridiculousness.
After 50 years of drinking whisk(e)y, I think I have just about got it sorted, but I might be wrong: For a special occasion( my birthday?); or Smith's (to share with friends); and a good everyday blend found in many pubs.
As any fule kno, Scotch comes in several levels of desirability. So does non-Scotch whisk(e)y but that's another discussion.
Sub-basement: Nasty blends of industrial grain alcohol with a meagre admixture of the cheapest, roughest malts. [Covers nearly everything that isn't labelled 'Malt'.]
Basement: Somewhat malt-heavier blends, often heavily marketed and usually at a price premium exceeding their value. Major example: Chivas Regal.
Ground floor: Vatted or blended malts. No nasty grain spirit. Vary from nigh-undrinkable to very good indeed. An example of the good stuff: the regional blends from Douglas Laing, like Big Peat.
Upper storey: Single malts. Vary from fairly bland but non-poisonous to distinctly characterful, complex and delightful. Region and style according to taste of course, barring the next level.
Penthouse: Islay.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
