I live right near this place and every time I drive by I say I am going to try them out but never remember when it comes time to eat. I LOVE soup and feel bad I have not made it in. I think it is a tough location but hopefully they will make it long enough for me to check them out.

Regarding the review of Soup's On.. sounds like a great little place but there's a karma and legal problem that needs clearing up. It's obvious these guys began using the name in the Baltimore market way after the 36th street establishment did, are in the same business niche with an obvious customer base overlap and the public will predictably be confused. It appears a clear case of trademark violation, even if 36th street has not filed for one yet as It's easily demonstrable "prior use" of the name. If this is not the case and they reached some kind of agreement with 36th street, it should be made known. And even though this is a dining piece, a newspaper should get both sides in a confusing situation like this. It's relevant to the dining experience, and I know others sharing the same concern and appreciation for the little earnest effort on 36th street. How do they feel?

I feel that a three month old post with one comment that elicits an elaborate legal treatment masquerading as a random comment was written with a very specific purpose that doesn't belong here.

Now, by using "karma" and "legal problem" in the same sentence you expose yourself as a fraud and a despicable person for polluting Buddhism in the name of whatever material game you are playing. It's sickening. Take this crap elsewhere. You are not going to try your case here, so why bother. And leave Buddha out of it. It's offensive to me and anyone with a clue about the meaning of the term. You have some dog in some fight and don't one crap about "the dining experince". You're not fooling anybody. This is sad to hear your greedy machinations as a followup (3 months later) to "I LOVE soup". I love soup too. You are no soup.

Owl Meat -- chowsearch's post was probably prompted by the fact that Richard Gorelick reviewed the Mount Vernon location of Soup's On in yesterday's Sun (see here). Also, this was not a "three month post", it was a 15-month post, since the prior entry was more than a year ago (June 2007).

That being said, I would agree that bringing up the "name's the same" issue is not newsworthy. If the entity claiming "original" use of the Soup's On name has done nothing in over a year to protect its rights to the use of the name, there is no real controversy that merits further discussion, either in The Sun or in this blog.

15 months is even more ridiculous. That was not a casual post, it was a contrived legal argument that ruined a perfect post whose only comment was "I LOVE soup". Lawyers, please leave your asshats at the blog door. It's just good soup karma. First the TV blog ruins TV and now an actual soup Nazi shows up with no soup for us. What next?

Is chowsearch some sort of ambulance chaser?

OMG asked: "First the TV blog ruins TV and now an actual soup Nazi shows up with no soup for us. What next?"

It's all about the numbers....hits on the blog, not quality is what Sun management is looking for. Advertising is sold to the lowest common denominator.

What next? Really bad commercials with Bill Gates.

The TV blog is so sad. It (so far) is an unctious living stain that fails to get the possibilities of the internet. This is an opportunity to do something new, but Eve is right, I'm sure he is pleasing the bean counters with such low aim. The problem is that he is pimping himself out to national aggregators like tvtattle.com with obvious headlines that say "Palin". When hits are 90% from out of the market area, the local-oriented ads are worthless. My point would be if you are going to sell out, do it well.

I dug up the old thread because there was noplace else in the sandbox to Thursday morning quarterback Gorelick's review, though I did post a comment at the article itself. I'm not a lawyer, but I do have a dog in this--I'm concerned about the wellbeing of little restaurants and abhor commercial abuse, whether by Mayo Shattuck against all of us, or these guys arriving in town and usurping the name of a nearly identical business too small to fight. It's one woman, who I do not know except she serves me nice soup about every two months, who does this part time, who can't afford to squeak. In researching trademark issues for myself, I learned a primary concept of who deserves official protection is prior use, and she has it--she was using the name here first. Infringement decisions look also at whether there is a probability of public confusion and if it's in the same or different market. These guys appear to have legally and morally ripped her off. As far as karma, I'm sure we agree we'd rather not eat in places doing bad things. Remember Kawasaki? Isn't it nice to visit Dogwood, going out of their way to do good? Trademark issues matter in dining--remember Pavarotti on Broadway with a big painted portrait in the foyer of the big guy? Gone. And there was Jim Widman, an owner of the multiply defunct Admiral Fell Inn who named his Broadway Square pretzel stand McKiosk with an arched orange and yellow paint scheme to intentionally attract McD's lawyers for publicity purposes. They showed up. But people I know won't show up to eat at this Soup's On unless the 36th St. person says she gave her blessing to them. And I think a newspaper, even a thinned one, should get both sides of the situation, which is why I brought it up in the first place. I think we could all agree that food and karma are intertwined, or should be. Now let's see if theirs is good enough to attract enough customers to a parked in, multiply-failed, out-of-the-way, barely visible location to pay the rent.

Sheesh!
WALL OF TEXT!

Chowsearch, ever hear of the Enter key? Its your friend. I thought I only saw this kind of post over at the sports boards. Yes, in addition to food, I'm a Ravens fan as well.

I am actually a casualty of Mr. Shattuck's wheelings and dealings, and have many feelings about that whole ordeal, but don't air them out in a food blog.

Sorry EL, I saw this and had to chime in. Hopefully no one else clicks on this entry and it slinks into oblivion. It just made me feel better to type that.

Sorry, Rob...I clicked.

Me, too. We all need to eat and we all need power, so these issues are interrelated (unless you live "off the grid," in which case you won't be blogging ...)

Huge single paragraphs tend to be ignored. First because they are tedious to read and scond because it often indicatesa style that is pedantic and boring.

So, be kind give us some white space if you want to be read.

Now I have to force my sleepy eyes to slog through that mess up there.

Yeah, you really took the long road there.

These things happen all the time with certain names. Salons and coffee places routinely draw from the same cliche names and phrases, so I'm not sure such a horribly UNcreative name like "Soup's On" deserves the charge of EVIL if it is duplicated.

That being said, given prior use, the original user needs to have a lawyer send the new gyus a letter to cease using the name. If that fails to move them, then sue their asses because damages being awarded seems likely.

This happened to Sound Garden, the music store in Fells Point. The band Sound Garden sent them such a letter, which they ignored because their was real possibility of confusion. Different products.

Liquid Earth in Fells Pt was originally called something else (Fluid Mud? can't remember) and they found out that there was already a place in town with that name so they changed it.

A new business doesn't want to share a name with another business anyway because they want to develop their own identity.

Blerg

Here's a fun game that doesn't involve talk of lawyers. Let's come up with some new goofy name for the evil evil evil place. i'll start.

Souper Salad (probably exists)
What's Oup?
Souper Man

I'm tired.

Soup to Nuts (or Soup for Nuts?)

Soup Nutsy