Yeah they were! Even though there's a clear disclaimer of the conflict of interest.
Plus, haven't we moved on from bagging people from citing wikipedia - rather accepting that it is a flawed resource and living with it. It's hardly a doctoral thesis.
I was just going to link that! It could stir them up. Good I say. More ammo to show just how ridiculously litigious DB are being.
In other news, crabbey and BeerNZ have informed me that the Dux de Lux managed to do a Radler without any action from DB. This could give grounds for overturning DB's trademark based on nothing more than that they failed to enforce it! ;) Of course, then we're encouraging the very behaviour that led to this situation. Law is stupid. :(
I reckon he purposely wrote this article based on the fact that the trademark exists - and he knows that because it is sold in a big supermarket (who sell a lot of DB beer), they won't go after it. interesting play Mr Hadler. I'm very impressed!
Who have they gone after so far? Green Man (competition) and Beerstore (who don't stock their beer). I have seen Green Man Radler on plenty of New World shelves over the last few weeks... where are the lawyers there?