Liz Gaspari’s fake Instagram Followers

Posted by on Sep 15, 2014 in Anthony Roberts | 0 comments

About a month ago, Liz Gaspari’s Instagram account had a thousand followers, maybe. Pretty much like her first account:

LG2

 

Now, she’s got a new account which claims (somewhat unspecifically) that she is the CEO of a sports supplement brand…and it’s got almost 60k followers.

 

LG3

Or something. Because they’re mostly all fake accounts with nobody behind them…just like her Twitter followers – bought and paid for, to look important). Here’s a photo she recently posted:

Photo

As you can see, this photo has 336 likes. But the likes are mostly from people like this:

Likers

And most of those people have between 0-3 followers and/or are not following anyone, and have never posted any pictures….which is exactly what we find if we look into most of her alleged ~60k followers…they’re almost entirely fake and look something like this:

Profile

Read More

Thirty Six Tons of Counterfeit Bodybuilding Supplements Seized!

Posted by on Sep 14, 2014 in Anthony Roberts, Featured | 0 comments

10370905_909569225723459_1187894262075503877_nMost people living in the United States will be unaware of the bootleg supplement market. But overseas, they’re a way of life. I generally seperate bootlegged supplements into one of two categories:

Grey Guy – the Grey Guy is the dude who circumvents a brand’s contracts and imports supplements from a distributor behind their back. So let’s say in South Africa, Company X (a United states brand) has given a contract to Company Y (a South African distributor) the sold rights to sell their products in the country. Company X then requires that their US based distributors don’t sell to anyone in South Africa except this guy. That guy is then responsible for advertising the product in-country and all of the associated  costs of supporting the brand. The Grey Guy will then go around the brand and their distribotor and buy from someone in the USA, and resell it, without the added expense of supporting the brand through advertising or contest sponsorships, or whatever…This obviously hurts the brand, the licensed distributor, and everyone else from the bodybuilding mags (like Muscle Evolution) who lose advertising revenue, to the local bodybuilding scene, who lose out on the sponsorship dollars (err…Rand). This is grey market supplement sales. And who sells these products to unlicensed distributors, after telling the brand they won’t? Let’s just say “even (especially) the biggest US-based distributors” have been guilty of this, and leave it at that.

Counterfeit – counterfeits are products not made by the brand on the label. They’re produced by someone else, somewhere else, and the brand makes no money off their sale. Obviously there is no oversight and counterfeiters are able to put anything they want in the product, and never get in trouble, because there is no way to track them (if they do it right). Generally speaking, counterfeiters will deal product to grey guys, and the grey guys will distribute throughout the country.

Which brings us to India, and the market for cheap bodybuilding supplements. India’s economy has been exploding for the past decade, and training has become more popular than ever. Counterfeiters have taken notice and flooded the market with cheap impostors of well-known brands. The problem has gotten so out of control that 36 tons of counterfeit supplements were recently seized. It looks like there’s a bunch of Universal stuff in there, Optimum Nutrition, and I think I can see VPX in the dark blue jug.

As always, where there is money to be made, some people will take advantage of the market.

Read More

Glanbia buys Isopure for $153MM

Posted by on Sep 12, 2014 in Featured | 0 comments

KILKENNY-based food firm Glanbia has acquired US sports nutrition specialist Isopure for $153m (€118m).

 

The business focuses on specialist sports powders and ready to drink formulas with sales mainly online and through direct distribution channels.

“As a premium brand, the Business is an excellent addition to our portfolio of market leading performance nutrition brands and provides an opportunity to leverage our infrastructure and capabilities to drive future growth,” said Siobhan Talbot, chief executive at Glanbia.

“The transaction, which is firmly aligned with the Group’s strategy, supports our growth ambitions and will be value enhancing for our shareholders.”

Isopure generated net revenues of $74.6m for the 12-month period to the end of July.

Davy Stockbrokers said: “This represents a CAGR of 20pc for the period from end December 2011 to end July 2014.

“The acquisition is expected to be earnings accretive from 2015 and will be funded from the group’s existing debt facilities.”

– from: http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/glanbia-acquires-sports-nutrition-specialist-isopure-for-153m-30581680.html#sthash.f4qGI7qr.dpuf

Read More

MICROBIAL ODOR PROFILE OF POLYESTER AND COTTON CLOTHES AFTER A FITNESS SESSION.

Posted by on Sep 10, 2014 in Studies | 0 comments

Appl Environ Microbiol. 2014 Aug 15. pii: AEM.01422-14. [Epub ahead of print]

MICROBIAL ODOR PROFILE OF POLYESTER AND COTTON CLOTHES AFTER A FITNESS SESSION.

Callewaert C1, De Maeseneire E1, Kerckhof FM1, Verliefde A2, de Wiele TV1, Boon N3.

Author information

Abstract

Clothing textiles protect our human body against external factors. These textiles are not sterile and can harbor high bacterial counts as sweat and bacteria are transmitted from the skin. We investigated the microbial growth and odor development in cotton and synthetic clothing fabrics. T-shirts were collected from 26 healthy individuals after an intensive bicycle spinning session and incubated for 28h before analysis. A trained odor panel determined significant differences between polyester versus cotton fabrics for the hedonic value, the intensity and five qualitative odor characteristics. The polyester T-shirts smelled significantly less pleasant and more intense, as compared to the cotton T-shirts. A dissimilar bacterial growth was found in cotton versus synthetic clothing textiles. Micrococci were isolated in almost all synthetic shirts and were detected almost solely on synthetic shirts by means of DGGE fingerprinting. A selective enrichment of micrococci in an in vitro growth experiment confirmed the presence of these species on polyester. Staphylococci were abundant on both cotton and synthetic fabrics. Corynebacteria were not enriched on any textile type. This research found that the composition of clothing fibers promotes differential growth of textile microbes and, as such, determines possible malodor generation.

paywall

Read More

Crossfit loses Battle in War to invalidate their Trademark

Posted by on Sep 7, 2014 in Anthony Roberts, Featured, Legal Documents | 0 comments

I’ve been monitoring CrossFit’s legal activity for several years now. It ranges from indefensible douchebaggery (taking down online parody that is clearly protected by the First Amendment), to valid assertion of their trademark. The case at hand falls somewhere in-between, but I’d generally side with the counterclaimant/defendant, as I did in the PR Cave lawsuit, which was ultimately won by HQ because (frankly) they have more money and a willingness to spend it (this is also why they have been able to take own parody sites and names, when parody is clearly protected under the First Amendment – they are willing to make their critics spend money to exercise a protected right, and their critics are generally not earning an income from their Lulz). Before anyone gets sand in their vaginas, it’s important to note that I don’t always oppose (or support) HQ – I think their lawsuit versus the NSCA is valid and justified, and I hope they prevail. I honestly hope they donkey punch the entire NSCA.

In this particular case, Emergent Legal, in partnership with The Gaw Group,representing 360 Fitness Superstore,  has sued to invalidate the “CrossFit” trademark claimed by CrossFit, Inc. Read the full complaint here. CrossFit has attempted to get a preliminary injunction against 360 Fitness, and failed. But this is only the first battle in what could be a long war. And although a countersuit to invalidate their TM is on the table, CrossFit could simply settle out of court before that happens. This would allow them to keep suing anyone who doesn’t have the money to mount a similar (costly) defense (and offense).

Here are the facts: In February, 360 Fitness Superstore was sued by CrossFit for trademark infringement based on their website that advertised the sale of “crossfit equipment.” CrossFit equipment per se, doesn’t exist – it’s equipment from other disiplines that is used by CrossFitters for their training. In April, 360 Fitness answered the complaint and asserted counterclaims against CrossFit, alleging that the CF TM is invalid because:

  1. CrossFit fails to distinguish its exercises from any others available on the market
  2. CrossFit makes no attempt to control the content or quality of the exercises taught by its licensed trainers and gyms
  3. CrossFit has failed to take reasonable steps to enforce its trademark during the 30 years it claims to have used the term in commerce
  4. Over that 30-year period, the term “crossfit” has become a generic description for a wide range of exercises.

I disagree with most of this. CrossFit is very unique, and no other program has defined itself similarly, even if CF does draw from many prior disciplines. Jeet Kune Do draws from every/any available source, and is 100% unique, even to the point of allowing black belts to modify the curriculum and dogma as they see fit. I don’t believe drawing from prior art is sufficient to claim a practice is not unique. Greg Glassman, the founder of CrossFit, has called it “open source” and to an extent that’s true – you can check out the source code, use it, and modify it to your needs, and do anything else you wish. But if you want to sell it, and use the brand to do so, Glassman wants his shekels; I’ve got no problem with this.

As for the claims that HQ doesn’t make a valid effort to enforce their TM…Enforcing a trademark pretty much means you have to be a douchebag and sue everyone who tries to use it, which CF certainly doesn’t shy away from. But I do agree that the term has become somewhat generic, in that half the people who exhibit any form of epic fail while training, are assumed to be Crossfitters. However, the most glaring fact here, is that there is NO attempt to exert any semblance of quality control. If you don’t control quality, then you can not logically assert that someone’s use of your trademark will hurt the brand (because you’ve made no attempt to prevent – or even monitor – your own licensees from damaging it, ergo you are clearly not protecting it).

2These are well-policed issues that have been discussed in depth on social media. CrossFit, and Russell Berger in particular (and The Russells in general), have never shied away from this dialogue, and their position has therefore been made transparent and obvious.  I see no logical contradiction in CFHQ’s definitions, but there are numerous practical issues that arise from them. You’re not doing CrossFit unless HQ says you’re doing CrossFit – frankly, although that creates absurd situations, I see no legal issue with it. You might be jumping around like an idiot in spandex, listening to Brazilian Techno, but it’s really not Zumba unless you’re at a class. I’m fine with that. Riding a stationary bike isn’t spinning.

However, although I feel that they’ve mounted a sufficient online defense to their critics viz a viz what defines a CrossFit session, their faux bad-boy personna also works against them in this instance, when they assert potential loss of goodwill (as the personna been more appropriately likened to high-school jock behaviour):

1

We’ve seen HQ come up against well-funded opponents before, with mixed results (a crushing defeat of Anthos, but a timid “undisclosed, out of court settlement” with MHP). Again, I’m non-partisan here – I’ve been in full support of CFHQ on some issues, and against them on others. In this particular case, since they don’t actually sell or produce “Crossfit Equipment,” I believe anyone selling gymnastic rings, olympic sets, medicine balls, $150 pairs of Reebok shorts, and perhaps even shitty tribal tattoos…should rightfully be able to say that they sell CrossFit equipment.

 

Read More