GEMSCO NOS Vintage Patch – ANDERSON ERIKSON DAIRY IA – Original 60+ MINT

NEPP&B.Co
N.E. Patch, Pin & Buckle Company
Don’t Be Fooled by Reproductions. .
.
Most PATCHES
we offer are old school machine embroidered (single hand fabrication or by a Schiffli embroidery
machine)
with natural fibers.  These Patches are mostly crafted from chain, satin, and hemming stitches and machine
work
relies on the
use of
multiple threads. Most have machine hand merrowed (surge stitching) edges, the “tailor’s tail” intact
(rely on photo)
or were
hand cut with die, mallet, on wax board.  Many of our items are dated by manufacturing material
and
method
and / or production paperwork if available. There is nothing wrong with reproductions,
they make
great collection “place holders” . . . we’re here when you want to trade-up.
. . . An Educated
Customer, is Our Best Customer
This item was offered by now-defunct famous military, police fire, municipal,
fraternal, club, and industry patch, pin, badge & buckle supplier
GEMSCO
General
Embroidery Military Supply Company – since 1881 –
– NOS
– EMBROIDERED PATCH –
Circa 1960 –
ANDERSON ERICKSON
Dairy Corporation
Vintage high quality item – Size:  4″ X 2″ – Shape: Oval
(see photo)
– Gauze Back – Merrowed Edge – Tailor’s “Tail” –
The
Anderson Erickson Dairy
(AE) is the largest independently owned dairy in Iowa. Headquartered in
Des Moines, it was founded in June, 1930 during the Great Depression by Iver Erickson and
Bill Anderson. After eight years in business, Anderson sold his interest in the company and
moved to Minnesota, leaving Erickson with complete ownership of the company.
By 2004 the family-owned company was the 73rd largest dairy by sales
in the USA. As of 2021, it is still run by descendants of Iver Erickson
You are purchasing described item only – photo staging
not
included
Photographs are considered part of the listing description.
Please contact us with any questions.
As a condition of sale
, the purchaser confirms that the obsolete police, sheriff, fire, rescue
memorabilia
and other similar patches are purchased for legitimate purpose of collecting,
display, theatrical
production,
memento;
or the lawful dealing in police, sheriff, fire,
rescue, state, municipal,
fraternal, education, commerce and associated patches and other memorabilia.
ITEM SHIPS VIA USPS 1ST CLASS
ALL ITEMS PURCHASED WILL SHIP THE FRIDAY AFTER COMPLETED SALE
INSURANCE, TRACKING, AND DELIVERY CONFIRMATION ONLY AS SPECIFIED IN LISTING
WE SHIP ONLY TO THE UNITED STATES & US TERRITORIES
We have many items to sell so please check back regularly.
We have been on Ebay for over 15 years with strong positive rating.
This patch meets eBay’s regulations.
This patch is strictly for collecting and display.
This patch has no police, fire or law enforcement authority.
If there is a problem with this item being listed,
please contact me first with the objection.
Sales of this item are in full compliance with United States Federal Law: 18 USC § 716 et seq:
A. The Use of Another’s Trademark In A Descriptive Sense
It is a basic principle marking an outer boundary of the trademark monopoly that, while trademark rights may be acquired in a word, symbol or device, acquisition of those rights does not prevent others from using the word, symbol or devise in good faith in its descriptive sense, and not as a trademark. – This principle is of great importance because it protects the right of society at large to use words or images in their primary descriptive sense, as against the claims of a trademark owner to exclusivity.-
Car-Freshner Corp. v. S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc., 70 F.3d 267, 269 (2d Cir. 1995)
; see Champion Spark Plug Co. v. Sanders, 331 U.S. 125 (1947) (registering proper noun as trademark does not withdraw it from language, nor reduce it to exclusive possession of registrant). To come within this fair use defense a person must make use of the other party’s trademark (i) other than as a mark, (ii) in a descriptive sense, and (iii) in good faith. See
15 U.S.C. §1115(b)(4)
.
B. Reference to the Owner of the Mark or the Owner’s Goods or Services
Another species of the fair use defense is the use of a mark when referring to the owner of a mark or the owner’s goods or services. Once again, this defense is only available if the unauthorized user is not using the term for purposes of source identification and the use does not imply sponsorship or endorsement by the trademark owner. Obviously, a great deal of useful social and commercial dialogue would be all but impossible if speakers were under threat of an infringement lawsuit every time they made reference to a person, company or product by using its trademarks.
In
New Kids on the Block v. North American Pub., Inc., 971 F2d 302 (9th Cir. 1992),
the Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of the defendant newspapers which had used the trademarked name of the band ?New Kids on the Block? to refer to the band in polls it conducted for the purpose of stimulating newspaper sales. The Court referred to a ?class of cases where the use of the trademark does not attempt to capitalize on consumer confusion or to appropriate the cachet of one product for a different one,? noting that ?[s]uch nominative use of a mark ? where the only word reasonably available to describe a particular thing is pressed into service ? lies outside the strictures of trademark law: The Ninth Circuit stated that a commercial user is entitled to a nominative fair use defense if the user meets the following three requirements: (i) the product or service in issue must not be readily identifiable without reference to the mark; (ii) only so much of the mark may be used as is reasonably necessary to identify the product or service; and (iii) the user must not do anything to imply sponsorship or endorsement by the trademark owner.
New Kids on the Block, 971 F2d at 308
.
C. The First
Sale
Doctrine
The unauthorized use of another’s trademark is also permitted under the “first sale” doctrine. Under this doctrine a business that resells genuine, non-adulterated goods bearing a true mark cannot be held liable for trademark infringement, even if the distributor had no authority to do so from the actual trademark owner. See
Polymer Technology Corp. v. Mimran, 975 F.2d 58 (2d Cir. 1992)
. ?After the first sale, the brandholder’s control is deemed exhausted [and d]own-the-line retailers are free to display and advertise the branded goods. Secondhand dealers may advertise the branded merchandise for resale in competition with the sales of the markholder . . . .?
Osawa & Co. v. B&H Photo, 589 F.Supp. 1163 (S.D.N.Y. 1984)
.
We have learned much from our customers,
So if you can add something constructive
that we omitted,
Feel free to advise us.
THANKS FOR LOOKING HAVE FUN BUYING or BIDDING!