So will an attorney show up if you garnish with a cherry?

In a piece representing the rare and wonderful collision of intellectual property, cocktails, and popular culture, Jonathan Miles filed this piece for the New York Times last week about a rum producer who aggressively defends its trademarked name for a classic cocktail, the Dark 'n' Stormy.

According to the piece, a Dark 'n' Stormy must contain:

• 2 ounces Gosling's Black Seal rum
• 4 ounces (or so) ginger beer
• a lime wedge garnish

...and nothing else. The Gosling's guy (E. Malcolm Gosling, Jr., no less) says that the company will pursue any company advertising a drink using that name with a recipe that contains any other type of rum.

This is interesting stuff! I've never seen this approach to intellectual property protection before. I can see the logic -- this is a cocktail that's been around for about 100 years, so there is tradition surrounding its execution. The Gosling company is associated with the drink and, if Gosling's is a unique rum (I've never tasted it, so I can't say) then they certainly have an interest in having the drink be consistent.

This seems to get to the heart of the value of a trademark, versus patent and copyright: the company associated with this product simply wants to have some control over the product as it makes its way to consumer. Consumers, for their part, benefit from this because they can expect that if they order a Dark 'n' Stormy, it will be made to the intended specifications. Bars are welcome to make and advertise this drink, so long as they use the Gosling recipe.