Posted on 08/28/2026 6:22:05 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd
The CEO of Buc-ee’s says the beloved convenience chain will focus expansion on conservative states as the beaver-themed brand faces scrutiny over its repeated trademark lawsuits.
Arch “Beaver” Aplin III, also the Texas chain’s co-founder, made the remarks last week during the grand opening of Buc-ee’s first Arkansas location in Benton.
"We have a lot of opportunities. We're growing. We're building in a lot of places, but when you find a conservative, business-friendly state with a phenomenal workforce, it makes a difference," Aplin said in a video shared by Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders on social media.
"And I'm starting to realize life's too short to try to build in places that people don't appreciate what you're bringing versus a place like this, where people do appreciate what you're building,” Aplin added.
He then explained that Buc-ee’s-worthy locations must meet three of the brand’s key values.
(Excerpt) Read more at aol.com ...
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
There are parts of California (I-5, I-580, I-205, and State Highway 99 for example) that are used for long haul trucking. Seems like they could use a place like this. Since California is considered liberal, they will not locate here.
I don’t expect Buc-ee’s in San Francisco or Los Angeles of course.
The idea that a company with billions of dollars in annual revenues has law firms running around in multiple states filing lawsuits on its behalf, and paying copious amounts of attorneys fees to those law firms, without being aware of, much less directing what they are doing, is laughable.
Rule 12 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure allows any party who believes an attorney is acting without authority to file a motion and require the attorney to show proof that they are authorized to act on behalf of the client they purport to represent. In other states, or Federal Court, a motion to strike pleadings alleging the attorney was not authorized to file them, amounts to the same thing.
And once litigation is commenced, and discovery begins, the client, Buc-ees, will have to swear to discovery responses, and produce corporate representatives for deposition.
It maybe that Buc-ees has authorized law firms to send nastygrams to businesses who might be violating their trademarks, but Buc-ees is absolutely aware of, and directing, every lawsuit brought on its behalf.
Have they explained Colorado yet? Or did I miss Colorado going red?
You don't believe it is possible that a lawyer assigned to protect the company's trademarks could simply walk into his superior's office and tell him that Beaver's market is infringing on their logo and be told to send them a cease and desist letter and if they fail to immediately comply file suit?
A firm that takes an aggressive line to bill more hours is going to take on all comers. The company take employs such a company gets what they pay for and doesn't care.
That rather begs the question.
Beaver Mart's logo looks nothing like Buc-ee's ...
There's no infringement now. If Beaver Mart decided to expand, using its existing logo, there would still be no infringement.
This isn't trademark protection, it's "lawfare".
Just don’t put South Of The Border out of business.
Ford had to change the name of the Mustang in Germany to “T6”. The Krupp works sold a truck called the “Mustang” in Germany before Ford brought out its own vehicle.
Too many assholes there.
Red States are appreciative. (Thanks from Florid)
And Blue states don’t deserve this quality anyhow? Avoid ‘em like the plague...
I am not even considering that in my argument.
The first step in any defense is to file a motion to dismiss.
The judge is supposed to look at the prima facia facts of the complaint and decide if it possible that the complainant has been injured and if the court can provide redress.
In the Beaver Market case it should be obvious that the Beaver Mart logo and name do not infringe on Bucc-ee's copy right. Motion to dismiss should have been granted with prejudice.
Our courts rarely grant motion to dismiss. Everybody, no matter how frivolous the cause, no matter the cost, gets their day in court.
I am glad the Rockingham (VA) location opened last year. I know the locations in New Kent County and Stafford are taking longer to build.
Mondami the commie.
I loved that place! Are there still any in SA?
Ruined a perfectly good jingle.
Before I retired, I got an invitation to bid from the City of San Francisco.
I declined.
Great movie.
In that case, the name and the item were fundamentally the same. That’s a genuine case of trademark infringement.
I visited a couple of them on the round trip drive and back from SC to Wisconsin.
Nice places.
Next time, fly and get a rental vehicle.
The only part of the drive I hated was going through Chicago.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.