×
Anduril has invented a wild new drone flying contest where jobs are the prize  | TechCrunch

Anduril has invented a wild new drone flying contest where jobs are the prize  | TechCrunch

Tech-news ,

Palmer Luckey’s eyes light up, and he talks a mile a minute, when discussing his company’s new recruiting event: the AI Grand Prix. 

This is a drone flying contest with a twist. Rather than humans operating drones, the drones must operate autonomously. The humans will be tested on their software-writing skills that cause the drones to outfly their competition.  

There are prizes ranging from a $500,000 pot to be spilt amongst the highest-scoring teams, to jobs at Anduril, and a chance to bypass the company’s standard recruiting cycle. 

“It was something that I decided we should do,” Anduril founder Luckey said in an interview with TechCrunch. Luckey and the team were meeting to discuss recruitment strategy, he recalled.

Someone suggested sponsoring a drone racing tournament, which was somewhat in line with the company’s previous marketing tactics. For instance, Anduril sponsors the NASCAR Cup Series race known as the Anduril 250. 

Luckey generally liked the idea but then said, “‘Guys, that would be a really dumb thing for Anduril to sponsor. The whole point, our entire impetus and reason for being, is this pitch that autonomy has finally advanced to where you don’t have to have a person micromanaging each drone,’” he recalled, then adding, “‘What we should really do is sponsor a race that’s about how well programmers and engineers can make a drone fly itself.’” 

After discovering that such an event didn’t exist, the company opted to create it themselves. Interestingly, though, Luckey pointed out that the teams in the AI Grand Prix will not be flying Anduril’s drones, but those built by another defense tech startup: Neros Technologies. According to Luckey, Anduril’s drones are too physically big to run in the contained course in Ohio where the finals will take place.  

Techcrunch event

San Francisco
|
October 13-15, 2026

“We talked about having teams use Anduril drones, but Anduril doesn’t make any drones that are of the ultra-high speed, very small nature that you would want for a Drone Racing League. It’s mostly bigger stuff,” he said.  

Anduril is also partnering with one of the established racing leagues, the Drone Champions League to operate the event, as well as JobsOhio. The final race will take place in Ohio (where Anduril’s key manufacturing facility is located). 

Although Luckey is clearly excited about how fun the event will be, he won’t be a racer himself. “I absolutely will be there,” he says, but “it’s going to be about who can build the best software to pilot these drones.”  

He smiled and said, “I’m not actually a very good software programmer. I’m more of a hardware guy. I’m an electromechanical and optical guy, and I know just enough about coding to glue stuff together in a way that works for my prototypes.”  

(Luckey calls Anduril CEO Brian Schimpf “our de facto lead software brains” at the company.) 

The founder is hoping for at least 50 teams, and already has interest from multiple universities, he said. Should this competition be a successful event, the plan is to expand it into races with the other types of autonomous vehicles.

“We are starting with these quadcopter racing drones, which is what people expect from drone racing. However, we want to be, in the future, applying AI racing to other platforms as well,” he said.  

Underwater AI racing, ground AI racing, potentially even AI racing of spacecraft were some of the ideas Luckey shared.

The contest is open to all international excluding teams from Russia.  

“The difference with Russia is they are actively engaged in the act of invading Europe,” he said.

The concern is that the people qualified to enter such a race may also be working for their nation’s military. “I would love to have everybody, but we’re not the Olympics,” he added.

Luckey said the event was following the lead from the World Cup, which has also excluded Russia. 

Interestingly, teams from China (home to a lot of autonomous engineering) are welcome, despite it being the country that U.S. autonomous weapons hawks often name as their biggest fear.

Should a Chinese team win, the prize of a job at Anduril, which makes weapons used by the U.S. military, would not be a given. “If you work for the Chinese military, you’re not going to be allowed to get a job at Anduril,” Luckey said. Certain laws apply, he pointed out. In fact, there will still be some interviews and qualification process for all the job candidates.

The competition will take place across three qualifying rounds beginning in April with the final Grand Prix race scheduled for November.  

Source link
#Anduril #invented #wild #newdrone #flying #contest #jobs #prize #TechCrunch

Tag

Related Posts

The US Department of Commerce, which oversees the Census Bureau, is circulating a proposed rule that would cease the collection of demographic data on racial minorities and LGBTQ+ people and prevent undocumented immigrants from being counted in the 2030 census, according to documents viewed by WIRED.

The decision could have far-reaching implications for federal funding, particularly in states where there are substantial numbers of racial and ethnic minorities, as well as on immigrant communities across the country.

The proposed rule, which is being circulated across government agencies for review, says the census will eliminate questions about race and sexual orientation “to protect from any distortions created from the inclusion of personal questions.” The memo also states that “illegal aliens (among others) should not be included in the apportionment count, they are not true inhabitants, members of the body politics [sic], or persons with ‘usual residence’ in the United States.”

This would likely require the reintroduction of a census question about a respondent’s citizenship. During Donald Trump’s first presidential term, Republicans attempted to add a citizenship question to the census for the first time since 1950. The effort was struck down by the Supreme Court, 5-4, with Chief Justice John Roberts siding with the Court’s then-larger liberal bloc on the grounds that the justification for adding the question was “contrived.” The decision did not, though, find that citizenship questions are inherently unconstitutional.

The Department of Commerce did not reply to requests for comment.

“This is about the Voting Rights Act,” says Danah Boyd, a professor at Cornell University who studies the census, referencing the landmark voter protection legislation that the Supreme Court dismantled earlier this year. Eliminating the collection of these data, she says, would make it difficult to make basic assessments, like whether a congressional district is predominantly made of minorities.

“If we don’t know certain things, we can’t challenge them politically,” says Boyd. “If we don’t know that certain peoples live in a particular geography, we can’t say, ‘Oh my gosh, here’s some massive inequality.’”

Republicans and the Trump administration have long taken aim at the census. More recently, members of the Trump administration have attacked a little-known statistical method called “differential privacy,” which is used to prevent census data from being used to reidentify individual respondents, claiming that it makes the results inaccurate. In August 2025, Republican representative August Pfluger made another attempt to reintroduce a citizenship question on the census, sponsoring a bill called the COUNT Act, and in October, Republican senator Jim Banks of Indiana published a letter to Commerce secretary Howard Lutnick, writing, “There is a credible argument that the framers of the Constitution designed the Census to cover lawful inhabitants and not those who are present illegally.”

Census questions are set between two and three years in advance of the actual survey, based on priorities set by the administration. The data from the census inform everything from the apportionment of congressional seats to federal funding that is allocated based on the size of a population.

An employee at the Department of Health and Human Services, who asked to remain anonymous because they are not authorized to speak to the press, tells WIRED that “many HHS programs use Census data to appropriate funding. Removing undocumented individuals from the census will cause localities with high numbers of those populations to lose critical federal funding.”

The employee says that removal of racial categories could specifically impact Native populations, which sometimes receive specialized funding. “Some programs use the ‘American Indian or Alaska Native’ category from the Census to make determinations of grants set aside for Tribal entities,” they say.

#Census #Proposal #Stop #Counting #Undocumented #Immigrantsand #Ignore #Race #Sexual #Orientationus census,immigration,undocumented immigrants,race,lgbtq+">Census Proposal Would Stop Counting Undocumented Immigrants—and Ignore Race and Sexual OrientationThe US Department of Commerce, which oversees the Census Bureau, is circulating a proposed rule that would cease the collection of demographic data on racial minorities and LGBTQ+ people and prevent undocumented immigrants from being counted in the 2030 census, according to documents viewed by WIRED.The decision could have far-reaching implications for federal funding, particularly in states where there are substantial numbers of racial and ethnic minorities, as well as on immigrant communities across the country.The proposed rule, which is being circulated across government agencies for review, says the census will eliminate questions about race and sexual orientation “to protect from any distortions created from the inclusion of personal questions.” The memo also states that “illegal aliens (among others) should not be included in the apportionment count, they are not true inhabitants, members of the body politics [sic], or persons with ‘usual residence’ in the United States.”This would likely require the reintroduction of a census question about a respondent’s citizenship. During Donald Trump’s first presidential term, Republicans attempted to add a citizenship question to the census for the first time since 1950. The effort was struck down by the Supreme Court, 5-4, with Chief Justice John Roberts siding with the Court’s then-larger liberal bloc on the grounds that the justification for adding the question was “contrived.” The decision did not, though, find that citizenship questions are inherently unconstitutional.The Department of Commerce did not reply to requests for comment.“This is about the Voting Rights Act,” says Danah Boyd, a professor at Cornell University who studies the census, referencing the landmark voter protection legislation that the Supreme Court dismantled earlier this year. Eliminating the collection of these data, she says, would make it difficult to make basic assessments, like whether a congressional district is predominantly made of minorities.“If we don’t know certain things, we can’t challenge them politically,” says Boyd. “If we don’t know that certain peoples live in a particular geography, we can’t say, ‘Oh my gosh, here’s some massive inequality.’”Republicans and the Trump administration have long taken aim at the census. More recently, members of the Trump administration have attacked a little-known statistical method called “differential privacy,” which is used to prevent census data from being used to reidentify individual respondents, claiming that it makes the results inaccurate. In August 2025, Republican representative August Pfluger made another attempt to reintroduce a citizenship question on the census, sponsoring a bill called the COUNT Act, and in October, Republican senator Jim Banks of Indiana published a letter to Commerce secretary Howard Lutnick, writing, “There is a credible argument that the framers of the Constitution designed the Census to cover lawful inhabitants and not those who are present illegally.”Census questions are set between two and three years in advance of the actual survey, based on priorities set by the administration. The data from the census inform everything from the apportionment of congressional seats to federal funding that is allocated based on the size of a population.An employee at the Department of Health and Human Services, who asked to remain anonymous because they are not authorized to speak to the press, tells WIRED that “many HHS programs use Census data to appropriate funding. Removing undocumented individuals from the census will cause localities with high numbers of those populations to lose critical federal funding.”The employee says that removal of racial categories could specifically impact Native populations, which sometimes receive specialized funding. “Some programs use the ‘American Indian or Alaska Native’ category from the Census to make determinations of grants set aside for Tribal entities,” they say.#Census #Proposal #Stop #Counting #Undocumented #Immigrantsand #Ignore #Race #Sexual #Orientationus census,immigration,undocumented immigrants,race,lgbtq+

Census Bureau, is circulating a proposed rule that would cease the collection of demographic data on racial minorities and LGBTQ+ people and prevent undocumented immigrants from being counted in the 2030 census, according to documents viewed by WIRED.

The decision could have far-reaching implications for federal funding, particularly in states where there are substantial numbers of racial and ethnic minorities, as well as on immigrant communities across the country.

The proposed rule, which is being circulated across government agencies for review, says the census will eliminate questions about race and sexual orientation “to protect from any distortions created from the inclusion of personal questions.” The memo also states that “illegal aliens (among others) should not be included in the apportionment count, they are not true inhabitants, members of the body politics [sic], or persons with ‘usual residence’ in the United States.”

This would likely require the reintroduction of a census question about a respondent’s citizenship. During Donald Trump’s first presidential term, Republicans attempted to add a citizenship question to the census for the first time since 1950. The effort was struck down by the Supreme Court, 5-4, with Chief Justice John Roberts siding with the Court’s then-larger liberal bloc on the grounds that the justification for adding the question was “contrived.” The decision did not, though, find that citizenship questions are inherently unconstitutional.

The Department of Commerce did not reply to requests for comment.

“This is about the Voting Rights Act,” says Danah Boyd, a professor at Cornell University who studies the census, referencing the landmark voter protection legislation that the Supreme Court dismantled earlier this year. Eliminating the collection of these data, she says, would make it difficult to make basic assessments, like whether a congressional district is predominantly made of minorities.

“If we don’t know certain things, we can’t challenge them politically,” says Boyd. “If we don’t know that certain peoples live in a particular geography, we can’t say, ‘Oh my gosh, here’s some massive inequality.’”

Republicans and the Trump administration have long taken aim at the census. More recently, members of the Trump administration have attacked a little-known statistical method called “differential privacy,” which is used to prevent census data from being used to reidentify individual respondents, claiming that it makes the results inaccurate. In August 2025, Republican representative August Pfluger made another attempt to reintroduce a citizenship question on the census, sponsoring a bill called the COUNT Act, and in October, Republican senator Jim Banks of Indiana published a letter to Commerce secretary Howard Lutnick, writing, “There is a credible argument that the framers of the Constitution designed the Census to cover lawful inhabitants and not those who are present illegally.”

Census questions are set between two and three years in advance of the actual survey, based on priorities set by the administration. The data from the census inform everything from the apportionment of congressional seats to federal funding that is allocated based on the size of a population.

An employee at the Department of Health and Human Services, who asked to remain anonymous because they are not authorized to speak to the press, tells WIRED that “many HHS programs use Census data to appropriate funding. Removing undocumented individuals from the census will cause localities with high numbers of those populations to lose critical federal funding.”

The employee says that removal of racial categories could specifically impact Native populations, which sometimes receive specialized funding. “Some programs use the ‘American Indian or Alaska Native’ category from the Census to make determinations of grants set aside for Tribal entities,” they say.

#Census #Proposal #Stop #Counting #Undocumented #Immigrantsand #Ignore #Race #Sexual #Orientationus census,immigration,undocumented immigrants,race,lgbtq+">Census Proposal Would Stop Counting Undocumented Immigrants—and Ignore Race and Sexual Orientation

The US Department of Commerce, which oversees the Census Bureau, is circulating a proposed rule that would cease the collection of demographic data on racial minorities and LGBTQ+ people and prevent undocumented immigrants from being counted in the 2030 census, according to documents viewed by WIRED.

The decision could have far-reaching implications for federal funding, particularly in states where there are substantial numbers of racial and ethnic minorities, as well as on immigrant communities across the country.

The proposed rule, which is being circulated across government agencies for review, says the census will eliminate questions about race and sexual orientation “to protect from any distortions created from the inclusion of personal questions.” The memo also states that “illegal aliens (among others) should not be included in the apportionment count, they are not true inhabitants, members of the body politics [sic], or persons with ‘usual residence’ in the United States.”

This would likely require the reintroduction of a census question about a respondent’s citizenship. During Donald Trump’s first presidential term, Republicans attempted to add a citizenship question to the census for the first time since 1950. The effort was struck down by the Supreme Court, 5-4, with Chief Justice John Roberts siding with the Court’s then-larger liberal bloc on the grounds that the justification for adding the question was “contrived.” The decision did not, though, find that citizenship questions are inherently unconstitutional.

The Department of Commerce did not reply to requests for comment.

“This is about the Voting Rights Act,” says Danah Boyd, a professor at Cornell University who studies the census, referencing the landmark voter protection legislation that the Supreme Court dismantled earlier this year. Eliminating the collection of these data, she says, would make it difficult to make basic assessments, like whether a congressional district is predominantly made of minorities.

“If we don’t know certain things, we can’t challenge them politically,” says Boyd. “If we don’t know that certain peoples live in a particular geography, we can’t say, ‘Oh my gosh, here’s some massive inequality.’”

Republicans and the Trump administration have long taken aim at the census. More recently, members of the Trump administration have attacked a little-known statistical method called “differential privacy,” which is used to prevent census data from being used to reidentify individual respondents, claiming that it makes the results inaccurate. In August 2025, Republican representative August Pfluger made another attempt to reintroduce a citizenship question on the census, sponsoring a bill called the COUNT Act, and in October, Republican senator Jim Banks of Indiana published a letter to Commerce secretary Howard Lutnick, writing, “There is a credible argument that the framers of the Constitution designed the Census to cover lawful inhabitants and not those who are present illegally.”

Census questions are set between two and three years in advance of the actual survey, based on priorities set by the administration. The data from the census inform everything from the apportionment of congressional seats to federal funding that is allocated based on the size of a population.

An employee at the Department of Health and Human Services, who asked to remain anonymous because they are not authorized to speak to the press, tells WIRED that “many HHS programs use Census data to appropriate funding. Removing undocumented individuals from the census will cause localities with high numbers of those populations to lose critical federal funding.”

The employee says that removal of racial categories could specifically impact Native populations, which sometimes receive specialized funding. “Some programs use the ‘American Indian or Alaska Native’ category from the Census to make determinations of grants set aside for Tribal entities,” they say.

#Census #Proposal #Stop #Counting #Undocumented #Immigrantsand #Ignore #Race #Sexual #Orientationus census,immigration,undocumented immigrants,race,lgbtq+

X is overhauling how it pays creators, phasing out its long-running Revenue Sharing program in favor of a new system called the Original Content Rewards Program.

The platform’s Creators account announced the change in a post, saying the program is meant to “reward creators who bring original ideas, expertise, reporting, creativity, and commentary to X.”

According to the announcement, X stopped accepting new Revenue Sharing enrollments immediately and will wind the program down entirely after Sept. 7. Creators currently enrolled will receive three final payouts — two on the standard schedule in mid- and late August, and a final payment around Sept. 11 covering earnings through the cutoff date. Starting Sept. 8, existing Revenue Sharing members can apply for the new program if they meet its eligibility requirements, the company said.

SEE ALSO: With the launch of X Money, Elon Musk gets one step closer to his ‘everything app’

Per X’s announcement, the new program ties earnings to “qualified impressions” a creator’s original content receives, rather than the advertising-revenue split that defined the old system. Qualified impressions must come from unique, verified Premium subscribers viewing at least half of a post on the Home Timeline; impressions that are duplicated, paid, promoted, or fraudulent don’t count.

To qualify, X says creators must be at least 18, live in an eligible country, hold a Personal or Business account in good standing, subscribe to a paid X tier, and have at least 500 verified followers, along with 500,000 Home Timeline impressions from verified users over the prior 90 days. Those requirements must be maintained continuously to keep receiving payouts, according to the announcement.

X’s guidelines lean heavily on defining what counts as “original.” Per the company’s post, content that is copied, reuploaded without authorship, generated through automated means, or reposted with only minor edits — such as captions, watermarks, or basic text overlays — won’t qualify. Users can earn from reposting others’ material only if they add substantive commentary, analysis, or creative editing. So, simply describing what’s already happening in a post doesn’t meet the bar.

As noted in Engadget’s report on the news, X adjusted its Revenue Sharing formula in March to weight engagement more heavily toward a creator’s home region. That shift, they wrote, likely followed revelations that a number of popular accounts posting pro-Trump content and US-focused commentary were not actually based in the United States.

Whether the new Original Content Rewards Program carries over a similar regional weighting is not yet clear.

#retires #revenue #sharing #Original #Content #Rewards #program">X retires revenue sharing for new ‘Original Content Rewards’ program X is overhauling how it pays creators, phasing out its long-running Revenue Sharing program in favor of a new system called the Original Content Rewards Program. The platform’s Creators account announced the change in a post, saying the program is meant to “reward creators who bring original ideas, expertise, reporting, creativity, and commentary to X.”According to the announcement, X stopped accepting new Revenue Sharing enrollments immediately and will wind the program down entirely after Sept. 7. Creators currently enrolled will receive three final payouts — two on the standard schedule in mid- and late August, and a final payment around Sept. 11 covering earnings through the cutoff date. Starting Sept. 8, existing Revenue Sharing members can apply for the new program if they meet its eligibility requirements, the company said. SEE ALSO: With the launch of X Money, Elon Musk gets one step closer to his ‘everything app’ Per X’s announcement, the new program ties earnings to “qualified impressions” a creator’s original content receives, rather than the advertising-revenue split that defined the old system. Qualified impressions must come from unique, verified Premium subscribers viewing at least half of a post on the Home Timeline; impressions that are duplicated, paid, promoted, or fraudulent don’t count. Mashable Light Speed To qualify, X says creators must be at least 18, live in an eligible country, hold a Personal or Business account in good standing, subscribe to a paid X tier, and have at least 500 verified followers, along with 500,000 Home Timeline impressions from verified users over the prior 90 days. Those requirements must be maintained continuously to keep receiving payouts, according to the announcement.X’s guidelines lean heavily on defining what counts as “original.” Per the company’s post, content that is copied, reuploaded without authorship, generated through automated means, or reposted with only minor edits — such as captions, watermarks, or basic text overlays — won’t qualify. Users can earn from reposting others’ material only if they add substantive commentary, analysis, or creative editing. So, simply describing what’s already happening in a post doesn’t meet the bar. As noted in Engadget’s report on the news, X adjusted its Revenue Sharing formula in March to weight engagement more heavily toward a creator’s home region. That shift, they wrote, likely followed revelations that a number of popular accounts posting pro-Trump content and US-focused commentary were not actually based in the United States. Whether the new Original Content Rewards Program carries over a similar regional weighting is not yet clear. #retires #revenue #sharing #Original #Content #Rewards #program

announced the change in a post, saying the program is meant to “reward creators who bring original ideas, expertise, reporting, creativity, and commentary to X.”

According to the announcement, X stopped accepting new Revenue Sharing enrollments immediately and will wind the program down entirely after Sept. 7. Creators currently enrolled will receive three final payouts — two on the standard schedule in mid- and late August, and a final payment around Sept. 11 covering earnings through the cutoff date. Starting Sept. 8, existing Revenue Sharing members can apply for the new program if they meet its eligibility requirements, the company said.

SEE ALSO: With the launch of X Money, Elon Musk gets one step closer to his ‘everything app’

Per X’s announcement, the new program ties earnings to “qualified impressions” a creator’s original content receives, rather than the advertising-revenue split that defined the old system. Qualified impressions must come from unique, verified Premium subscribers viewing at least half of a post on the Home Timeline; impressions that are duplicated, paid, promoted, or fraudulent don’t count.

To qualify, X says creators must be at least 18, live in an eligible country, hold a Personal or Business account in good standing, subscribe to a paid X tier, and have at least 500 verified followers, along with 500,000 Home Timeline impressions from verified users over the prior 90 days. Those requirements must be maintained continuously to keep receiving payouts, according to the announcement.

X’s guidelines lean heavily on defining what counts as “original.” Per the company’s post, content that is copied, reuploaded without authorship, generated through automated means, or reposted with only minor edits — such as captions, watermarks, or basic text overlays — won’t qualify. Users can earn from reposting others’ material only if they add substantive commentary, analysis, or creative editing. So, simply describing what’s already happening in a post doesn’t meet the bar.

As noted in Engadget’s report on the news, X adjusted its Revenue Sharing formula in March to weight engagement more heavily toward a creator’s home region. That shift, they wrote, likely followed revelations that a number of popular accounts posting pro-Trump content and US-focused commentary were not actually based in the United States.

Whether the new Original Content Rewards Program carries over a similar regional weighting is not yet clear.

#retires #revenue #sharing #Original #Content #Rewards #program">X retires revenue sharing for new ‘Original Content Rewards’ program

X is overhauling how it pays creators, phasing out its long-running Revenue Sharing program in favor of a new system called the Original Content Rewards Program.

The platform’s Creators account announced the change in a post, saying the program is meant to “reward creators who bring original ideas, expertise, reporting, creativity, and commentary to X.”

According to the announcement, X stopped accepting new Revenue Sharing enrollments immediately and will wind the program down entirely after Sept. 7. Creators currently enrolled will receive three final payouts — two on the standard schedule in mid- and late August, and a final payment around Sept. 11 covering earnings through the cutoff date. Starting Sept. 8, existing Revenue Sharing members can apply for the new program if they meet its eligibility requirements, the company said.

SEE ALSO: With the launch of X Money, Elon Musk gets one step closer to his ‘everything app’

Per X’s announcement, the new program ties earnings to “qualified impressions” a creator’s original content receives, rather than the advertising-revenue split that defined the old system. Qualified impressions must come from unique, verified Premium subscribers viewing at least half of a post on the Home Timeline; impressions that are duplicated, paid, promoted, or fraudulent don’t count.

To qualify, X says creators must be at least 18, live in an eligible country, hold a Personal or Business account in good standing, subscribe to a paid X tier, and have at least 500 verified followers, along with 500,000 Home Timeline impressions from verified users over the prior 90 days. Those requirements must be maintained continuously to keep receiving payouts, according to the announcement.

X’s guidelines lean heavily on defining what counts as “original.” Per the company’s post, content that is copied, reuploaded without authorship, generated through automated means, or reposted with only minor edits — such as captions, watermarks, or basic text overlays — won’t qualify. Users can earn from reposting others’ material only if they add substantive commentary, analysis, or creative editing. So, simply describing what’s already happening in a post doesn’t meet the bar.

As noted in Engadget’s report on the news, X adjusted its Revenue Sharing formula in March to weight engagement more heavily toward a creator’s home region. That shift, they wrote, likely followed revelations that a number of popular accounts posting pro-Trump content and US-focused commentary were not actually based in the United States.

Whether the new Original Content Rewards Program carries over a similar regional weighting is not yet clear.

#retires #revenue #sharing #Original #Content #Rewards #program
Buc-ee’s became something of a viral sensation during the World Cup, but it has a troubling history of suing small gas stations and convenience stores. On a recent episode of Last Week Tonight, John Oliver literally begged the company to sue him for selling merch featuring his squirrel mascot, Mr. Nutterbutter, with branding that reads “Buc-Off.” But Buc-ee’s has so far declined to take the bait, instead targeting yet another small business that lacks the deep pockets and legal team of HBO.

According to WDTN, an NBC affiliate in Miami Valley, Ohio, Buc-ee’s opened its first locations in the state earlier this year. And now it’s targeting established local businesses through trademark suits. Beaver’s Mini Mart in Beavercreek has been a staple of the city for “decades.” But Buc-ee’s is claiming that this long-running store’s beaver logo could confuse customers. WDTN says:

In the suit, filed days ago, Buc-ee’s alleges that the Mini Mart’s cartoon beaver mascot is too similar to their own, with its “wide eyes and a smile” that also “uses red as a predominant color,” and could cause confusion.

Oliver and Mr. Nutterbutter have already fended off one lawsuit, with Bob Murray, a mining executive, having unsuccessfully sued for defamation following a 2017 episode about the coal industry.

#Bucees #dodges #John #Oliver #sue #small #businessBusiness,Culture,Entertainment,Internet Culture,Law,News,Policy,TV Shows">Buc-ee’s dodges John Oliver to sue another small businessBuc-ee’s became something of a viral sensation during the World Cup, but it has a troubling history of suing small gas stations and convenience stores. On a recent episode of Last Week Tonight, John Oliver literally begged the company to sue him for selling merch featuring his squirrel mascot, Mr. Nutterbutter, with branding that reads “Buc-Off.” But Buc-ee’s has so far declined to take the bait, instead targeting yet another small business that lacks the deep pockets and legal team of HBO.According to WDTN, an NBC affiliate in Miami Valley, Ohio, Buc-ee’s opened its first locations in the state earlier this year. And now it’s targeting established local businesses through trademark suits. Beaver’s Mini Mart in Beavercreek has been a staple of the city for “decades.” But Buc-ee’s is claiming that this long-running store’s beaver logo could confuse customers. WDTN says:In the suit, filed days ago, Buc-ee’s alleges that the Mini Mart’s cartoon beaver mascot is too similar to their own, with its “wide eyes and a smile” that also “uses red as a predominant color,” and could cause confusion.Oliver and Mr. Nutterbutter have already fended off one lawsuit, with Bob Murray, a mining executive, having unsuccessfully sued for defamation following a 2017 episode about the coal industry.#Bucees #dodges #John #Oliver #sue #small #businessBusiness,Culture,Entertainment,Internet Culture,Law,News,Policy,TV Shows

viral sensation during the World Cup, but it has a troubling history of suing small gas stations and convenience stores. On a recent episode of Last Week Tonight, John Oliver literally begged the company to sue him for selling merch featuring his squirrel mascot, Mr. Nutterbutter, with branding that reads “Buc-Off.” But Buc-ee’s has so far declined to take the bait, instead targeting yet another small business that lacks the deep pockets and legal team of HBO.

According to WDTN, an NBC affiliate in Miami Valley, Ohio, Buc-ee’s opened its first locations in the state earlier this year. And now it’s targeting established local businesses through trademark suits. Beaver’s Mini Mart in Beavercreek has been a staple of the city for “decades.” But Buc-ee’s is claiming that this long-running store’s beaver logo could confuse customers. WDTN says:

In the suit, filed days ago, Buc-ee’s alleges that the Mini Mart’s cartoon beaver mascot is too similar to their own, with its “wide eyes and a smile” that also “uses red as a predominant color,” and could cause confusion.

Oliver and Mr. Nutterbutter have already fended off one lawsuit, with Bob Murray, a mining executive, having unsuccessfully sued for defamation following a 2017 episode about the coal industry.

#Bucees #dodges #John #Oliver #sue #small #businessBusiness,Culture,Entertainment,Internet Culture,Law,News,Policy,TV Shows">Buc-ee’s dodges John Oliver to sue another small business

Buc-ee’s became something of a viral sensation during the World Cup, but it has a troubling history of suing small gas stations and convenience stores. On a recent episode of Last Week Tonight, John Oliver literally begged the company to sue him for selling merch featuring his squirrel mascot, Mr. Nutterbutter, with branding that reads “Buc-Off.” But Buc-ee’s has so far declined to take the bait, instead targeting yet another small business that lacks the deep pockets and legal team of HBO.

According to WDTN, an NBC affiliate in Miami Valley, Ohio, Buc-ee’s opened its first locations in the state earlier this year. And now it’s targeting established local businesses through trademark suits. Beaver’s Mini Mart in Beavercreek has been a staple of the city for “decades.” But Buc-ee’s is claiming that this long-running store’s beaver logo could confuse customers. WDTN says:

In the suit, filed days ago, Buc-ee’s alleges that the Mini Mart’s cartoon beaver mascot is too similar to their own, with its “wide eyes and a smile” that also “uses red as a predominant color,” and could cause confusion.

Oliver and Mr. Nutterbutter have already fended off one lawsuit, with Bob Murray, a mining executive, having unsuccessfully sued for defamation following a 2017 episode about the coal industry.

#Bucees #dodges #John #Oliver #sue #small #businessBusiness,Culture,Entertainment,Internet Culture,Law,News,Policy,TV Shows

Post Comment