Former owners Allison Burger, left, and Mary Beth Grady.
Ray Ewing

New York Businessman Acquires Chilmark Chocolates Name

Jason B. Teuscher, of New York, has taken over the company name with the apparent intent to sell chocolates, causing dismay among people involved in the original company.

When Chilmark Chocolates closed for good nearly five years ago, owner-managers Allison Burger and Mary Beth Grady intended to retire the company name as well, in tribute to an Island business like no other.

“As we stated upon closing, we wanted ‘to let it stand for what we all worked together to create,’” they wrote to the Gazette last month.

But well before the shop sold its last box of handmade sweets in December 2019, a legal effort was under way to claim the Chilmark Chocolates trademark for a new business.

A New York man has taken over the company name with the apparent intent to sell chocolates, causing dismay among people involved in the original company. Ms. Grady and Ms. Burger wrote to the Gazette and clarified there is no connection to their old shop. 

The new patent application included pictures of chocolates.
The new patent application included pictures of chocolates.

“While the new business reads ‘established 1984’ and ‘40+ years in business (almost)’, it has no connection other than the name with the business begun by Jan Campbell in 1984 and taken over by a team in September 1985 through 2019,” they wrote.

According to the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Jason B. Teuscher, of New York, first applied for the trademark in August 2019 — six months after Ms. Burger and Ms. Grady announced they would close Chilmark Chocolates at the end of the year.

In 2020, Mr. Teuscher took legal action, successfully petitioning the U.S. Trademark and Appeal Board to cancel the mark’s original registration. The patent office formally registered Mr. Teuscher’s Chilmark Chocolates trademark last month.

Though Mr. Teuscher’s plans for the business are unclear, a new website (chilmarkchocolate.com) appeared recently. Every page has a logo reading “Est. 1984” along with the statement “Our chocolate is the product of an amazing community of incredible people who are dedicated to crafting an exceptional product that you’ll love.”

There are also various listings for chocolate products, and the home page features a quotation about chocolate that is attributed to Charles Dickens, although it actually is from a 20th-century writer.

Documents filed with the Patent and Trademark Office included pictures of small chocolate squares emblazoned with the name “Chilmark Chocolates,” displayed on a nondescript coffee table or surrounded by tea and pastries. 

Attempts to reach Mr. Teuscher’s trademark attorneys at the White Plains, N.Y. firm Mandelbaum Silfin were unsuccessful. 

Mr. Teuscher provided the patent office with New York City addresses on Fifth avenue and West 77th street. A New York Times announcement of his 2012 wedding in Chilmark describes Mr. Teuscher as the holder of an international patent for vertical blinds who is an alumnus of Boston University with a master’s degree in business administration from the University of Chicago Executive Program in Singapore. 

Chilmark Chocolates founder Jan Campbell said seeing the old brand reused was upsetting and outrageous. 

“I can’t imagine anybody who knew and saw what happened at Chilmark Chocolates believing that’s okay to steal,” she said.

Ms. Campbell had been a longtime volunteer at Camp Jabberwocky when she started Chilmark Chocolates. She now works with Tulgey Wood, a similar camp for people with disabilities that was first based on Nantucket and is now located on the Cape. She questioned why the website had a page with logos for both camps and a pledge to contribute to “Martha’s Vineyard Intellectually Challenge[d] Non-Profits.”

“I don’t understand what he’s thinking he will even get out of it,” she said.

Born into a chocolate-making family in New Jersey, Ms. Campbell opened Chilmark Chocolates in 1984 and ran it for a year before deciding to go to graduate school.

“I tried to figure out a way Jabberwocky could take over, but the board was risk-averse,” she said.

Chilmark Chocolates packages up sweets on its last day of business in 2019.
Albert O. Fischer
Chilmark Chocolates packages up sweets on its last day of business in 2019.
Albert O. Fischer

Ms. Grady and Ms. Burger, whom Ms. Campbell knew from Camp Jabberwocky, were willing to give it a try. They took over Chilmark Chocolates amid the chaos of Hurricane Gloria and went on to become one of the Island’s best-loved establishments, hiring Jabberwocky campers and other Islanders.

With no website, limited mail order and open only 20 hours a week, the little shop on State Road drew lines of customers who filed through the narrow showroom to select their chocolates from long glass cases.

Behind the counter and in the kitchen, Ms. Burger and Ms. Grady maintained an egalitarian workplace, shying away from words like “owners” and “employees.”

“We always stayed focused on our approach, and that was to be a team,” Ms. Grady said in a rare interview last month.

When preparing to close, the two worked with former employees Allison and Sarah Flanders to teach the Chilmark sisters the chocolate-making trade.

“We asked them to make their own story, and it’s theirs,” Ms. Burger said. 

Chocolate lovers now line up at the West Tisbury Farmers’ Market for candy from the Flanders sisters’ Salt Rock Chocolates.

While taking over a company name is allowed, there were parts of the new Chilmark Chocolates brand that could be problematic in the eyes of the law, according to one trademark expert.

Trademarking a company name is done to prevent customer confusion and preserve a company’s reputation, said Stacey Dogan, a law professor at Boston University and scholar in intellectual property law. 

The branding on the new website, claiming the new iteration of Chilmark Chocolates was established in 1984, seemed to falsely suggest it was a continuation of the former, longstanding, respected business, she said.

“That is deceptive advertising if there is no relationship between this new owner and the prior firm,” Ms. Dogan said. “This is exactly the kind of behavior that falsely suggests this new business is a continuation of the old business.”

Ethan Genter contributed to this report. 

Comments

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 09/05/2024 - 17:28

Permalink

Hugh Weisman Chilmark

What a travesty....I don't know how you can just take over another company's name like that. I assume it wasn't trademarked. But we should all get the word out to shun "Chilmark Chocolates." The=e thought of a company with that name that's so callous and unfeeling and so unlike the wonderful company run by Allison and Mary Beth for all those years just makes me sick.....Sure, I'll get my chocolate fix from Salt Rock Chocolates and thanks Allison and Sarah for that, but this is beyond.

Sara OB

“Their new website is honestly the saddest thing I’ve ever seen”
I really don’t get it.
How about inflation? Our Economy ? The SSA?
To name a few…
We are talking about a candy store??
The folks did not patten the name, it’s just that simple… we need to move on.
More important things to worry about.

Alex OB

Ok, *obviously* there are bigger things to worry. My point is that if you look at their web site, it’s another layer to this story. Every aspect of it is Gen AI: the wordmark, the odd illustrations, the fake Dickens quote, the random basil leaf, and the product images and shop pages. It all feels so shoddy and suspicious.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 09/05/2024 - 19:28

Permalink

Madeline Way West Tis

Did He buy the business? His site says 40+ years in business and lists as an/the address:
Chilmark Chocolates Company
Chilmark, Martha's Vineyard, MA
Est. 1984

If not the website seems like a lie. My understanding is that he did not buy the business.

I think some good Island-loving lawyer needs to clarify this. And maybe help keep honest and clean our Island Chilmark Chocolate's wonderful history of providing amazing chocolate and employing people with differences for 40 years.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 09/05/2024 - 19:37

Permalink

Charles West Chester, Pennsylvania

Wow, what a shame this person is trying to take advantage of the good name and reputation of these two women. These two women clearly were dedicated to the greater good of the community, and very special members of the Vineyard community. They are to be applauded, and the good name and reputation shouldn’t be misappropriated (even if he’s doing it lawfully).

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 09/05/2024 - 21:20

Permalink

Bill R Chilmark/DC

This year Chilmark has seen a good bit of division and discord, and in walks Mr. Jason Teuscher to gift the community what it needs: common cause against what seems to be a bewildering and buffoonish act.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 09/05/2024 - 22:11

Permalink

Tom Engley West Tisbury

Just because you can doesn’t mean you should.

Outrageous steal. Shameful but that’s a new normal.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/06/2024 - 06:14

Permalink

Mark Acker Vh

Judging from this story the Island should impose an All Island boycott on the sale or distribution of these chocolates out of respect for the founders.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/06/2024 - 07:37

Permalink

Christine Senge

Over many summers, we were frequent consumers of the original Chilmark chocolates.
Not only, will we not purchase the new pirated brand, but we will be sure to tell everyone we know that the new owner is dishonest.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/06/2024 - 07:41

Permalink

rosemary stimola

He may have now have stolen via trademark the name, but to imply that he is now owner of an island business established in 1984 is bogus and he should be subject to legal acton. he is not entitled to their history.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/06/2024 - 07:52

Permalink

Cindy Flanders Edgartown

Nobody will ever be able to replicate the magic created by Mary Beth and Allison. And it was always about so much more than chocolate. Something that I suspect Mr. Teuscher will never understand.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/06/2024 - 08:37

Permalink

Sadpecanturtls VH

A few sentences in and I new I would never buy a single piece of this man’s chocolate - I’m sure many others feel the same way

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/06/2024 - 10:00

Permalink

Bob Giordano Long Island

If the two partners had not trademarked the name or let it go after closing, the new entrepreneur has cart blanche to trademark it himself. That being said, saying established in 1984 is false advertising. I'm in the copyright business, you cannot "Patent" a name. You can only Trademark it for the product category it's being used on, in this case I'd imagine he has a trademark for food items I'm sure. Somebody should make t-shirts that say Chillmark Chocolates and beat him to the Trademark for apparel, make mugs get the Trademark for Housewares. Each TM carries application to specific product categories only and one usually has to show a presence in that marketplace to secure the TM. It ban be cutthroat out there with some tryin to capitalize on somebody else's brand. Thankfully in this case Chillmark Chocolates wasn't operating as we knew it. There's even times when businesses "parallel market" successful brands. For example in the height of "The Little Mermaid" by Disney, hundreds of companies ran out and made Mermaid products and called it "The Cutest Mermaid" or "Little Mermaid of the Sea"..it can get ugly.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/06/2024 - 10:52

Permalink

Ron M Chappaquiddick

The web page in claiming that the new company has been in business since 1984 would seem to clearly violate 15 USC Sec. 1125 (a)(1)(A), because that statement is a "...false or misleading representation of fact, which— (A) is likely to to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods...". However, the question is who is damaged by this clearly deceptive connection to the former company? The former owners no longer have a business to be damaged. Perhaps they could obtain an injunction against that and all other confusing statements on that website based on the theory that it damages their personal reputations in the community, but that would require legal fees and proof and there would be no monetary damages.

mark acker vh

Ron M. It is damaging to the people that buy the product. The public purchases products based on a stated reputation or declared advertising facts. So maybe the State would demand accurate advertising to protect the public. Or any individual could file a small claims action claiming false advertising, and maybe get awarded treble damages.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/06/2024 - 11:33

Permalink

Elisha Wiesner Chilmark

Besides making great chocolate, Mary Beth, Allison and the entire Chilmark Chocolates family represented everything that was good in this town and on this Island. A truly magical business that we may never see the likes of again. We were all sad when they closed but have great memories and can still get the chocolate from Salt Rock. The fact that someone could be so callous and tone deaf to just take the name and toss up a website is disgusting. Jason Teuscher should be ashamed of himself.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/06/2024 - 17:02

Permalink

Gayle Fredericks Lawrenceville, NJ and Oak Bluffs

What a horrible lie! This New Yorker is trying to fool clients into thinking that he established the business in 1984. Unsuspecting people will believe him. What a shame. My husband and I bought several pounds of Chilmark Chocolates to serve at our wedding in 2019. They were our last taste of the real thing. I'm sad that someone is abusing the name.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 09/08/2024 - 12:44

Permalink

Scott Toronto

This is shameful. We all have wonderful memories of the original. Call it what he wants, he will never replace the original!

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.