5 Movies with Unbelievable Scenes About Trademarks and Intellectual Property
  
I love watching good movies.
And I can't help but notice those that have something to do with intellectual property or trademarks.
I finally decided to compile a list of 5 movies with some great scenes about IP.
And guess what?
The second I uploaded my video, I got a notification from YouTube that my video was blocked because it allegedly constitutes a copyright infringement.
Beat the irony of that!
I initiated a dispute. Here's a quote from my response: "This video is just my commentary on my compilation of 5 amazing movies with scenes about intellectual property and trademarks. It does not undermine the rights of highly respected copyright owners. It does not replace the actual movie. Only short snippets were used—and only as illustration of how intellectual property disputes are depicted in motion pictures. I give a disclaimer at the beginning of the video and sincerely recommend that the audience purchase a legitimate copy of the whole film. I would greatly appreciate if you agreed to unblock the video. I was an intellectual property lawyer for over 21 years and have utmost respect for others' intellectual property. I'll happily add whatever copyright notice you'd request in the description of the video. Andrei Mincov."
Next morning, I received a notification that the video was unblocked and ready for your viewing pleasure.
Watch it at http://snip.ly/qtapo and let me know your favorite scene!
Patricia's First Archery Class
My 8 years old has been begging me to take her to an archery class for weeks.
She has a plastic toy bow that she used to play with all the time, but I never took it seriously.
Finally, I said, OK, let's get you a lesson.
And guess what?
Immediately she demonstrated that she was dead serious about it!
Check her out!
Her next step is a 3-day Christmas archery bootcamp.
She can't think or talk about anything else!
Trademark Screw-Ups of the Month
NY Times Forces BuzzFeed to Scrap ‘Too Lit for Print’ Slogan Over Trademark Issues Looks like everyone is happy with the outcome. BuzzFeed used the tagline—and then the dispute with NY Times—to attract additional interest to its morning show. NY Times felt good about having trademarked their tagline. NY Times' lawyers felt great about their power of persuasion. Journalists who covered the story were happy because they had something to cover. Perfect win for everyone, it seems!
Deere wins trademark lawsuit in protection of green and yellow colors When it comes to trademarking logos, one of the decisions that the brand owner needs to make is whether or not to "claim color as a feature of the trademark." To oversimplify, a logo filed WITHOUT claiming color as a feature protects the shape of the logo in any color. This is typically regarded as a stronger trademark. When color is claimed as a feature of a trademark, the protection is granted not only to the shape of the logo, but also to the colors. Typically, it narrows down the scope of protection of the logo as far as the shape of the logo is concerned. On the other hand, it provides additional protection to the color combination itself, even if the shape of the logo is varied. This is precisely what happened in this case. John Deere's competitor's logo did not look like John Deere's, except it used the same colors. Because John Deere had claimed color as a feature of their trademark, they were able to prevail. The lesson here is: you have to be very strategic in deciding whether or not you want to claim color as a feature of your trademark. Sometimes, it's best to file two separate trademark applications for the same logo—you would claim color as a feature for one application and not claim it for the other one.
App developer who’s been using Animoji name since 2014 sues Apple for trademark infringement Ouch, that's embarrassing. And the most embarrassing part is that Apple first tried to get a license to use the name and—after getting a no as the answer—still went ahead and used the brand of one of its own AppStore developers. What's fascinating is that they failed to quietly make the problem go away. Would be fascinating to read Apple's response. We'll see where it goes...
Yes, Using a Copyrighted Photo Without Permission Can Get You Sued… Well, duh! That's what copyright is about. Just because you can find it on Google Images, doesn't mean you have a right to use it. Just because you see a Ferrari parked down the road doesn't mean you can jump into it and drive it!
Adidas Files Trademark Opposition Against Turner Over ELEAGUE Logo Yep, you guessed it. ELEAGUE's logo has three stripes. Adidas felt the need to give the world a notice that they're upset.
Supreme Court refuses to hear case questioning Google’s trademark "Google" survives as a trademark, for now. Google has never been this close to paying the price for being the textbook example of what not to do with your brand. I explained this in more detail at: https://trademarkfactory.com/faq/why-is-google-the-textbook-example-of-what-not-to-do-with-your-trademark
Epic Sues ‘Fortnite’ Cheaters For Copyright Infringement This is much more than just a copyright infringement lawsuit. But it demonstrates how powerful IP rights can be. Breach of contract and other claims require the plaintiff to prove damages. With copyright, they can go straight for statutory damages that do not require the plaintiff to prove anything other than that the defendant made an unauthorized modification or reproduction of the plaintiff's work without the plaintiff's permission.
Frankfurt Book Fair 2017: Concern that Canadian Copyright Disaster Could Spread Margaret Thatcher is famous for saying, "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." The problem with expanding the list of copyright exceptions to benefit the masses is that you eventually run out of publishers who would be willing to invest in making new books available to the entitled masses...
Fintech boom drives record number of trade mark applications by UK finance firms Indeed. While it's relatively easy to copy financial products, it's not easy to copy trademarked names. Trademarks give fintech companies a massive competitive advantage in a market where it is very difficult to come up with a revolutionary product or a service. But it's not just the names that get trademarked. It's also slogans and visuals. With a proper trademarking strategy, it becomes possible to legitimately claim that you are "the only company that..." even when your products and services are no different from those of your competitors.
Kim, Khloe and Kourtney go after Michigan restaurant named Kardashian Bakery & Grill as they 'file paperwork to block trademark' Here we go again...
Classixx Sue H&M for Trademark Infringement It's an interesting one. H&M's defense is, at least in part, that "the use of a word as a decorative feature on an article of clothing is not trademark use." Typically, simply slapping a name or a logo on a tshirt is not sufficient to act as an acceptable specimen of use for the purposes of registering your own trademark in the U.S. USPTO routinely rejects such specimens claiming that the trademark is merely "ornamental" rather than referring to a source. However, the standard for what constitutes trademark infringement is different from the standard of what can be registered as a trademark. Clearly, telling artists whose trademark you used on the clothes you sell that they are "relatively unknown" was not the smartest thing to avoid confrontation.
UCLA’s effort to patent a costly prostate cancer drug in India hurts the poor, critics say The article somehow assumes that inventors have an obligation to place the interests of the poor above their own. Newsflash: they don't. It also ignores the fact that the dole of the poor did not change between not having access to the cancer drug: they didn't have access to it before it was invented and they don't have access to it now because they can't afford it. Nothing really changed for the poor in this department. To say that UCLA's efforts to patent what they developed hurts the poor is to assume that the invention somehow robbed the people from what they used to have. In fact, of course, it's quite the opposite. UCLA gifted the world with something truly valuable, something that hadn't existed before. Their efforts to get rewarded for it don't hurt anyone. Instead, we should be forever grateful to them for their efforts.
Kraft takes Bega to court over classic peanut butter stand-off This dispute may become a classic example of a clash between contractual rights and statutory IP rights. Typically, contractual rights overrule default statutory provisions relating to who owns what IP. IP continues to govern relationships that are not covered by a contract. The really tasty stuff (pun intended) happens when there is a dispute as to what is governed by a contract and what isn't. Either way, this dispute shows how important trademarks are: it's really the most valuable part of the multi-million peanut butter business! This battle will likely make into textbooks—regardless of the outcome.
Ritter Chocolate Maintains Its 3D Trademark in Germany These are the words of wisdom: "The square form of the chocolate bar is not a crucial usage attribute of chocolate." In all seriousness though, good for Ritter Sport! It's not an easy task to protect the shape of a product through trademarks...
Are Kid Rock and Feld Headed For a Trademark Fight? So the dispute is over the tagline, "THE GREATEST SHOW ON EARTH" that belongs to a company behind a 150-year-old circus. The kicker here is that the circus stopped touring earlier this year. Because they only stopped touring this year and because the company behind it is still operational, Kid Rock can't successfully initiate cancellation proceedings to kill the circus's trademark. Moreover, even though the circus is no longer touring, the trademark has independent value. So I agree with the comments in the article: the best win-win out of this would be for the circus company and Kid Rock to enter into a license agreement which would allow Kid Rock to use the tagline and which would preserve the value of the brand. As long as a trademark being used—even by a licensee—it cannot be cancelled for non-use. So the circus company does need someone to use the tagline—legitimately—in order not to lose the brand.
Eminem wins $600,000 after New Zealand political party breached his copyright This reminds me of my very first court case. My father caught a radio station stealing his music to make an ad for Samsung out of a song he wrote for a children's film. I had to take the case from the bottom court all the way to one level below the Supreme Court of Russia—and won. Mind you, that was my very first experience as an intellectual property lawyer. The case set a precedent in Russia. The radio station's position was that they have a license from the Russian collecting society that is authorized to grant general licenses for the use of all published works of all authors as long as such works were not excluded from the collecting society's catalog. I was able to prove that unauthorized modifications of a published work do not form part of the collecting society's catalog and therefore cannot be the subject of the license that the radio station had from the collecting society. I only wish the award we got was anywhere near what Eminem got in New Zealand court!
LeBron James files to trademark 'nothing is given' phrase Another day, another celebrity trademarks their catchphrase. The first reason they do it is because they can think of a thousand ways to monetize it. The second reason it because they'd hate to see someone else monetize it. If you managed to craft a catchphrase that is getting some attention, make sure you secure it!
Black cab shape not distinctive enough to be trademark, say judges Hmm. If that shape is not distinctive enough to be a trademark, what is? The shape of the car may have been generic to many cars when it first introduced, but clearly, it doesn't look like any other car you'd see on the street today. It's also clear that the only reason London Taxi Company preserved the shape of their cars is to make them recognizable to potential passengers, which is precisely the proper function of a trademark. I wonder if the decision can or will be further appealed.
SPI Group wins Stoli trademark case in Brazil Perfect example of when a brand is more valuable than the product. Whenever I tell people that I'm originally from Russia and that vodka is one of my favorite alcoholic drinks, 9 times out of 10, the first thing that comes out of their mouth is, "Stoli." What follows next is usually "Nasdrovie." Let me start with busting some myths here. Russians never say "Nasdrovie" when they drink. It's an urban legend that has nothing to do with reality. Second, Stoli—as famous as it is—is definitely not the best vodka around. But hey, people are not buying it because of its taste. People are buying it because of the brand. And if that's the case, owning the brand is a matter of hundreds of millions of dollars.
Humvee maker sues Activision over 'Call of Duty' Oh, this one will be interesting to watch. Does using a vehicle in a computer game require a license from the owner of the trademark and other IP behind the vehicle? Will the $15B game manufacturer quietly settle? Will the two corporate giants go at it until the end?
DC Comics Defeats “Jesus” Trademark Another story from the "What were they thinking?!" department... Companies that value their IP monitor possibly confusingly similar trademarks filed around the world and go after everyone who might devalue their successful brands. Thing is, David-and-Goliath trademarking stories are popular today because of the prevalence of illiterate online comments such as "just change a letter or two there—and they won't be able to do anything to you." Nothing can be further from the truth. Trademark protection expands much further than identical copying. Trust me, teasing the giant may seem brave and funny—until it isn't anymore.
Gucci Wins Latest Round in Legal Battle With Forever 21 You may remember that Forever 21 proactively sued Gucci seeking declaration that Forever 21 was not infringing Gucci's trademarks and that Gucci's trademark should be cancelled. Well, at least on the district court level, Forever 21 lost. The court refused to grand the declaratory judgment—and Gucci will now proceed in their quest to protect their color-combination trademarks against alleged infringement by Forever 21.
Moosehead files lawsuit against Vermont brewpub over trademark Another beer dispute. You would think that when you come up with a name for your beer, you would at least google what's out there. I'm not even mentioning doing a proper trademark search, which, by the way, is the right way to do it. So going back to online searches. If they googled for just two words, "moose" and "beer", they'd not only immediately see links to Moosehead Breweries, they'd also get to read about all the trademark infringement disputes that Moosehead Breweries won. That should have been a good indicator to pick a different name. Apparently, some business owners prefer to learn from their own mistakes.
‘Epic’ trademark lawsuit plays out in Denver Are breweries really running out of words to name their beers? How come are there so many beer trademark disputes? Here's yet another one...
Hollywood nudist resort sues local restaurant group over 'Rooftop' name They may be naked but they've got a trademark they're willing to protect.
Hyannis store owner sues over trademark This proves, again, that even small business owners benefit from having their brands protected. The brand owner said she lost $50,000 due to customer confusion caused by the defendants. $50K may not be a huge amount but enough for the trademark owner to be justified in patting herself on the back for having timely secured her brand.
Amazon Facing Legal Action Over German 'Black Friday' Trademark Breach Unlike Canada and the U.S., Europe does not recognize unregistered trademarks. It means that whoever files the trademark there first has priority over everyone else. Now that Black Friday's got a trademark, they have the legal right to go after everyone who uses it, however ridiculous this may sound to someone in North America. The real question here is, will Amazon prefer to pay their team of lawyers to invalidate the offending European trademark or just pay the offenders to go away.
Kevin Spacey Registered Trademarks for ‘House of Cards’-Themed Merch Days Before Scandal Broke Well, what can I say. I've often said that with real estate, it's all about location, location, location. With trademarks, it's all about timing, timing, timing. It's often too late but never too early to register your trademark. Regardless of your sentiment towards Kevin Spacey at this point, you'd have to admit that a semi-destroyed career plus ownership of a valuable brand is better than a semi-destroyed career when you don't own it.
|
