But you don't get to take their words for it
August 9, 2017 9:36 AM   Subscribe

'Reading Rainbow taught a generation of kids that they could (a) go twice as high as a butterfly, (b) go anywhere, and (c) be anything. Unfortunately, if you chose to be “LeVar Burton using his classic Reading Rainbow catchphrase,” the place you will go might be court. According to The Hollywood Reporter, WNED-TV Buffalo, New York, is suing the children’s show host in part over his continued use of the tagline “But you don’t have to take my word for it” on his podcast LeVar Burton Reads.'

The podcast, where "in each episode, host LeVar Burton hand-picks a different piece of short fiction, and reads it to you," is really quite lovely, so if WNED's true mission was to promote reading by driving the entire outraged internet to the soothing embrace of LeVar Burton's voice, then they seem to be succeeding.
posted by J.K. Seazer (29 comments total) 9 users marked this as a favorite
 


It should be noted that butterflies have been known to fly over 10,000ft high.
posted by Sys Rq at 9:45 AM on August 9, 2017 [6 favorites]


Well, I understand (based solely on previous MetaFilter discussions), that if you want to keep a trademark, you have to be aggressive about dumb shit, but unless you are trying to give the podcast you have a problem with free publicity, this seems like a mistake. But you don't have to take my word for it.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 9:45 AM on August 9, 2017 [2 favorites]


that if you want to keep a trademark, you have to be aggressive about dumb shit

Couldn't they just license it to him for like a dollar? It's not as if he's harming the brand, and they could still go after later infringers.
posted by paper chromatographologist at 9:49 AM on August 9, 2017 [6 favorites]


From the conference room at WNED:

"I know! We'll sue LeVar Burton and we'll make sure to schedule nothing but endless woo-woo shit during pledge season instead of boring science crap like Nova! That will correctly warn area viewers that we are a pack of irredeemable chuckleheads that shouldn't get anyone's money!"
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:51 AM on August 9, 2017 [13 favorites]


"Mr. Burton’s goal is to control and reap the benefits of Reading Rainbow’s substantial goodwill — goodwill that unquestionably belongs to WNED."

I wanted to set my kids up with some TV and pulled up Netflix. "I wonder if they have anything from WNED. They managed some really great intellectual property...", I thought to myself, getting a warm feeling inside as I reminisced about how their station breaks were interspersed with some of my favorite shows.
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 9:54 AM on August 9, 2017 [28 favorites]


"Mr. Burton’s goal is to control and reap the benefits of Reading Rainbow’s substantial goodwill — goodwill that unquestionably belongs to WNED," states the complaint.

Unquestionably? I don't know the legal merits--"goodwill" may have a meaning as a term of art that's different from what it connotes to me. But I think many fans of the show, if they were told it's goodwill belongs to WNED, might have a question along the lines of "What about LeVar Burton."

And I recall reading a history of the series that pointed out that the production frequently experienced cash flow problems, and that Burton consistently went beyond his duties as a program host to help secure the funding that allowed them to continue.

Seconding jpfed here. That quote really makes the station look ridiculous.
posted by layceepee at 9:57 AM on August 9, 2017 [11 favorites]


"Mr. Burton’s goal is to control and reap the benefits of Reading Rainbow’s substantial goodwill — goodwill that unquestionably belongs to WNED," states the complaint.

"Hey, remember that old Reading Rainbow show?"
"Oh, man, do I ever. WNED, what a great source of quality children's programming."
"Who hosted that again?"
"It was... that guy... from the thing..."
posted by Etrigan at 10:05 AM on August 9, 2017 [25 favorites]


He should get Worf to come over from another of his properties and litigate physically.
posted by Abehammerb Lincoln at 10:11 AM on August 9, 2017 [16 favorites]


I'd watch that show.
posted by jeffamaphone at 10:14 AM on August 9, 2017 [6 favorites]


Michael Dorn in costume as Worf in costume as Marcus the BDSM-loving supermutant.
posted by radicalawyer at 10:30 AM on August 9, 2017


I got it! LeVar puts his lips right on the mic and serious as as the reaper says "you HAVE to take my work for it". Followed by some wispy gaseous sound effects that fade into five minutes of dead air.
posted by Stonestock Relentless at 10:36 AM on August 9, 2017


I think Levar himself has eroded the power of this phrase. He used to say "you don't have to take my word for it" when recommending some books, right before passing the show of to kid book reviewers. I didn't have to take his word because I was about to hear recommendations from kids like me. Now he just uses it as a sign off phrase, so it seems to have no meaning at all other than to remind us of a thing he used to say. I don't think he should be sued over this, but I also think he should reconsider how he is using it.
posted by cubby at 10:40 AM on August 9, 2017 [8 favorites]


…endless woo-woo shit during pledge season instead of boring science crap like Nova!

I agree with that general sentiment (my local PBS station seems to exist mainly to sell CD collections of old music), but I have to point out that even Nova has gone downhill over the years. And I cringe whenever I see the credits acknowledging David Koch for funding it. I suspect these things are related.
posted by TedW at 10:51 AM on August 9, 2017 [4 favorites]


If

a) WNED-TV rebooted "Reading Rainbow" with a new host using original "But you don't have to take my word for it."

b) Hulu/Netflix created a new show called "Reading Railroad" hosted by Levar with the catch phrase "You shouldn't just take my word on it."

I know which one my son would watch.

I don't know if that is too close for IP law, but it seems like Levar is the glue holding the thing together.
posted by TofuGolem at 11:11 AM on August 9, 2017 [3 favorites]


…endless woo-woo shit during pledge season instead of boring science crap like Nova!
]
presumably this works, or they'd stop doing it. But why does it work? I just don't get the intersection between viewers who like The Newshour or Donton Abbey with those who crave the wisdom of Dr. Wayne Dyer on "The Power Of Intention". And the boomer music concerts, when they normally don't play rock? I've heard they don't attract young donors; maybe they just double done on the old farts who turn in to watch the Grateful Dead and then donate out of a sense that that's what decent bourgies do?
posted by thelonius at 11:32 AM on August 9, 2017 [2 favorites]


Kind of makes me wonder if Channel Four will sue Mary Berry if she ever utters the phrase "lovely flavour" again.
posted by briank at 11:38 AM on August 9, 2017 [3 favorites]


There's a lot more going on besides his use of the catchphrase. From this article at People:

The complaint also accuses RRKidz of transferring the rights to Reading Rainbow to a company owned by a close friend of Burton’s. It also alleges that the contents of the Reading Rainbow website have been moved to LeVarBurtonKids.com — and the Reading Rainbow Skybrary has been rebranded as “LeVar Burton‘s Skybrary.” (According to CourthouseNews.com, Skybrary by Reading Rainbow is a subscription-based digital library of children’s books, “video field trips”, and clips from the original Reading Rainbow series that users can access on mobile devices.)
posted by grumpybear69 at 11:40 AM on August 9, 2017 [2 favorites]


I'm sure there are legal reasons, but ethically, I'm not sure I have any problem with someone moving something that created when they owned the rights to Reading Rainbow (like the Skybrary subscription service) to your own site when no longer have the Reading Rainbow rights. But I agree it's probably a lot thornier than that.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 11:55 AM on August 9, 2017


Money. God damn money.
Somebody might get too much. Somebody might not get enough.

If it ever was about kids and books, it's now about momey.
posted by BlueHorse at 1:26 PM on August 9, 2017 [5 favorites]


layceepee: "I don't know the legal merits--"goodwill" may have a meaning as a term of art that's different from what it connotes to me. "

Yes, it's a legal term of art.
posted by Chrysostom at 2:26 PM on August 9, 2017 [1 favorite]


You can say a lot of bad stuff about the Bible, but "The love of money is the root of all evil" pretty much nails it.

"This is why we can't have nice things" indeed.
posted by Mr.Encyclopedia at 3:11 PM on August 9, 2017 [1 favorite]


I note that Burton often signs his tweets "#bydhttmwfi." I was too old for Reading Rainbow so it took me an embarrassingly long time to work out what it meant.
posted by ob1quixote at 3:37 PM on August 9, 2017


For what it is worth, I can't find an entry in the USPTO trademark database for the “...but you don’t have to take my word for it” slogan, so the slogan itself does not appear to be a registered trademark in the US. However, in the US trademark rights can also be established by actual use in the marketplace even if the mark is never registered. However, it is my understanding that failing to register a mark complicates any associated lawsuit.
posted by RichardP at 4:47 PM on August 9, 2017


Sure people rail against money. But a dollar here and a dollar there and you lay off a worker and cut back on raises. Money is what keeps us alive.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 7:56 PM on August 9, 2017


"Mr. Burton’s goal is to control and reap the benefits of Reading Rainbow’s substantial goodwill — goodwill that unquestionably belongs to WNED."

and the best way for WNED to prevent Mt. Burton from acquiring said good will is to destroy it utterly.
posted by dustsquid at 9:55 PM on August 9, 2017 [1 favorite]


Yes, it's a legal term of art.

There are a couple of definitions at Chrysostom's link, and it looks to me like if you apply the meaning of the legal term of art, WNED's claim still doesn't make any sense.

The Collins Dictionary of Law says goodwill is the advantage or benefit that is acquired by the business beyond the mere value of its capital stock or property in consequence of the patronage it receives from its customers. For example, it is usual for a business to be sold on the basis of so much for the stock and so much for the goodwill. Goodwill can also be considered as the amount by which the value of the business as a whole exceeds the assets minus the value of the company's liabilities. In another sense, it is ‘the probability that the old customers will resort to the old place’.

Is WNED seriously asserting that the patronage Reading Rainbow receives from its customers is unquestionably in consequence of the station rather than Burton? Do they believe "the probability that the old customers will resort to Reading Rainbow" is greater for a show broadcast/produced/distributed by WNED without Burton as a host than for one with Burton as the host broadcast/produced/distributed by someone besides WNED.

Doesn't the claim that Burton doing a show like Reading Rainbow (but not called Reading Rainbow) devalues their brand suggest that the goodwill in question is vested in the host, not the producer?
posted by layceepee at 11:17 AM on August 10, 2017


It should be noted that butterflies have been known to fly over 10,000ft high.

Thank you, you just resolved the tension I had with that theme song. And also I'm kind of impressed. Do they fly that high on purpose or is weird weather/geography involved somehow?
posted by Foosnark at 1:08 PM on August 10, 2017


If Susan B. Komen™ can get away with copyrighting the words: "The Cure" in the context of cancer road race fundraising, then you can begin to see how far afield from sensible fairness the law in this area has become. Sadly, WNED has a fair chance with this.
posted by MidStream at 7:57 AM on August 11, 2017 [3 favorites]


« Older Hold me closer   |   And God said, “Let there be light,” and it was lit... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments