MetaFilter posts tagged with trademarks

even posting "Pepsi Blue" would make us liable.

amberglow — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 22:08:45 -0800

"Drove my Chevy to the levee..."? That's a lawsuit. "Pass the Courvoisier"? Yup. Lawsuit too. Artwork using Barbie Dolls? Lawsuit again... It's all part of the Trademark Dilution Revision Act, which would eliminate the non-commercial "fair use" protections of trademarks in art, literature, and speech-- To amend the Trademark Act of 1946 with respect to dilution by blurring or tarnishment. It goes to the Senate Judiciary Committee on the 16th, and there's a large roster of groups fighting it, including the American Library Association, EFF, and more, saying that consumers as well as artists would be preventing from exercising their free speech rights unless it's amended.

Total Rekall of the Scharzenegger doll

KirkJobSluder — Sat, 01 May 2004 10:22:00 -0800

CNN reports that Arnold Schwarzenegger is threatening to sue Bosley Bobbers seeking to stop production of a charity bobblehead doll. The doll shows the former action-actor turned Governor of California posing in a business suit, ammo belt and assault rifle. Arnold is arguing that he owns the marketing rights to his likeness. The creators argue that he lost those rights when he became a political figure. However, this seems to be a repeat of Hustler v. Falwell. And courts lately have been skeptical of trademark rights trumping satire. On the other hand, there seems to be a fine line between editorial use and commercial exploitation.

File this under barratry

rcade — Sun, 21 Sep 2003 06:22:19 -0800

A trademark infringement lawsuit has been filed by the owners of the Dewey Decimal System against New York's Library Hotel, which numbers and fills rooms based on the system: "Each of the 10 guestrooms floors honors one of the 10 categories of the DDC and each of the 60 rooms is uniquely adorned with a collection of books and art exploring a distinctive topic within the category or floor it belongs to." Call early to book Room 800.001.

Who is the real Posh?

stunned — Wed, 13 Nov 2002 11:08:20 -0800

Victoria Beckham aka Posh Spice is fighting a move by second division Peterborough United to register their nickname POSH as a trademark for it's club merchandise claiming that the nickname is recognised around the world as belonging to her.

The term POSH is widely believed to have originated in the time of the British Raj when P&O passenger ship tickets were marked POSH -Port Out Starboard Home - port (left-hand side) berths were mostly in the shade when travelling out (easterly) and the starboard ones when coming back. So the best and most expensive berths were POSH. Unfortunately P&O say they have never issued such tickets and none have ever been found even though many tickets do exist from the time.

But this page from the US Navy METOC site claims it originated in Boston as a label for the luggage of wealthy passengers travelling from the US to Europe to indicate which side of the ship to place the luggage to protect it from the sun.

Should you be allowed to register a word in common usage as a trademark? If posh goes what word is next.

kcmoryan — Wed, 14 Aug 2002 10:36:32 -0800

Over-aggressive trademark enforcers "advised to chill". Tommy Hilfiger's trademark is not infringed by Timmy Holedigger perfume for dogs. Perhaps this can be used as precedent in responding to silly cease and desist letters.

BarneyFifesBullet — Sat, 02 Feb 2002 09:13:38 -0800

"Let's Roll" trademark battle is on Coming to your local Wal-Mart and flea markets very soon... Supposedly, it's become a "national catchphrase". The only people I've heard say it are George W Bush and Neil Young. Anyone need a new coffee mug?

rory — Mon, 03 Dec 2001 03:43:44 -0800

Let's make today Link KPMG Day. Why? Because apparently they think that people need their permission to link to them [via plasticbag.org]. This sort of nonsense is completely antithetical to the spirit of the web.

Georgina — Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:26:16 -0800

eBay takes a leaf out of eToys' book. Everybody's favourite auction site is threatening legal action against EBay Pty Limited, an Australian company that’s been around for twenty years but only got online recently. eBay has the ebay.com.au domain name, so EBay bought ebayaust.com in late 1999 for their small business selling self-published books.

Now eBay wants EBay to stop using the name both online and offline, the latter of which seems highly dubious given the relative ages of the companies.

In what is becoming an increasingly global marketplace, where do we draw the line between disparate companies with similar names?

bkdelong — Fri, 08 Dec 2000 12:18:22 -0800

Warner Brothers is going after Harry Potter fan sites. This isn't the first time. It should be interesting to see if they come after The Leaky Cauldron Weblog. It seems they're going after sites with "Harry Potter" as part of the domain name. However they do have a trademark for "Leaky Cauldron".

Steven Den Beste — Tue, 17 Oct 2000 20:49:57 -0800

Somebody call a lawyer! Now this is a blatant case of someone ripping off someone else's trademark in a URL if there ever was one. (Courtesy of Hard OCP)

snakey — Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:52:14 -0800

Mastercard Wants to Silence Nader If you thought Ralph Nader's views on too much corporate power were too far out -- click this one. The corporate thugs are trying to shut him down.

mathowie — Tue, 29 Feb 2000 00:17:21 -0800

The VW vs. Virtual Works case is a lot like the eToys vs. ETOY battle. The vw.net site is owned by a small ISP that has been using it for the last few years, but VW is saying that their brand is diluted and their trademarks infringed when another company uses the initials "vw". Like the eToys case, it looks like Volkswagon has convinced a court of this and will be taking the domain soon. If you remember the different top level domains, .org is for non-profits and organizations, .com is for commercial ventures and corporations, and .net is for network companies and network providers. One would think an ISP qualifies for a .net, and that VW should be perfectly happy with their .com domain, or am I missing something here?