US Trademark Office cancels Marvel, DC's 'Super Hero' marks21182
Pages:
1
 Forum Crier
|
OGJackster private msg quote post Address this user | |
| US Trademark Office cancels Marvel, DC's 'Super Hero' marks By Blake Brittain September 26, 2024 clickable text Sept 26 (Reuters) - A U.S. Trademark Office tribunal has canceled a set of "Super Hero" trademarks jointly owned by comic giants Marvel and DC at the request of a London-based comic book artist, according to a Thursday order. The USPTO's Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ruled for S.J. Richold's Superbabies Ltd, opens new tab after Disney's (DIS.N), opens new tab Marvel and Warner Bros' (WBD.O), opens new tab DC did not file an answer to Superbabies' request to invalidate the marks. Spokespeople and attorneys for Marvel and DC did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Superbabies attorney Adam Adler of Reichman Jorgensen Lehman & Feldberg said in a statement that the ruling was "not just a win for our client but a victory for creativity and innovation." "By establishing SUPER HEROES' place in the public domain, we safeguard it as a symbol of heroism available to all storytellers," Adler said. Rivals Marvel and DC jointly own four federal trademarks covering the terms "Super Hero" and "Super Heroes," the oldest of which dates back to 1967. Richold writes comics featuring a team of super-hero babies called the Super Babies. According to Richold, DC accused his company of infringing the "Super Hero" marks and threatened legal action after Superbabies Ltd applied for U.S. trademarks covering the "Super Babies" name. Marvel and DC have cited their marks in opposing dozens of superhero-related trademark applications at the USPTO, according to the office's records. Superbabies petitioned the office to cancel the marks in May. It argued that Marvel and DC cannot "claim ownership over an entire genre" with their trademarks, and that the two competitors cannot own trademarks together. The case is Superbabies Ltd v. Marvel Characters Inc, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, Cancellation No. 92085201.  |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
|
Forum Crier
|
OGJackster private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Marvel and DC Just Lost the Super Hero Trademark: Here's What That Means We break down what DC and Marvel losing the Super Hero Trademark means and what it affects By MATTHEW AGUILAR - September 28, 2024 07:31 clickable text The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has shaken things up in the world of comics today, as a long-held trademark by Marvel Comics and DC Comics has now been canceled. The announcement comes courtesy of law firm Reichman Jorgensen Lehman & Feldberg (RJLF), who have declared victory over DC and Marvel in a trademark case over the word Super Hero (via Bleeding Cool). The request was granted after DC and Marvel failed to respond to court requests over the challenge to the joint trademark, and now that it's been canceled, RJLF's clients S.J. Richold and Superbabies Limited can now use that term without issue. DC Comics and Marvel Comics registered a joint trademark of the word "superhero" in 1977, and it was eventually approved in 1979. Since then they have successfully defended the trademark multiple times, both stateside and internationally, but a new challenge to the trademark was made in May of this year. That challenge was issued by Scott Richold of Superbabies Ltd, stating that "Super Hero", as well as terms like "superhero" or "super-hero", are generic terms that aren't entitled to trademark protection. The petition states "DC and Marvel are wrong. Trademark law does not permit companies to claim ownership over an entire genre." If you go through the complaint, you will find a host of examples from DC, Marvel, Image, and more utilized as proof of the core point.  Superbabies Ltd then asked the court for a default judgment in their favor and stated that while DC Comics and Marvel Characters filed a motion to extend their time to answer the charges by the 24th of July, they had not done so or requested more time to respond. That led to today's decision to cancel the trademark. What This Means From Here  This won't affect Marvel or DC as far as what they can print or use, but it does mean that they no longer have ownership of that trademark, meaning that other companies can now freely use it. In a statement, lead counsel for Superbabies Adam Adler said this is a win for everyone, and makes sure the term Super Heroes has a home in the public domain. "Securing this result is not just a win for our client but a victory for creativity and innovation. By establishing SUPER HEROES' place in the public domain, we safeguard it as a symbol of heroism available to all storytellers." "Superhero stories teach us to stick up for the little guy, so it's only fitting that the liberation of SUPER HEROES would come at the hands of The Super Babies-the littlest of them all. My hope is that this victory will encourage smaller companies to share their stories with the world," Richold said. Superbabies released a new image that celebrated the win and also parodied the House of M No More Mutants moment, though instead of mutants it was "No More Superheroes...trademark!" You can check out that image above. |
||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
RRO private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I always thought it petty for "the big boys" to co-opt this term. I am curious as to why DC & MARVEL chose not to respond to this challenge though. | ||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
 Beaten by boat oars
|
Studley_Dudley private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Enough time has probably gone by that it is generic and the general public won't think of just Marvel and DC. I think of it in terms of trademarks like Xerox or Kleenex. Brand names but what the public thinks of with photo copiers and facial tissue. | ||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
 Not trying to be an ass since February 12, 2020.
|
HulkSmash private msg quote post Address this user | |
| According to Merriam-Webster superhero (noun) “ fictional hero having extraordinary or superhuman powers also : an exceptionally skillful or successful person” “ Word History First Known Use 1899, in the meaning defined above” By Marvel and DC standards I could make my own variations of sandwiches and trademark the word sandwich. |
||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
 Please continue to ignore anything I post.
|
southerncross private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Well some American company came in and trade marked sheep skin boots that Aussies use the slang ugg boots, or uggies. Think that's trademarked pffttt. If that's what he case I want to trade mark the letter A, and any usage in a name, poster advertisement regular day usage I need to be paid. Maybe create a murder mystery series on TV and before that trademark the word mystery. |
||
| Post 6 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
starlord private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Trademarks are mostly stupid and petty imo, but in some instances they make sense. BatMan and Spiderman as copyright and trademark use makes sense in ownership of name, look and IP use. Bootleg stuff is obvious to identify when a toy or item looks 99% like spiderman, but is labeled insect Hero. However I hate that generic phrases, words or sounds get trademarked. Paris Hilton owns "That's hot" Taylor Swift owns a bunch of stuff like "Shake it off" "1984" "Swifties" and other variations of her name and lyric phrases. Owning your work/IP/Brand I can wrap my head around. Generic phrases and even a year or audible tone? Ridiculous imo. |
||
| Post 7 • IP flag post | ||
|
Not trying to be an ass since February 12, 2020.
|
HulkSmash private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @starlord looks like we need to change our usernames… | ||
| Post 8 • IP flag post | ||
Pages:
1