Wal-Mart Trying to Trademark the Smiley Face

Ellis D. Tripp writes to tell us BBC News is reporting that mega-retailer, Wal-Mart, is now fighting it out with a man who claims to have invented the 'smiley face' logo, and has been marketing it since the '70s. From the article: "Until now the smiley face had been considered in the public domain in the US, and therefore free for anyone to use. Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley told the Los Angeles Times that it had not moved to register the trademark until Mr Loufrani had threatened to do so."

Comments

I thought it was invented by

[kahanamoku]

Forest Gump?

Re:I thought it was invented by

[Columcille]

Unless I've misread something, this is the little guy trying to crush Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart's move is a protective reaction against another entity wanting to trademark an image currently in the U.S. public domain. The indication from the article is that Wal-Mart has no problem with it being public domain, but are now trying to trademark it in response to the actions of "the little guy". Had "the little guy" not tried to trademark the image, Wal-Mart would not be doing this.

Re:I thought it was invented by

[lbmouse]

This is a Trademark, not a patent or copyright fight. The brewers of Bass Ale didn't invent the word Bass, they just trademarked it in conjunction with their triangle logo. Trademark law is supposed to help the consumers by eliminating confusion in the market place.

IANAIPL but my ex-wife is and she is always talking about how strange and vague trademark law can be. Her firm help trademark the shape of the Dean's Milk Chugs bottles. They used the Coca-Cola bottle product packaging trademark as the basis for their argument. So saying that consumers might be confused in the market place by a well known smiley face is not that odd or unethical.

Simley?

[virgil_disgr4ce]

In the article, the spokesman's name is Simley. Why is it an anagram of smiley??? WHY?!

The only way I can see this working for Wal-Mart

[Rachel Lucid]

There's no way they can copyright the 'smiley' face itself. They might be able to copyright their interpretation of it.

Wal-Mart's smiley face is a very distinctive one - the elongated eyes, the wide smile, the button-ised bevel around its edges, the ray-man-esque gloves. If they included its whistling personality and the song they use for the whistling, there is a GOOD chance they can copyright that specific interpretation of the smiley as a cartoon character, much in the way the Church of the Subgenius seems to hold the copyright for 'Bob's pipe-wielding visage, despite how common the image of a clean-cut 50's male with a pipe actually was in those times.

I think Wal-mart is full of shit here if they think they can claim they invented the smiley or patented its use in drumming up sales, but if they keep to that narrow interpretation I just described, they have a chance.

Pointless "prior art"

[jnadke]

I've been producing shit since I was born, but you don't see me suing Slashdot.

Change-up

[cei]

In a deft move by Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley, Wal-Mart mistakenly trademarks the Simley face.

Defensive trademark registration

[Russ Nelson]

Walmart is trying to avoid the same situation Linux was in a few years ago. Everybody knew that Linux came from Linus, and yet the USPTO (the "M" for Morons is silent) allowed some mental defective to register "Linux" as a trademark. Much confusion and angst ensued until Linus was able to wrest his trademark back. The way trademarks work, Walmart MUST try to defend their common-law trademark against a rogue trademark registration.

In this case, Walmart is the little guy defending itself against the Big, Bad USPTO.

Re:I worked for walmart .....

[nosredna]

It's been a long time since I've been in a 24-hour store in the wee hours and seen the employees smiling (excluding of course the stoned guy running the drive-thru at Taco Bell, or anything involving floor buffer races). I'd blame the simple fact of working third shift in a retail chain before blaming management completely.

That's not to say that the management had nothing to do with it, of course, but not many people are gonna be doing a lot of smiling while restocking the toilet-paper aisle and directing the latest group of stoners to the Doritos, regardless of the management.

Re:Two issues here

[Stinky Cheese Man]

They are not copyrighting the smiley - they are trademarking it. These are very different things.

SCM

Re:The Patent System Needs an Overhaul

[stuuf]

No, slashdot needs an overhaul. Happy Birthday is copyrighted, Wal-Mart is trying to trademark the smiley face, and now you mentioned patents for no reason. Those are three different things.

slashdot trademarks

[cashman73]

Has CowboyNeal filed the trademarks for the "/" and the "." yet? One would think that would be an excellent money-making opportunity for slashdot.