Slashdot Mirror


Tour Companies Battle Over Trademarked Duck Noises

Tour company Ride the Ducks is suing rival tour company Bay Quackers, alleging that it holds trademark rights to the sound made by tourists using duck call devices, while on amphibious vehicle tours. San Francisco-based Ride the Ducks holds a 'sound mark' on the noise. Very few companies hold sound marks, but some of the more famous include: the NBC chimes and the MGM lion. The company holds US Trademark No. 2,484,276, which protects a mark consisting of 'a quacking noise made by tour guides and tour participants by use of duck call devices throughout various portions of [guided amphibious vehicle] tours.' Reading this makes my think that there is a room full of litigious monks somewhere, just waiting for someone to try clapping with one hand.

7 of 251 comments (clear)

  1. It seems legit by furby076 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unless there was a timing issue (e.g. they trademarked this last week, or the other company has been doing this before these guys have) this lawsuit is legitimate. Someone came up with an idea (i personally hate the quack duck tours but that is me) and it made them money. There are tons of tours going around and this was a unique idea to involve kids and adults who enjoy acting as kids. While people may not agree with trademarks they are legitimate and a company has a right to protect their trademark - especially when it makes money for them.

    --- Scuba

    --

    I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
  2. Generic sounds, words can not be trademarked by spun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I would argue that the duck quack is a generic sound, used by hunters for hundreds of years. It is like a particular note on a generic piano. Or a generic word, such as 'Quality.' Nobody can trademark the word 'Quality' by itself. The duck quack is not like the NBC chimes or other sound marks, which are carefully engineered and specific. You can still play the three notes of the chimes in a commercial, just not the specific chime sounds. In a sane world, generic duck quacks can not be trademarked.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    1. Re:Generic sounds, words can not be trademarked by spun · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The duck quack is a generic sound, used by hunters for hundreds of years.

      Also, I think ducks used it even before that.

      Yes, but they used it to advertise sex with ducks, theoretically a very different market than amphibious tours.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  3. Maybe *specific, unique* sounds by JSBiff · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I could see, potentially, someone trademarking/soundmarking a specific, unique sound. A particular recorded clip, for example. However, 'dynamically' generated sounds like someone blowing a duck call - how can that be 'sound marked'? After all, every time someone blows a duck call, the sound will be *slightly* different, unique, if you will.

    How can you trademark/soundmark something which DOES NOT YET EXIST?

    Anyhow, people have been using duck calls for many, many years (uhh, hunters, bioloigsts?) How can one company trademark something people have been doing forever.

    I would like to sound mark human singing. Yeah, that's the ticket. Every person who makes any money singing, or selling recordings of songs, or selling advertising on 'free' streams/radio/tv broadcasts, songs embedded in video games, or any other media, now owes me a license fee.

    I'll start by going after buskers (you know, those aspiring artists who play for tips in subways, street corners, and parks) - they'll be too broke to defend themselves, so I can build up a nice body of 'precedent'. Then, when I start suing larger marks, I can point to the previous cases as precedent.

  4. The legal argument should fail for this by icewalker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OK, I can see trademarking the NBC Chimes and the MGM Lion. These sounds are CONSISTENT and definitely identify the brand. It is the same audio through and through time and time again. The duck call is not the same sound time and again. The sound will be different based on who does it, how they hold the duck call, etc. Unless they have the sound on a speaker and pipe it out that way, this lawsuit should fail.

    This is no different than Harley Davidson attempting to trademark the sound of their engines. It's an engine! No matter how good you are, the engines will just sound different from bike to bike. I should note that Harley Davidson ultimately failed in their bid to trademark the sound of their engines.

    --
    The truth is usually just an excuse for lack of imagination.
  5. What next?!? by Locke2005 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Will taxi companies start registering "gesture marks" and "profane exclaimation marks", attempting to trademark their drivers reaction to other drivers cutting them off? "I'm sorry, but your referring to me as 'fuck you, you ignorant asshole', as well as your choice of finger position, is a violation of our trademarks. You will be hearing from our lawyers!"

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  6. Re:Might sound nuts, but has a sound legal basis by mea37 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sure. Now let's just remember what a trademark is actually for - it protects the trademark holder's reputation by preventing others from passing themselves, their products and/or services, or (to an extent) their views as those of the trademark holder.

    Do the passengers on this other tour line get to a certain point in their tour, play with duck calls for a moment, and suddently think "wait, am I on that other carrier's tour?"

    Is a passerby likely to see the tour boat, hear the duck calls, and associate it with the other carrier, perhaps tracking the boat to port so they too can get a tour from this well-reputed carrier, only to find themselves duped into taking someone else's tour?

    A trademark is a symbol - it identifies a product, but it is not part of the product. You hear the NBC chimes coming over a speaker, you think to yourself "ah, I'm listening to NBC programming; what I'm about to hear is a product of NBC"; but you don't listen to NBC to hear the chime.

    This is a case where one tour operator is trying to force another to change the product itself - the experience of the tour. Their being very clever about it; but as I do with any IP-abuser, I hope they suffer an expensive failure in this effort.