Slashdot Mirror
San Diego Comic-Con Wins Trademark Suit Against 'Salt Lake Comic Con' (deseretnews.com)
The Deseret News reports:
A jury has found that Salt Lake Comic Con founders Dan Farr and Bryan Brandenburg, along with their company, violated a trademark when they named their fan convention a "comic con." However, the jury decided that the trademark was not willfully violated, and only awarded $20,000 of the $12 million that San Diego Comic-Con had asked for in damages. The decision came at the end of an eight-day jury trial and three years of legal maneuvering... And with an estimated 140 other fan conventions across the country calling themselves comic cons, the impact of the decision could be felt nationwide...
The Salt Lake group also has an ongoing action with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office seeking to invalidate San Diego's "comic-con" trademark... San Diego Comic-Con, which has been holding events since 1970, has a trademark on "comic-con" with a hyphen, but was unsuccessful in its 1995 bid to trademark "comic con," with a space. The unhyphenated name "Comic Con International," as well as the event's iconic "eye logo," are also protected by trademark. The event maintains that its trademarks cover the term "comic con" in all its forms...
San Diego Comic-Con wanted more than $12 million in damages from Salt Lake, including over $9 million for a three-month "corrective advertising campaign" to dispel confusion... In his closing arguments, Michael Katz, an attorney for Salt Lake Comic Con, questioned the amount San Diego was seeking, noting that San Diego authorities said during trial the organization generally spends between $20,000 and $30,000 for a month of advertising.
Slashdot reader AlanBDee writes: When I attended the Salt Lake City Comic Con I did assume it was the same organization that put on San Diego Comic-Con... But now I have to wonder how that will affect other Comic Cons around the nation? What should these comic based fan conventions be called if not Comic Con?
The Salt Lake group also has an ongoing action with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office seeking to invalidate San Diego's "comic-con" trademark... San Diego Comic-Con, which has been holding events since 1970, has a trademark on "comic-con" with a hyphen, but was unsuccessful in its 1995 bid to trademark "comic con," with a space. The unhyphenated name "Comic Con International," as well as the event's iconic "eye logo," are also protected by trademark. The event maintains that its trademarks cover the term "comic con" in all its forms...
San Diego Comic-Con wanted more than $12 million in damages from Salt Lake, including over $9 million for a three-month "corrective advertising campaign" to dispel confusion... In his closing arguments, Michael Katz, an attorney for Salt Lake Comic Con, questioned the amount San Diego was seeking, noting that San Diego authorities said during trial the organization generally spends between $20,000 and $30,000 for a month of advertising.
Slashdot reader AlanBDee writes: When I attended the Salt Lake City Comic Con I did assume it was the same organization that put on San Diego Comic-Con... But now I have to wonder how that will affect other Comic Cons around the nation? What should these comic based fan conventions be called if not Comic Con?
The whole thing about having a trademarked name, is San Diego Comic Con may very well want to branch out in offering comic conventions in other cities - to me the name does sound pretty generic but just far enough away from "Comic Convention" that I can see where they'd be awarded a trademark, especially for Comic-Con.
Other shows can be called "Comic Conventions" and they should be perfectly fine as it's enough of a distinction and comic itself is a broadly generic term.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
How about Comicon? (cc-by-0, I declare...unless someone else has that, and likely do ; ) )
Based on these actions I feel much better about my decision not to continue supporting them.
Comic Con has turned into an over-commercialized whore-fest, less about the fans and more about pushing whatever Big Media is selling this year, as can be seen by the majority of their panels, and the floor space disproportionately focusing on non-comic related content nowadays.
Whether it is porn stars, new movie/tv franchises, or videogames, Comic Con has been letting in a lot of things that really stretch the limits of a comic convention.
Given the amounts these knockoff comic conventions are charging though, nobody on any side of the debate is not being a money whore though. Would rather seen the cons just fall into irrelevance, but sadly all these faux nerds and geeks who thing being a commerce whore and fanboy/girl gives you nerd/geek cred.
Maybe it is time for the real nerds and geeks and hackers and phreaks to find new terms for ourselves, because the old ones have been diluted to the point of meaninglessness.
NOT Comic Con?
- The Convention Formerly Known as Salt Lake Comic Con.
- Much Better Than Comic Con
- The Comic Convention That Isn't a Con
- Unwilling to Pay Extortionate Fees to Be Called Comic Con
- Did They Bribe the Judge So We Aren't Comic Con Anymore?
- Like Comic Con, Except We Don't Suck
- More Comic, Less Con
Others?
So which comic con conned which comic con out of their comic con name?
When people hear "City <generic convention name>", is anyone actually confused?
(Aside from the stoners who wonder "Huh... I didn't know that Salt Lake City moved San Diego! I guess Mormons like the beach, too!?")
Welcome to Mormon Con 2018!
#DeleteChrome
They could call them PAX.
#DeleteChrome
So "Comic Con", a straightforward streamlining of the generic term, should be considered generic as well.
Contrast that with a clear trademark violation: an entrepreneur who reasoned that "google" meant Internet search, or "amazon" meant ecommerce, would have a tough time convincing a court that "music-google.io" or "amazon-novelty-gifts.com" didn't violate somebody's trademark.
Copycats should be ashamed.
Like 90% of comics are a formulaic copy.
There is an assertion, an assumption that these conventions are a celebration of art and creativity.
That's taking things a bit too seriously. There are very few Alan Moores in this world and a whole bunch of Stan Lees. When comics are artistic and creative, it's an anomaly. People don't go to conventions to celebrate creativity and art. They go to conventions to goo over collectible comics and buy useless junk and see celebrities and feel like their lonely hobby isn't quite so lonely.
"From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
Rumours were heard that "Salt Lake Comic Con" would change its name to "Salt Lake Comic Sans".
#DeleteFacebook
are the lawyers. Would be much cheaper to have dueled at high noon, and more entertaining.
The word 'con' has been short for convention well, forever. This is why jury trials suck. There's no way this should have passed muster. I'm guessing the schmucks that run San Diego's Comic Convention just had better lawyers. I'm guessing the chewbacca defense was employed, because I can't think of a single damn good reason why else they'd win this.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Have gnu, will travel.
Ba-dum tsss
Salt Lake one should just change its name to
Salt Lake Comic CONvention
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
Other gatherings should just call themselves Comic McConface.
Comikhaaaaaaannnnnnnn!
The Democratic National Convention should change their name to Commie Con.
But it will only be held once a year.
SImple, SLC just needs to call it Bi-Mon-Sci-Fi-Con
Yeah, I run a "movie theater" and those fuckers down the street opened a "movie theater" I'm suing their asses.
I went to SDCC '90, and I thought "comic con" was a generic term for all such events. I've been to similar events before and after. Those that went out of their way to not call them comic cons were still called that by attendees, even outside of the US were almost nobody putting it on or attending has ever been to SDCC.
And what about comi-con? It may be spelled comic-con, but it's pronounced comi-con. Or stylized? Kommie-cawn?
Learn to love Alaska
A convention where people impersonate characters in comics sues for imitation of their event.
Also realize they don't care.
But... OTH, it does bug me when people poach on the Youtube "Primative Technology" guy.
So I guess I get San Diego action but either
* I just don't sympathize with really rich people.
* I don't think you can confuse different comic book and science fiction conventions.
In the end it comes down to guests and events. Not the name.
For me.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
wow http://airteltrickz.net/
Sacrilege! There is ONE Stan Lee.
Bite your tongue!
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
I assume a small tweak like "Comic Convention" or "Comical Con" should be sufficient to work around the trademark. At least, I'd hope so.
Ok, what would be an original name for a comic con? Preferably one that still tells you it's a comic con.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I'd have named it Commie-Con, but then again, there is already something sounding similar in California, and you can't really have something like that anywhere else in the US.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
This is all rather ironic (even hypocritical), given that San Diego Comic-con has always been about blatantly ripping off comic and movie design property in the form of attendee costumes. (Of course that's fine by fair use doctrine and artistic license, but the irony remains.)
That's pretty much the argument supporting trademarks. The abuse of a mark they created and used to distinguish their offering has been so abused that the average person off the street couldn't tell.
When the nerds start fighting each other, we know humanity is doomed
Would you say the same about classic literature (I would, I'm just wondering if you see that your claim applies to it as well).
Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
[...] They go to conventions to [...] feel like their lonely hobby isn't quite so lonely.
And there's actually nothing wrong about that. I collected comics as a kid. I loved going to a comic store (Commercial! Sacrilegious!) not just to see what the newest titles coming out where but to just be around others that at least understood something that I liked (and by extension, understood something about me).
My kids love comics. They're now 11 and 14 years old. I'm happy that comic characters (if not collecting comics) are becoming somewhat mainstream. We've been to a couple comic cons (Tampa and Philly) and they enjoyed geeking out around adults who love what they love.
Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
Literature is culture. Comics are for kids. Grow up.
This. I recently read The Incredible Hulk issue 180 to see what all the fuss was about. I was very surprised at how crappy the writing/story was and think comparing that to any literature, from any era, is a serious stretch. The adverts alone should be a clue as to who this stuff was aimed at.
For something like q-tip or band-aid then it's obvious that even though the trademark name has become generic, that it isn't just descriptive. Things like comic-con, App Store, windows, friend list, etc.. that are mostly just descriptive should not be trademarks.
As a side note, I'm typing this on my iphone and apple refuses to let me type App Store in lowercase but has no issues letting me type the rest of the trademarks in lowercase.
What should these comic based fan conventions be called if not Comic Con?
Stay In The Basement, Quietly.
I find this hilarious. Stan Lee created a whole heck of a lot of new characters from scratch. Alan Moore? He's most famous in general population for League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, which is just a cobbling together of other people's characters or historical figures. How is that creative?
And dont go "but...but.. Watchmen!" The graphical novel was a bore (at least to me), the characters uninteresting.
In fact, if I google "comic con", the NYCC comes up first, followed by SDCC.
Alternate names:
- Comicky Con
- GraNoCon
- Comicsexpo
- Comixpo
- Nerd/Geek/Dweeb/Derp/[choose your favorite reclaimed epithet] Con
92 posts and nobody has registered his disgust yet?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Would you say the same about classic literature (I would, I'm just wondering if you see that your claim applies to it as well).
No, because what makes something a "classic" and what makes it "literature," by definition would mean that it's critically viewed as artistic, creative, and of high quality. Now, there are works that are considered classics that I find unworthy of the title—much of Thomas Hardy's work, or On the Road, for example—but I usually understand why classics are so widely admired.
Now, it must be noted that most novels—both past and present—are complete garbage and not worth the paper they're printed on. Ever since Charles Fenerty devised a way to make cheap paper out of wood pulp, there have been "penny dreadfuls" or "pulp fiction" or whatever. These books are crap and are very analogous to most comic books.
I don't judge people for reading trash fiction just as I don't judge people for reading comic books. It's good to have a hobby that one can enjoy. But it's all too common for people to take a healthy hobby and turn it into an unhealthy obsession.
"From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
Or Comi-con if you prefer. That is what I actually THOUGHT they were called!
Yes, but in the good old days, you had no more than one trade mark per maker. SDCC was their unique mark. "con" for "convention" predated them. And "comic" predated them. So they took two common words, and combined them.
In short, they should be able to claim SDCC or Comic-con, but not both.
Learn to love Alaska
I'll admit that I failed to find a way to know what is "good" and what is "trash". In my eyes, what matters is how much I feel that a book influenced my emotions or interested me. That makes "Fountainhead" (I'm not libertarian but I think it is really good propoganda) and "Moby Dick" into "good" books in my eyes and some of Kafka's works into "trash". I have failed to find any better criteria so far.
Also, do you think that being obssessed with "good" books is better? I would assume that obssession, by definition, is harmful.
Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
An abbreviation that has been used for decades. Heck, baseball card conventions, comic book conventions... decades old.
This trademark should ONLY be enforceable in San Diego. Now, a legitimate trademark would be if San Diego Comic Con created a stylized logo/text type for "Comic Con" which they then used to branch out to other cities. No one else could use that style.
But government is so stupid, this sort of thing exists. $20,000 is enough to kill a convention.
To put it in perspective, this would be like Sal's Used Cars being sued by Al's Used Cars for the use of the term "Used Cars"
+1
A jury by peers, should mean that the only people allowed to be on the jury are those who have attended one or more comic book conventions in their lives.