"Naked Cowboy" Wins Court Shoot-Out with Candy Cowboy
Recent Cases
A ruling in a trademark infringement case filed by a New York street entertainer who performs as “The Naked Cowboy” is another indication that judges may be taking parodies too seriously when the parody conveys a commercial message.
Robert Burck alleged an animated cartoon advertisement that featured a blue M&M dressed “exactly like The Naked Cowboy” violated the Lanham Act, which prohibits a false endorsement of a product or service by a real person. The ad ran on oversized billboards in Times Square, where Burck plies his trade, dressed only in a white cowboy hat, cowboy boots and underpants.
M&M's manufacturer Mars, Inc. argued that no consumer would be likely to confuse its parody as an endorsement of its product by Burck. The cowboy M&M, it said, is “part of a series of parodies of the 'New York City experience,'” which also portrays an M&M as King Kong climbing the Empire State Building.
But U.S. District Judge Denny Chin denied Mars' motion to dismiss, finding factual issues as to whether the M&M Cowboy characters are a parody of Burck's creation.
“Some consumers, as defendants argue, may view the the M&M Cowboy characters as part of a larger work depicting New York scenes and parodying famous New York characters,” he said in a June 23 opinion. But, he continued,
other consumers may mistakenly believe that The Naked Cowboy himself endorsed the copying of his “trademarked likeness” because the M&M Cowboy characters appear in a commercial setting.
Chin's ruling is quite similar to that of a Los Angeles judge who ruled in December 2007 that Paris Hilton could sue Hallmark Cards over its humorous use of her likeness and “That's Hot” catchphrase on a greeting card.
“[T]he potential exists that the card is sufficiently evocative of an image Hilton has presented of herself that Hallmark is capitalizing on her notoriety,” U.S. District Judge Percy Anderson concluded.
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has noted that “the cry of 'parody!' does not magically fend off otherwise legitimate legitimate claims of trademark infringement or dilution. There are confusing parodies and non-confusing parodies.” Dr. Seuss Enterprises v. Penguin Books, 109 F.3d 1394 (1997).
But parodies which have a commercial purpose should be protected under the First Amendment if the use of a trademark “was not specifically misleading as to sponsorship or endorsement.” In neither the Burck nor Hilton parodies is there any specific statement that the “real person” endorsed a product and judges are giving too much latitude to plaintiffs by ignoring that requirement.
Chin did dismiss Burck's publicity rights claim, in part because New York's "privacy statutes were not intended to protect a trademarked, costumed character publicly performed by a person."
Related listings
-
Court to rule on pension credit for old maternity leaves
Recent Cases 06/22/2008The Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether decades-old maternity leaves should count in determining pensions.The issue has split federal appeals courts and could become increasingly important as women who took maternity leaves in the 1960's and 7...
-
Social Security Mismatch Wasn't Grounds To Fire
Recent Cases 06/18/2008Thirty-three janitors at the Los Angeles Lakers' arena were wrongfully fired for not responding quickly enough to a request to provide a correct Social Security number, the 9th Circuit ruled. Aramark Facilities Services received a "no-match" letter f...
-
Court Overturns $101M Tax Refund To Texaco
Recent Cases 06/17/2008The 9th Circuit rejected Texaco's bid for a $101 million tax refund on the $1.25 billion settlement it paid the government for selling oil and gas above the price ceilings set by federal regulations. The judges reversed judgment for Texaco, now a sub...
Our Eugene Oregon Bankruptcy Practice
Since 2005, Erin Uhlemann has helped individuals and families facing financial difficulties file for bankruptcy relief. Erin's compassion and understanding of the law have helped hundreds of Oregonians achieve a financial fresh start. She started Willamette Valley Bankruptcy to focus on helping clients with bankruptcy and debt issues in the Lane County Area. Erin understands that choosing a bankruptcy attorney who makes you feel comfortable and confident can be as difficult as deciding whether to file a bankruptcy case. Because she knows that filing bankruptcy is not something that you planned to do or look forward to doing, Erin strives to make the process as easy as possible.
Because most people facing bankruptcy do not have extra money to pay fees, Willamette Valley Bankruptcy offers low upfront fees and will work with you to set up affordable payment plans to pay attorney fees and court filing fees. Consultations are always free so that you can get the answers you need before making any sort of financial commitment. If you have questions about attorney fees and payment plans, you can call or email today to get these questions answered.