Trademark Lawsuit For Using Kazoos To Quack Like A Duck

from the quack-quack dept

Fri, Aug 28th 2009 6:44pm — Mike Masnick

When this article in the ABA Journal started off by noting (accurately!) that the following story sounds like typical late-night fodder that makes lawyers look bad for filing frivolous lawsuits -- but then said "but the suit is anything but silly" -- I expected an article that would explain convincingly why a trademark lawsuit between two tourist tour operators that have passengers use kazoos to quack like a duck was not silly. But, I'm left scratching my head. I found the article via Eric Goldman, who notes that "I can't imagine this lawsuit has a good ROI."

Here's the basic story. Apparently, there are some tour operations out there that involve amphibious truck/boats, that take tourists around different places both on land and in water. One company, Ride the Ducks, does this in various areas around the country, and has trademarked the sound of kazoos being used to quack like a duck -- which it asks passengers to play as the truck goes from land to water. Now it turns out, right nearby where I am, in San Francisco, there's a tour called Bay Quackers, that does something similar, also involving quacking kazoos. Ride the Ducks isn't happy and has sued Bay Quackers, saying that the specific quack of the kazoo is trademarked.

My first question is why Bay Quackers just doesn't get different kazoos. Well, actually, my first question is a slightly unprintable question about why tourists might ride amphibious boat/trucks while using kazoos to sound like ducks... but I figure that's a tangent. Either way, it's difficult to see what benefit there really is to this lawsuit, other than Ride the Ducks being pissed off that someone else is using their idea. But ideas aren't protectable, and competition is a good thing. So, we're left with a silly lawsuit about quacking kazoos that does, still, seem pretty frivolous.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: amphibious trucks, kazoos, quacking, tourism, trademark
Companies: bay quackers, ride the ducks

60 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

GeneralEmergency (profile), 28 Aug 2009 @ 6:56pm

Time to update an old saw...
"If it quacks like a Duck...Sue the shit out of it".

Where are people this stipid and petty finding lawyers that are this stupid and petty?

Oooops. I think I just answered my own question.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bob, 28 Aug 2009 @ 7:08pm

Somewhere in here there's a ripe Ducktails Joke. The punchline involves something about Scrooge McDuck drinking Glenlivet.

I'll work on it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2009 @ 7:42pm

just google Duck Boat tours. Quacking doesn't seem like a very original concept...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
STJ, 28 Aug 2009 @ 7:45pm

So, how do I go about patenting putting a piece of meat between 2 pieces of bread. Then collecting money from some big name fast food joints?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Clinton W. Carter, 28 Aug 2009 @ 7:50pm

Quack like a Douche
If you were EVER curious...

Now you have a solid and verifiable reason to NEVER EVEN THINK ABOUT going on one of those douchbag tours. You have to be old and half-retarded to get on one of those things and quack like a fucking duck.

Get a life, show some spirit, find a clue, and if you *have* to go on a tour - please, for the love of God and all that is holy - stay off the "Quack like a Douche" Tour.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wnyght, 28 Aug 2009 @ 7:51pm

Re: Time to update an old saw...
"If it quacks like a Duck...Sue the shit out of it".

does this apply to hunters that use duck calls?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2009 @ 8:01pm

Why ducks do not fly upside down
they would quack up
[ link to this | view in thread ]
tony, 28 Aug 2009 @ 8:27pm

"Why ducks do not fly upside down"
BOOOOOOOO! *hangs head* But sadly, I laughed...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
William C Bonner, 28 Aug 2009 @ 9:23pm

I've taken one of those tours when I had relatives visiting. If you get into the spirit of talking back to the tour guide, and quacking at peopel on the tour, and anyone you happen to drive by, it can be fun.

Of course they charge and extra $5 or so for the noise makers, which I don't remember thinking was worth it.

Trademarking quacking like a duck is bad, and I hope they lose their suit, or worse, attract Disney's attention.

This is along the lines of Texas A&M suing any football team for referring to their fans as the 12th man.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2009 @ 10:39pm

I've been on a "duck tour" at some point when some relatives were visiting. It didn't involve kazoos and was actually rather fun. I don't think kazoos would have really improved the experience, and depending on whether little kids got to use them I could easily imagine them making it substantially worse.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2009 @ 11:02pm

Re: Re: Time to update an old saw...
What about hunters that go after sitting ducks.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Danica, 29 Aug 2009 @ 12:40am

The day this kind of a tour sounds good to me, would someone please please please put a pillow over my head and smother me to end my suffering?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dave, 29 Aug 2009 @ 12:42am

Bang!
Could get shot......quick, get the legal team on board and in the firing line!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Danica, 29 Aug 2009 @ 1:30am

On second thought, this lawsuit embarrasses me. How would you explain it to some woman living in a cave in Afghanistan. She's praying for food, clean drinking water, and she's also praying for her daughters to get an education without Taliban extremists throwing acid in their faces while they're walking home from school. This is the best we can do with all of our privileges as citizens of a first-world nation, suing each other for copyright infringement over the ownership rights to duck and kazoo sounds?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ben (profile), 29 Aug 2009 @ 6:24am

Sigh
What a stupid lawsuit. If they think the Kazoo use of a 2nd party is any way detrimental to their livelihood, then they're morons. Hey, they also so into the water, lets sue them for that too!

Lets hope Daffy, Donald & Toilet Duck all get involved in this. They have substantial claim on prior art.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
shmengie (profile), 29 Aug 2009 @ 6:56am

a duck walks into a pharmacy...
...so the duck says, "put it on my bill."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Aug 2009 @ 7:25am

nothing wrong with trademarking quacking
there's nothing wrong with trademarking the kazoo quacking during an amphibious tour, assuming no one else was using it in commerce first. it's completely non-functional, just as trademarks are supposed to be. it's very memorable, which makes it a high quality tool for branding. any skilled attorney could easily defeat that prior philadelphia decision by arguing the right things.

as for the stupidity of quacking, it's just like walmart. just because any of YOU hate walmart/quacking, doesn't mean everyone else does. if the company runs the stats and finds that ridership is up when they do quacking, who gives a shit whether any of you think kazoo quacking is stupid -- the market has spoken and you lost. you probably weren't going to go on the tour anyways.

nothing in any of the "arguments" above explain why this should not be trademarked... you're just spouting your usual anti-IP rhetoric. the only non-moronic commentary has been a single liner from goldman saying he can't imagine the ROI is good on this lawsuit. but without knowing the data on how well this quacking improves one's business, goldman's comment is a step up from speculation -- i only say a step up because goldman has extensive knowledge and training in IP law which allows him to form a much more valid and informed opinion than any of you random forumgoers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Aug 2009 @ 7:55am

shmengie - do you have permission to use the image of Alfred E. Newman?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Aug 2009 @ 8:07am

Re: a duck walks into a pharmacy...
The pharmicist pulls out a nail gun... *Kachunk!*
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nullop, 29 Aug 2009 @ 8:16am

Oiy
can u say dumb as a bag of hinges!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Howard, Cowering, 29 Aug 2009 @ 9:45am

Re: nothing wrong with trademarking quacking #17
"there's nothing wrong with trademarking the kazoo quacking during an amphibious tour"

There is no example of prior art? Did this tour company invent the kazoo? Or the amphibious tour?

Kazoo-playing is INTELLECTUAL property? What level of intellect does it take to make a buzzing noise?

Trademarks are "supposed to be" non-functional? Please cite references, this is the sort of thing that should be easily verifiable.

And, if you really want to be taken seriously, sign up for an account.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Aug 2009 @ 1:57pm

*is alone in the fact that he thinks the tour sounds like a bit of a giggle*
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Aug 2009 @ 3:47pm

Actually, Duckboat tours are actually quite interesting. They are generally amphibious vehicles, they tour the dock areas and "old town" in a city, and then roll into the water to give the people a water view of the city. Thus, they are ducks.

It's called marketing Mike, an amazing concept. Oh yeah, they don't have to give away their rides for free either.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Aug 2009 @ 4:25pm

Re: Re: Time to update an old saw...
What does Ride the Ducks do during wabbit season, and not duck season, since I don't think rabbits really make much noise.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Thomas (profile), 29 Aug 2009 @ 4:56pm

Their lawyers...
are a bunch of quacks.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Aug 2009 @ 5:55pm

I'm going to patent breathing, then demand royalties from everyone who breathes.

Oh, and I'll trademark whistling, and sue people who whistle.

Money time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
vastrightwing, 29 Aug 2009 @ 5:56pm

Patent communication via phonetics
I'm going to patent the idea that ideas can be communicated by making sounds I call "phonetics". By placing differing phonetic sounds together, one could communicate. I just need to write this up and find a good patent lawyer. Anyone?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Luci, 29 Aug 2009 @ 6:32pm

Re: Re: Re: Time to update an old saw...
Actually, rabbits squeal a lot like rats. Especially when they're in pain.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wvhillbilly (profile), 29 Aug 2009 @ 7:00pm

Kazoo quackers
It's nonsense like this that gives lawyers a bad reputation.

For stuff like this, they deserve to be made the butt of bad jokes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Aug 2009 @ 7:22pm

Re: Re: nothing wrong with trademarking quacking #17
your response is the perfect example of why attorneys and other people who are knowledgeable in these areas of law rarely come on to these sorts of blogs. trademarks are for specific fields of business. these guys are not claiming kazoo playing in general, and certainly not for non-commercial uses. they're claiming the trade dress of kazoo playing specifically on commercial amphibious tours, set up and encouraged by the tour guides. and they're not prohibiting some 6 year old from walking onto a competitors tour and pulling out a kazoo. they're trying to prohibit competitors from passing out kazoos to the entire tour. it's a commercial gimmick and it serves no function whatsoever besides branding. nothing in the lanham act says trademarks are limited only to words and designs -- in fact, colors, sounds, and even commercial possession of the flair you see in tgi fridays (and made fun of in office space) is trademarked. and there's nothing wrong with that.

as for my source on trademarks limited only to nonfunctional things, try the supreme court.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rod Smith, 29 Aug 2009 @ 11:06pm

Lovin' the Quack
Hey, if you've ever had to entertain a couple of kids on a holiday, the Duck boats are a ball. The kids love it, and you can just sit back and quack at all the uppity Europeans with their DSL cameras slung around their necks while they are snapping pics of 'historical importance' with their cell phones.

Riding those duck boats are a hoot, as long as you have a good attitude. Its a private business, making money providing a service people want.

If you don't like it, put on your Birkenstocks, grab your Fodor's guide and hump. I'll buy you a pint at the pub in the evening and we can have a lively conversation about the merits of entrepreneurship.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Keith Zuehlke (profile), 30 Aug 2009 @ 3:35am

I don't know what I've been told.......
I can see it now........the National Guard, technically being the first Armed Service dating back to revolutionary Minutemen, will now trademark the act of chanting during the morning PT run. They'll sue the quack out of the Navy, Coast Guard, Army, and Marines.

The Air Force is safe, since they don't do squat. Except for the Paratroopers.

Then this Ride the Ducks group will swoop in and sue the Department of Defense as a whole due to the inclusion of the "Duck Walk" in the entrance physical.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Alexander K, 30 Aug 2009 @ 4:10am

Smart!!!
This is cheap and great advertising (for both companies).

Genius, actually.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Paul Hobbs (profile), 30 Aug 2009 @ 4:54am

The land of the Free to Sue thy Neighbour
In one of my comments to a different article I made the comment that Australia was way behind the US in the litigiousness department, but that we're slowly catching up. After reading about this suit I would say we are a lot further behind than I previously thought and we may never catch up. Thank God.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2009 @ 6:27am

Re: nothing wrong with trademarking quacking
In my opinion.... You are a MORON
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2009 @ 6:35am

Re: The land of the Free to Sue thy Neighbour
Did you know that someone can break into your home to rob you, fall and get hurt, then sue you for pain and suffering? you talk about f*cked up lawsuits...........
[ link to this | view in thread ]
pangolin (profile), 30 Aug 2009 @ 8:11am

Don't they HAVE to do something?
Assuming their trademark is valid - and at least they think it is - then don't they HAVE to defend it BY LAW? Don't they HAVE to sue?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2009 @ 10:33am

Re: Don't they HAVE to do something?
No
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Marcus Carab (profile), 30 Aug 2009 @ 10:41am

At first I was sure you were going to report that the RIAA got confused and thought Kazoo was a new version of Kazaa, and started suing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Marcus Carab (profile), 30 Aug 2009 @ 10:41am

Re: Don't they HAVE to do something?
No, they have to if they don't want to risk losing the trademark. But considering this trademark is ridiculous and unlikely to hold up in court (I hope, dear god) it seems like a waste of time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2009 @ 2:26pm

If this case ends up in a civil jury trial, I can just see the lawyers trying to give their opening arguments to the jury, with a straight face. How could you not keep from laughing? This would make a perfect Saturday Night Live skit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike Masnick (profile), 31 Aug 2009 @ 12:13am

Re: Re: Re: nothing wrong with trademarking quacking #17
your response is the perfect example of why attorneys and other people who are knowledgeable in these areas of law rarely come on to these sorts of blogs.

As someone who knows a bit about people who come to this blog, I'd say that you are wrong. Plenty of attorneys and people who are knowledgeable in these areas of law come to this blog all the time.

But, you know... why let facts get in the way?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Scott, 31 Aug 2009 @ 12:21am

Re:
prior art
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Scott, 31 Aug 2009 @ 12:26am

Re: Re: nothing wrong with trademarking quacking #17
Learn the difference between IP (copyright) and trademark?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Scott, 31 Aug 2009 @ 12:29am

Re:
Hard time with that...prior art again.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Scott, 31 Aug 2009 @ 12:35am

Re: I don't know what I've been told.......
I'm pretty sure that cadences go back even further than U.S. history.

Plus, trademark involves a trade. To win, you have to prove that your trade has been inhibited. Soldiers, Marines, etc. call cadence to keep everyone together and help keep motivation and morale up.

Finally, you're very U.S.-centric aren't you? People all over the world use marching and running cadences, especially in the military.

Really poor example.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Scott, 31 Aug 2009 @ 12:37am

Re:
Too bad Boston Legal is gone...I'd have loved to see Denny or Alan work this one. :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Aug 2009 @ 2:49am

The trademark's real all right
Just had to look it up to be sure:

#75686528

"Description of Mark The mark consists of a quacking noise made by tour guides and tour participants by use of duck call devices throughout various portions of the tours"."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Aug 2009 @ 4:33am

Its been a long time since my IP law class but I do remember that trademarks are a consumer protection, not an IP protection. They are intended to protect against consumer confusion. We have duck tours in DC with quacking kazoos run by a different company. If i visited san francisco, i would assume both groups were simply duck tours not of a particular company. The "trademark" hasn't been sufficiently protected therefore neither company can claim it.

The company is being lazy and using trademark to stifle competition much like other company's use IP to stifle competition rather than innovate. IP is great when it encourages innovation; otherwise, its a hinder to advancing our tech economy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Aug 2009 @ 5:00am

OK so who the fuck allowed kazoo sounds to be trademarked in the first place?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 31 Aug 2009 @ 7:12am

Re: Time to update an old saw...
This Quacks Me Up .... Yeah I know so obvious
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jason (profile), 31 Aug 2009 @ 9:07am

Re: Time to update an old saw...
Kudos for the francophied spelling, "stipid."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jason (profile), 31 Aug 2009 @ 9:16am

Re:
Actually the 12th man thing is way more legit than this.

12th man was actually a registered trademark that they used on licensed apparel, and was legitimately recognized by fans as an Aggie t-shirt. It's based on aggie history(?folklore) that when they were for some reason only able to field 10 players (was it illness, war, I don't remember) someone actually came down from the stands and was added to the roster.

Obviously current rules would not allow this, but that's the story. The point is that Aggie enthusiam is in fact manaically stupid, and they are proud of it, and it really is specific to their history, and is more than just a rowdy crowd.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jason (profile), 31 Aug 2009 @ 9:17am

Re: Re: a duck walks into a pharmacy...
Waddle they think of next?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jason (profile), 31 Aug 2009 @ 9:23am

NOT an issue EVEN IF the trademark is legit
Bottom line, trademarks are NOT IP, they exist to protect customers from confusion within the same market. Sorry, but an amphibious tour in the bay area is nowhere near the same market as one in Georgia.

Or maybe it IS reasonable to think that people who get their jollies by quackin' a kazoo wouldn't know SF from GA, I don't know.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Aug 2009 @ 10:18am

Re: Re: Re: Re: nothing wrong with trademarking quacking #17
55 comments in this thread alone... how many were IP attorneys, or even non-IP attorneys? why let facts get in the way?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Fiercedeity (profile), 31 Aug 2009 @ 12:07pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: nothing wrong with trademarking quacking #17
Right, because everyone who visits this blog leaves a comment... You shills are so out of touch with people it's rather amazing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Derek Kerton (profile), 31 Aug 2009 @ 5:02pm

Re: Time to update an old saw...
...but why not just sue them for "stealing" the concept of using an amphibious vehicle to do tours?

I mean, that idea should totally belong to one company and be completely locked down. How could they neglect this? Every idea should be locked down: that's how innovation and progress works, right?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Derek Kerton (profile), 31 Aug 2009 @ 5:16pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: nothing wrong with trademarking quacking #17
Yeah. Only IP attorneys should be able to comment on whether common sense would allow one company to lock down an idea as inane as kazoos on floating buses.

"55 comments in this thread alone...how many were IP attorneys, or even non-IP attorneys? why let facts get in the way?"

You guys have a monopoly on facts now? Damn, you're arrogant! Can't I counter, since I'm an economist, that only economists can say what's right or wrong, and nobody else has a valid opinion? No, because I'm not an ass.

Gosh! You'd like lawyers to decide what's right or wrong about everything, no matter how mundane. It just shows the kind of world we'd have if lawyers were in charge. Thankfully, instead we have congresspeople! ;-(

Gotta run. I need to call my lawyer to ask what I should eat for dinner. God forbid I should make any decision without counsel.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Derek Kerton (profile), 31 Aug 2009 @ 5:22pm

Re: Re: I don't know what I've been told.......
Scott,

You're really making a habit of "debunking" people's posts that are just deliberate satire and exaggeration.

Get a sense of humor. You don't need to think it's funny (I don't), but at least you could detect that it's humor and lighten up.
[ link to this | view in thread ]