North Face Goes After South Butt Over Trademark Infringement
from the morons-in-a-hurry-in-heavy-fleeces dept
Another day, another story of a company reacting overly aggressively with a trademark infringement claim. North Face, the well known clothing company, apparently is not at all pleased with a student who created a parody line of clothing called "South Butt." The lawyer representing the student had a great quote:"I did try to explain with a great deal of candor to counsel for the North Face that the general public is aware of the difference between a face and a butt."And, indeed, that's the central question in most trademark lawsuits. Are the customers confused into thinking that they're buying one product, rather than the other. It would be pretty difficult for North Face to claim with a straight face that those buying South Butt clothing don't realize it's a different company...
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: clothing, moron in a hurry, parody, trademark
Companies: north face, south butt
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Thanks for trying tho.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
P.S. May the fleas of a thousand camels infest your armpits
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Douse this North Face, South Butt thing mean I could never make a clothing line called crevice or cleavage?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Albeit, I would buy a East West Cleavage shirt for my girlfriend.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
google fails to find it, it only returns this page when searching for that phrase.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
because I kinda just improvised, or made up, the English equivalent to the arabic letters the best that I could.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Finally, sophmoric humor is useful!
Great examples of this fact are in demeaning terms/names like "buttface" and "butthead". Largely, it is accepted that such deragatory and juevenile terms are used by the masses, particularly the uneducated masses, so the proverbial moron in a hurry ought to be included in their ranks. The term "buttface", a prime example in this case, would have no demeaning value if the masses were unable to differentiate between a butt and a face. The term is only employable because of the difference.
And so it goes with ALL demeaning terms employing the more unmentionable areas of our persons and/or actions. Simply for educational purposes, I'll list a few more:
1. Assclown
2. Fuckstick (double points!)
3. Cockass
4. Ass Bandit
5. Banana Vendor
6. Vagina Face
7. Angry Dude
You see, all of these are only deragatory because there is something intrinsically different in one part of the word or sub-word...except for that last one...that last one is just mean....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Finally, sophmoric humor is useful!
You fucking Fuckstick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Finally, sophmoric humor is useful!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Finally, sophmoric humor is useful!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Finally, sophmoric humor is useful!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Finally, sophmoric humor is useful!
Zing! Ouch you're on a roll.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Finally, sophmoric humor is useful!
1. Assclown
2. Fuckstick (double points!)
3. Cockass
4. Ass Bandit
5. Banana Vendor
6. Vagina Face
7. Angry Dude"
You forgot #8...
8. Dark Helmet
As I understand it, it's a derogatory term which refers to a gay man who doesn't clean off his penis after anal sex.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Finally, sophmoric humor is useful!
Brilliant, I love it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Finally, sophmoric humor is useful!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Finally, sophmoric humor is useful!
...
7. Angry Dude
"""
This actually made me lol, thanks DH :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ass = Hole in the ground
OK. Got it.
The logos are similar text/design and the clothing is similar in design.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not Difficult at All
You underestimate the egomaniacs running some companies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let's hope
It sounds like the student got a good lawyer. Let's hope this is another case where someone who files false IP claims gets that tables turned and has to cough up legal fees for the the defendant.
I have been shopping for a new jacket, and I just scratched the North Face one off my list. I wonder if South Butt makes one in my size?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Okay, I'll try to bring it back
I just don't see what good comes from this even if they win. What in the world are they attempting to accomplish?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Okay, I'll try to bring it back
Billable hours ... the motivation behind the lawsuit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Okay, I'll try to bring it back
It would be entertaining to know whether there were any settlement proposals prior to filing suit. North Face wants to protect its marks, because it will lose protection if it does not diligently protect. TM holders who don't actually care about a particular use often send C&Ds and then offer to license the mark for free or cheap or a small royalty. That way, the use is authorized and they are not failing to enforce their mark. If the offer goes unanswered, they are now in the uncomfortable position of having to sue over something they don't really care about.
I have absolutely no reason to believe that is what is happening here, and no reason to think it is not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
At about this point, trademark starts to run irretrievably afoul of the First Amendment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And the alleged infringement is apparently _not_ over "North Face" versus "South Butt," but over the red & white dome design. Frankly, North Face appears to my eye to be absolutely correct that the logos are confusingly similar.
There is an interesting legal point, here, about the trademark standard. Ostensibly, and jurisprudentially, it is "likelihood of consumer confusion." Because of the context in which these marks are used, there is no likelihood of consumer confusion. But what actually gets applied in the courts is whether the competing marks are "confusingly similar." These marks are probably confusingly similar. Because of the way these cases posture (often, competing motions for summary judgment,) the trademark holder tends to get the benefit of whichever standard best makes his/her/its case.
The problem is not North Face. They are doing what the law permits and may even require them to do. The problem is that the law is stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
boycott north face
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Obvious and Confusion
In fact, Winkelmann's dad says the whole idea behind his son's creation is to offer customers an alternative.
Well, Duh ... North Face does not want customers to have a alternative. The logos are very similar, and a lawyer in a hurry could get the logos (and a face and a butt for that matter) confused I suppose.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Obvious and Confusion
Not even look same
simples
eeeee
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Really!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The real issue is that he's 'trading off' of the North Face brand
Moreover, his south butt brand dilutes the power and exclusivity of the North Face brand...
It's a funny joke, but I'd be pissed too if I were North Face - this guy's product is only getting notice because of all the hard work North Face already did.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The real issue is that he's 'trading off' of the North Face brand
What all these people are doing is identifying the nature of their own brand with reference to an existing brand. Unless your brand is actually confusable with the existing brand (which this one clearly isn't) you still have to build your own market presence. The fact that you do it with reference to an existing brand name is no more significant than any other well known proper noun or word in the dictionary - like for example "Eiger" as in "the North Face of the...
Hint - look up Eiger clothing....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The real issue is that he's 'trading off' of the North Face brand
If I had seen the South Butt branded clothing in a store before reading this article...
...I would have thought to myself, "South Butt? What an unfortunate choice of brandname!" I would never have made the connection to North Face.
Now, every time I see it, I will. Hasn't North Face diluted South Butts brand by starting this stupid lawsuit in the first place?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The real issue is that he's 'trading off' of the North Face brand
Exclusions to trademark being what they are, all North Face is doing is increasing this young man's sales.
And to your comment about not being a corporate shill:
It's not really corporate shilling that you are doing sir, it is shilling of another ilk: Law Firm Shilling. We are all painfully aware these days that Law Firms like nothing more than to file suit on behalf of their clients, whether or not it is in their client's best interest.
In this case, I can see the legal team tittering behind closed doors at how North Face is going to spend a king's ransom to fight this quixotic battle, only to find that trademark law doesn't and never did allow them any kind of recourse.
The lawyers get paid either way.
You sir, are a Law Firm Shill.
Shame on you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The real issue is that he's 'trading off' of the North Face brand
And, I'm an IP laywer who leans strongly toward free speach over IP... Your generalizations are misplaced.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The real issue is that he's 'trading off' of the North Face brand
You're an IP LAWYER? Really? And you lean strongly toward FREE SPEACH? REALLY?
Whatever doofus. Get a dictionary, Fuckstick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Also, that North Face logo, the 3 curved lines, how is that even possible to trade mark? Its so generic. Like trademarking a single, common, not-made-up, English word, such as "Edge" (also referring to another trademark case here).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
My personal friend and bandmate would take great exception to your callous and insensitive opinion on this matter.
Do not incur our collective wrath, lest we descend upon you like the limb from a great Joshua Tree.
Yours,
Bono
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thanks!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
BOYCOTT NORTH FACE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]