Who Is That Masked Chocolate Candy? Zorro Slashes M&Ms Over Trademark
from the let-the-debate-begin dept
You may have seen the news that Zorro Productions is suing Mars, the makers of M&M's, over a trademark infringement claim, concerning an M&Ms commercial that apparently involves some sort of Zorro costume. But wait a second... just like Sherlock Holmes, it appears that at least some of Zorro should be in the public domain by now. Pamela Chestek writes in to give her very thorough analysis of this particular case, noting that, in some ways, it may be setting up some future lawsuits concerning the difference between trademark and copyright in characters. This is an issue that is going to get increasingly important -- since (assuming Disney doesn't pull another copyright extension out of its magic bag) some characters created in the last century may start hitting the public domain with their copyrights, even as their trademarks remain. But what does that mean when it comes to using those characters? Well, with Sherlock Holmes, it means that the estate holding the rights still pretends you can't do anything, even if that's not quite true. And it looks like Zorro Productions is doing the same thing. But it's not that easy:According to the Copyright Office, all works published before January 1, 1923 are in the public domain. So if the copyright in the original Zorro character is in the public domain, the public may also exploit the character. But how far does the right extend? As a matter of legal doctrine, in general copyright and trademark can happily co-exist. Therefore, even if Zorro was in the public domain, to the extent that Zorro has source-identifying significance (like Mickey Mouse does), Mars may use Zorro only as long as doing so isn't likely to cause confusion as to the affiliation, connection, or association of Zorro with Mars, and Mars doesn't suggest that Zorro sponsors or approves of Mars' goods. (That's an abridged version of the statutory language, don't blame me because it's almost unintelligible).In the end, Chestek gives the edge to Mars, but isn't entirely sure because it's not entirely clear what the actual infringement is. Many of the news stories show an image of an M&M candy in a sorta-Zorro-like outfit, but Chestek notes that the lawsuit describes someone in a Halloween costume, which implies it may be something different. Assuming that it is a person in a Halloween costume, Chestek suggests that Mars has a strong case, and Zorro may be missing the mark:
We can't know whether this might be happening without knowing what the accused work is, but the complaint may be squarely in doctrinal conflict territory. There is no suggestion that Mars used the word "Zorro"; it instead appears that ZPI is alleging that use of a Zorro character in any form is infringing. ZPI describes its proprietary character as dressed in black, wearing a flat Cordoba hat, a mask and a cape, and you can see that the registered logos of Zorro and the Zorro costume are both quite similar to the public domain Zorro.... So to the extent that the claim of proprietary rights in the Zorro character is co-extensive with the copyright in the character, which gives?
My vote right now is that the mere use of a character in the public domain, particularly when it appears to be someone simply wearing a Halloween costume representing the character, isn't going to be perceived as an endorsement in the first instance.However, that could change, depending on the specific use, and if there is some impression of "endorsement." Ah, the public domain. It isn't quite what it used to be.
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
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Time to give of bank robbery as the penalties are now to stiff
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Corporation? Since when?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Corporation? Since when?
http://www.zorrossteakhouse.com/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ZPI is a Band of Thieves!
Trademarks do NOT protect intellectual property, but certain corporate specific logos, marks and such. For instance, the famous Kraft Foods logo, with its distinctive spelling, is a trademark. The DC Comics circle logo is a trademark. The character and license of Zorro is not a trademark. Trademark is intended to identify the source of goods or services, not to protect stories or characters. ZPI owns and controls nothing. Zorro is fair game and anyone they sue is going to win.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: ZPI is a Band of Thieves!
but irrespective of their claims: isn't it a legal regulation that copyrights expire 70 years after the the authors death? in zorros case the author died 1958 and the rights should therefore expire in 2028. until then the copyrights should remain with mr. mcculley's heirs.
are they somehow affiliated with ZPI?
how could a courts decision overrule this 70 years copyright law? we would still love to write and produce this musical and have to make certain we don't get sued. ;-)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: ZPI is a Band of Thieves!
thanks nik
[ link to this | view in thread ]