Hells Angels: Trademark Bullies
from the of-course-they-are dept
The NY Times has a somewhat surprising article about how the Hells Angels have basically become rather aggressive trademark bullies, going after pretty much anyone who comes anywhere near their trademarks, complete with an angry looking lawyer named Fritz Clapp who has a red mohawk (but, apparently, is not actually a Hells Angel member, which I guess allows him to avoid a conflict of interest).Just in the past seven years, the Hells Angels have brought more than a dozen cases in federal court, alleging infringement on apparel, jewelry, posters and yo-yos. The group has also challenged Internet domain names and a Hollywood movie — all for borrowing the motorcycle club’s name and insignias. The defendants have been large, well-known corporations like Toys “R” Us, Alexander McQueen, Amazon, Saks, Zappos, Walt Disney and Marvel Comics. And they have included a rapper’s clothing company, Dillard’s and a teenage girl who was selling embroidered patches on eBay with a design resembling the group’s “Death Head” logo.While it appears that some of this is about money, it's much more clear that they're just fiercely protective of who's "in" the club. A deposition in one case of Sonny Barger, the head of the Hells Angels, has him discussing how if he sees anyone wearing unofficial Hells Angel clothing, he'll demand it on the spot -- sometimes offering to exchange it for a legitimate one, but also saying that if the person refuses "I'd beat him up and take it."
Of course, the article also details how law enforcement has often considered the Hells Angels an organized crime group, and I could see how that might lead to some problems down the road. A few years ago, we wrote about how, in a case against a different biker group, the Mongols, the US government asked the court to hand over the gang's trademarks, so that they could stop anyone and take away their clothes if they saw them wearing Mongols jackets or shirts. Basically, the government equivalent of what Barger said in his deposition. Imagine what kind of hell would break loose if the government tried to seize the Hells Angels trademarks as well...
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: fritz clapp, hells angels, trademark, trademark bullies
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Trademarks
> asked the court to hand over the gang's
> trademarks, so that they could stop anyone and
> take away their clothes if they saw them wearing
> Mongols jackets or shirts
I don't understand how this is supposed to works Just because you have a trademark on something doesn't give you the right to go around seizing the property of anyone who's displaying that trademark if you don't like them.
If I bought the trademark to the Oakland Raiders logo today, I can't just start going around seizing all the t-shirts, hats, etc. that people are wearing with that logo on it. It was legitimately their property before I owned the trademark. All the trademark allows me to do is prevent people from selling merchandise with the logo on it that I don't authorize from this point forward.
The same would be true of the Mongols. All their shirts, hats, and cuts have been their physical property for years. The government owning the trademark wouldn't give them the legal right to stop them and seize their apparel. All it would do is give the government the right to decide who gets to sell Mongol-themed merchandise from the date of the trademark transfer forward. (And most of these MC clubs don't sell their stuff anyway. They make it themselves, for themselves, so there'd be no stream of commerce for the government to interrupt with its trademark claims.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Trademarks
Actually, "support gear" is a very lucrative revenue stream for many motorcycle clubs, just as it is for every professional sports franchise. The Hells Angels website FAQ even makes it clear that you don't have to be a member of HA or own a Harley to wear their stuff.
It's just like any other trademark - if you don't defend it, you lose the "right" to restrict others from profiting from your mark.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Trademarks
Hells Angels have a store in Toronto Ontario Canada if you wish to purchase some apparel or gear.
http://www.hellsangelstorontodowntown.com/-support-gear.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Trademarks
> Canada if you wish to purchase some apparel
> or gear.
Which is why I said "most", not "all".
But even so, the stated purpose of the government seeking the trademarks was to "stop anyone and take away their clothes if they saw them wearing Mongols gear". The actual cuts and rockers that the members wear while riding around aren't for sale in this merchandise stores. Those are produced by members for members. Since owning the trademark on the Mongols logo only allows the government to stop the use of it in commerce, that won't do jack to keep members from creating their own apparel. And it certainly doesn't give the government or the cops or whoever the right to stop people on the street and confiscate merchandise that may have been created, owned, and purchased before the government became the owners of the trademark.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Trademarks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Trademarks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not a member?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is the kind of thing that makes me a firm believer in the second amendment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to comments
Anonymous Coward: I am just 5'6" and quite mild mannered. (Masnick describes me as 'angry looking' but he is wrong.)
TJGeezer: there are no "secret" members who hide their colors, and certainly no judges are undercover club members; these are both silly fantasies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Response to comments
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Response to comments
You sure look angry to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Response to comments
USA Chicken headed Patch wearing hells angels flock Many people are not aware of the bad side of this organisations history, due to the international media abroad who wanted to sell a “certain flavour of truth”, to the unbeknown audience abroad in order to shape their opinion., and the US Media thats keeps the Citizens controlled by pushing their view through entertainment .
Read more
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/bellmore-ny/TMLJFK4IJK7MTD3B0
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-10th-circ uit/1086851.html
http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013/03/13/hells-angel-member-sentenced-federal-cour t-boston-years/8W7rEEc5tCgBB0cOBBGrxL/story.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Conflict?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Conflict?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
idiots
[ link to this | view in chronology ]