Pentagon Gets Busy Trademarking After Seeing Disney Try To Cash In On SEAL Team 6
from the taxpayer-money dept
Three years ago, we wrote about how Disney applied for a trademark on "SEAL Team 6" just two days after the Navy SEAL's Team 6 killed Osama bin Laden. While public outcry resulted in Disney dropping the trademark application a few weeks later, the situation apparently woke up some trademark lawyers at the Pentagon to get busy trademarking.We wrote about this situation a few months ago, in noting that the military has suddenly been looking to trademark just about everything, but a recent NY Times piece suggests that it was that run-in with Disney that really ramped things up.
The Marines registered only one trademark in 2003 and four in 2008. But as troops came home from Iraq and then Afghanistan, efforts began picking up. In 2010 and the first half of 2011, the Marines registered nine trademarks.Of course there had been some earlier abuses, including this story we had back in 2008 concerning trademarks on military hardware. Still, it's difficult to see how the government should be able to gain a trademark in the first place on things like the name of a military team or division. Trademarks are supposed to cover use in commerce. And the government isn't going out and selling the "SEAL team." You can make an argument that no one should be able to get such a trademark, but it's unclear why the government should get it at all.
Then Navy SEALs killed Osama bin Laden in May 2011, Disney tried to trademark the name SEAL Team Six, and things ratcheted up from there. The Navy immediately fired back at Disney, filing its own trademark for the phrases “SEAL team” and “Navy SEALs,” terms that, the Navy said in its filing, imply membership in a Navy organization that “develops and executes military missions involving special operations strategy, doctrine and tactics.”
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: defense department, navy seals, pentagon, trademark
Companies: disney
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
What are they putting in there, war profiteering?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Also having trouble seeing Disney's angle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Also having trouble seeing Disney's angle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Also having trouble seeing Disney's angle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Sadly, there are a lot of relevant instances in which patents and copyrights are being abused, so there's a lot to point out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
There's an old saying in the news business, that you write stories about "man bites dog" not "dog bites man."
There's nothing interesting in "oh look, that patent makes sense." The stories of interest are the abuses.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What else is propaganda but selling a story or myth?
Not that I'm implying anything.
Maybe they want to make sure they get a cut of the movie rights, comics, game rights, a cut of the profit from history books. If it looks like profiteering perhaps it is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What's next? Disney tries to trademark the seal of the U.S. President?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
military branding and supplus
I was surprised when I visited a local sporting-goods store at how many "US Army" branded products were on the shelves. It seems like kind of a scam, since these are not things the army actually uses, and probably should not be putting its 'seal of approval' on otherwise.
Military surplus shops have long had the problem of cheap Chinese-made items that look virtually identical - including the labels - to actual US military surplus goods. Although it's illegal to manufacture and sell fake commercial brands, it's been perfectly legal to deceive consumers into thinking that these cheap counterfeit knockoffs are genuine military surplus.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
games
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The case of Pentagon vs Disney
Oh look, im being mentiomed in a negatibe but truthfull light, "trademark" them mutherfuckers-mothurfukers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]