Comic Con Verdict: Salt Lake Comic Con Loses The Battle, Now Seeks To Win The War
from the a-comic-can-of-worms dept
As you will all know, we've been covering the trademark case between San Diego Comic-Con and Salt Lake Comic Con pretty much since this whole dispute began some three years ago. From the outset, this whole thing seemed wholly unreasonable. Whatever trademarks SDCC managed to get past the USPTO, there are roughly a zillion comic cons across the country, few of which have any licensing arrangement with SDCC, meaning the plaintiff in this case hasn't bothered to enforce its trademarks for some time. That generally leads to the mark being abandoned, or considered generic. Either should have kept SLCC in the clear. Add to all that the fact that this is arguably a trademark that should never have been granted on the grounds that it's almost purely descriptive -- a "comic con" is a comic convention -- and many observers thought this was going to be an easy win for SLCC in court, including this writer.
Well, the jury has come back, and it managed to rule for San Diego Comic-Con instead.
In a case that could potentially complicate the lives of comic convention organizers the country over, a federal jury has ruled in San Diego Comic-Con’s favor in a suit brought against Salt Lake Comic Con for violating copyright law with their use of the term “comic con.” The verdict, which was arrived at on Friday afternoon, found SDCC’s trademark is valid, and that Salt Lake Comic Con used it without permission, according to a report by Fox13 in Salt Lake City.
That sound you hear in the distance is a hundred other comic convention organizers slapping their own foreheads. With this ruling, which SLCC may appeal, comic cons all over the place may feel more pressure to give in to any licensing demands from SDCC. Although, perhaps those other cons just need to run out the clock -- more on that in a minute.
I said SLCC may appeal this ruling for two reasons. First, the damages the jury awarded are almost laughably small and nowhere near what SDCC was asking for.
San Diego Comic-Con initially sought up to $12 million in damages from Dan Farr and Bryan Brandenburg, Salt Lake Comic Con’s organizers, but was rewarded only $20,000. According to the ruling, the violation was not a “willful infringement” of the copyright.
“It felt like it was a draw,” Brandenburg told Fox13. He told the news organization that he was currently considering whether or not to appeal. Additionally, Salt Lake Comic Con has proceedings underway with the US trademark office to officially cancel San Diego Comic-Con’s trademark.
And that last bit is the other reason it may not appeal and was my reference above to other cons simply running out the clock. The real misstep here might be in San Diego Comic-Con opening up this can of worms by bullying other cons over its abandoned, generic, descriptive trademark, with the potential end result being one of its victims getting that trademark cancelled entirely. Were I any other comic con in some other city in America, I would be trying to help SLCC getting this mark cancelled in any way I could. It would be a poetic end, to be sure, no matter what one jury thought of that actual case of trademark infringement.
So, more to come, I am sure.
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: comic con, confusion, damages, trademark
Companies: salt lake comic con, san diego comic-con
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Oh, anybody can be wrong -- you're Techdirt WRONG!
Just on percentages with your opinions, I'll go out on a twig and guess that the trademark will stand.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oh, anybody can be wrong -- you're Techdirt WRONG!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Oh, anybody can be wrong -- you're Techdirt WRONG!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oh, anybody can be wrong -- you're Techdirt WRONG!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oh, anybody can be wrong -- you're Techdirt WRONG!
Given your track record you're not exactly qualified to argue here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
a federal jury has ruled in San Diego Comic-Con’s favor in a suit brought against Salt Lake Comic Con for violating copyright law with their use of the term “comic con.”
I'm confused, how exactly did they find this a violation of copyright law?
Is that just shoddy reporting by the news station mentioned in the quote?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Just terrible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Someone doesn't know the different IP's and how they work.
I look forward to the trademark being cancelled, one can only assume the other comic cons across the nation would be willing to throw a bit of cash into the pot. Chipping in to get it cancelled is a much better fiscal decision than letting themselves getting bled a bit more every year.
Heh how about calling it the Salt Lake Convention of Comics?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: other comic cons
It doesn't even seem that any of the other comic cons are speaking out publicly about this issue. Are any of them even adding their two cents worth to Techdirt's articles? Did any of them offer to testify at the trial?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: other comic cons
Doesn't matter how unpopular some are, they are still trademarks that someone has and must be respected.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: other comic cons
2) do you disagree that "comic con" is a widely-used and generic phrase?
3) could you afford the 100s of thousands of dollars it costs to litigate a trademark dispute through trial and possible appeals?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: other comic cons
Companies should do their homework first. Just by making some phone calls could save costly litigation.
If there might be a possible conflict it is much better for the parties to discuss it before one of them takes a questionable action.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
San Diego Comic-Con
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They can keep pushing to invalidate the trademark, but at the same time, they can come up with a new moniker for their event and make another big publicity splash about being "not the comic con". They can extract way more than $20,000 worth of marketing value, especially because sites like Techdirt and others will latch onto the story for another round at that point, bemoaning how trademark has hurt the little guy.
This isn't the last you hear of this case, but I suspect it may be the last time you see it in court, unless SDCC decides to appeal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And what could they call it, if not a “comic con”? “Graphic Novel Gala” does not exactly roll off the tongue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
There are options...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Like their laywers handling the appeal on a contingency basis.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Trademark law has become beyond stupid, and the trademark approvals, the cases, and the rulings are worse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Seriously, though, there's DragonCon in Atlanta and MegaCon in Orlando (and probably many other), so these conventions don't necessarily need to say "comic con" or "comic convention".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Saltcon?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Saltcon?
It doesn't matter what you want to call it. You are going to be sued. Just because it's a generic word it can still have a trademark. That's just the way it is. Nothing can be done!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Salt Lake Comic Con is appealing
We like a lot of the people at SDCC and they have a great event. We just think somebody has to stand up for the 140 comic cons that can't afford to fight for what is everybodies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Salt Lake Comic Con is appealing
Who is the asshole on their legal team that initiated this fight and decided short form of the term comic convention, i.e. "Comic Con", belonged exclusively to them? Do they realize they're making their convention look bad to the community?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Salt Lake Comic Con is appealing
From what I've seen, the judge made a lot of improper calls about what evidence you were allowed to present, and certainly about how you were willing to talk about the case in public. Hopefully you'll get fairer treatment on appeal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"What's the copyright got to do with trademark?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]