San Diego Comic-Con Petitions Judge To Have Salt Lake Comic Con Pay Its Attorney's Fees, Bar It From Calling Itself A 'Comic Convention'
from the don't-describe-yourself dept
Perhaps you thought that the legal drama between the famous San Diego Comic-Con and the Salt Lake Comic Con was over. Our ongoing coverage of this trademark dispute stemming from SDCC somehow having a valid trademark on "comic-con", a shortened descriptor phrase for a comic convention, largely concluded when SDCC "won" in court, being awarded $20,000 after initially asking for $12 million in damages. With the focus now turning to the roughly gazillion other comic conventions that exist using the "comic-con" phrase in their names and marketing materials, this particular dispute seemed to have come to a close.
But not so much, actually. In post-trial motions, SDCC petitioned Judge Battaglia to consider the case "exceptional" so that SDCC can recover attorney's fees from SLCC. The arguement for SDCC appears to mostly be that they spent a shit-ton of money on attorneys for the case.
U.S. District Judge Anthony Battaglia heard a host of posttrial motions Thursday, including San Diego Comic-Con’s request for over $4.5 million in attorney fees which have already been paid in full. San Diego Comic-Con attorney Callie Bjurstrom with Pillsbury Law told Battaglia Thursday he should find the case is “exceptional” so that attorney fees and costs can be awarded.
“This was a very expensive case; the reason this case was so expensive was because of defendants and their counsel and the way they litigated this case,” Bjurstrom said.
It will be interesting to see how Judge Battaglia rules on the assertion that SLCC's defense of itself warrants its paying SDCC's attorney's fees. What exactly was SLCC supposed to do, not try to defend itself in the best way possible? One also wonders if SDCC would be petitioning for attorney's fees had the jury found that SLCC's infringement was not willful, resulting in the paltry $20k award. Perhaps, perhaps not. What this sure looks like is the SDCC realizing that this "win" came at the cost of a hilariously large amount of money and it is attempting to mitigate that loss.
SDCC also petitioned the court to bar SLCC from using its trademarks. That sort of thing would be par for the course except for two things. First, again, this trademark is ridiculous. It's purely descriptive. Second, hammering home that fact, SDCC doesn't want SLCC to even be able to properly describe the type of event it is.
But San Diego Comic-Con’s request went a step further than simply asking Battaglia to enjoin the Salt Lake convention operators from infringing its trademarks: it asked the judge to bar the Salt Lake convention from using the words “comic convention” or phonetic equivalents to “Comic Con” or “comic convention.”
That request should lay plain how dumb this all is. If a comic convention cannot refer to itself as such because that is too close to the trademark "comic-con", then it should be plain as day that "comic-con" is purely descriptive and, therefore, invalid as a trademark. I wouldn't be surprised to see this petition to the court turn up at the USPTO in a bid to cancel SDCC's trademark entirely. That's certainly what I would be doing if I were heading up any of the hundreds of comic cons out there.
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 conventions, salt lake comic con, san diego comic-con, trademark
Companies: salt lake comic con, san diego comic-con
Reader Comments
The First Word
“Problem solved.
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Greed: For when winning is not enough.
“This was a very expensive case; the reason this case was so expensive was because of defendants and their counsel and the way they litigated this case,” Bjurstrom said.
Translation: 'Our legal thuggery cost us a lot of money because our target had the utter gall to fight back and the ruling only gave us a tiny fraction of it back. We want more, make them give it too us.'
'Actions have consequences' does not an 'exceptional' case make.
But San Diego Comic-Con’s request went a step further than simply asking Battaglia to enjoin the Salt Lake convention operators from infringing its trademarks: it asked the judge to bar the Salt Lake convention from using the words “comic convention” or phonetic equivalents to “Comic Con” or “comic convention.”
So essentially they tried to claim ownership over the very concept of comic conventions by saying that no-one should be able to use the purely descriptive term of it.
Yeah, at this point I would love to see the USPTO come to it's senses, realize just how bad this trademark is and yank it entirely. It wouldn't help the Salt Lake Comic-con, but it would at least prevent the thugs in the SDCC from going after more targets.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Greed: For when winning is not enough.
Wouldn't it?
It seems like if the mark were thrown out, that would make SLCC's appeal a lot easier.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Greed: For when winning is not enough.
Even if the trademark gets tossed, they might be better off just leaving the judgment where it is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Greed: For when winning is not enough.
San Diego Comic-Con is trying to prevent the obvious and general descriptor being used. Vindictive or what?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here's hoping
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
2020: Salt Lake City Superheroes Social has been sued by Joe's Super Hero Sandwiches for infringing on their trademark.
2021: Salt Lake City Place for People to Meet to Dress Funny and Pay $45 for Celebrity Signatures has filed for bankruptcy, citing the excessive costs of rebranding every year.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
2023: San Diego Comic-Con sues police and prison system for using the word "Con" because it creates a negative impression.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Capitalist bloodsuckers infringe "Comecon" name.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comecon
Since they themselves are claiming '*phonetic* equivalents to “Comic Con”' [*emphasis* added], their piracy cannot be considered innocent or accidental.
Damages can be apportioned to worthy socialist causes.
http://www.cyberussr.com/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A fair share of the lawyers fee...
On the other hand, Salt Lake lawyers seriously reduced the award to San Diego; it seems fair that San Diego pays 99.83% of Salt Lake's attorney's fees because they had such unreasonable demands.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Problem solved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is SDCC even a comic book convention any more?
Is SDCC even a comic book convention any more?
I would argue that, no, the primary focus of SDCC is no longer comic books, but the entire pop-culture industry. The evidence should be plain: how many comic book artists are there, compared to how many TV and movie celebrities? Is the focus on comic book themselves or on the many movie and TV projects created from the comics?
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it SDCC where thousands of people camped out in the hallways for a spot in a panel discussion about the "Twilight" movies? In my non-legal opinion, an event can't call itself a "comic book convention" when it's main draw is a panel discussion about a movie!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is SDCC even a comic book convention any more?
how many comic book artists are there, compared to how many TV and movie celebrities?
There are still far more comic artists/writers/etc. then movie or TV celebrities, which can be easily confirmed just by looking at the guest list. Of course, TV/Movie celebrities tend to be popular with a much wider audience, so you thinking otherwise after a cursory examination can be forgiven.
Is the focus on comic book themselves or on the many movie and TV projects created from the comics?
If things derived from comic books do not fall under the umbrella of comics, then even the first SDCC was not really a comic convention. Or perhaps you are just confusing the "Comic Convention" which everyone, including the organizers, believe this event is, with a "Comic Book Convention," which only you believe it is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is SDCC even a comic book convention any more?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
word or phrase already in wide use,comic convention is
widely used an event where comic fans meet up.
Sddc has become more of a general event for fans of
tv ,movie,s where most people go to see panels
promoting new shows or movies mostly based on scifi or superhero franchise,s.
TO give it a trademark on the words comic con would be ridiculous considering comics are only a small part
of the Sddc convention.
Sddc should have lost the case since comic con is just short version of the words comic convention.
It was sddc,s choice to spend millions on legal fess to defend the term comic con.
Anyone should be able to use the words comic book
convention ,regardless of trademarks to descibe a public event where fans of comicbooks meet up .
The word con or convention was not invented by the
Sdcc .
[ link to this | view in chronology ]