National Geographic Defeats Trademark Suit Over 'Wild America' and 'Untamed Americas' Claim
from the unkempt-techdirtica dept
There is always tension between the First Amendment and trademark law, but it's a tension that is usually dissolved by trademark's primary aims to keep the public well informed as to the source and affiliations of goods and services. Still, it shouldn't be lost on anyone that the law at its heart is chiefly about what a business or commercial interest can name/say about itself. And, while the law carves out space in speech for identifying branding and language, the First Amendment doesn't entirely disappear in such commercial squabbles just because someone shouts trademark at it.
A recent example of this would be a trademark suit brought by Marty Stouffer a couple of years ago. Stouffer is a notable documentarian who heavily influenced the nature documentary landscape, typically on PBS. One of his series was entitled "Wild America", a PBS staple beginning in the 80s. National Geographic, on the other hand, produced a series of nature documentaries under the title "Untamed Americas" beginning in 2012. Stouffer claimed the title of the series was infringing upon his trademark in 2018. Well, the court has since ruled in favor of National Geographic, applying the Rogers test, which looks at whether there are First Amendment rights gained by a title that has artistic merit concerning the work itself.
The fact that National Geographic is using its titles to describe the content of the accused series weighs heavily in National Geographic’s favor. Each of the accused series substantially focuses on America’s wildlands. While the English language is notably quite expansive, the range of words to describe such programming is limited. Yet Stouffer would not allow even a synonym for ‘wild’ (i.e., ‘Untamed Americas’).
Judge Martinez initially applied the Second Circuit’s “Rogers test,” which asks whether the title has artistic relevance to the underlying work and whether it explicitly misleads the consumer. Seeing that the test disproportionately favored junior rights holders like National Geographic, Martinez asked six additional questions and allowed Stouffer to submit an amended complaint last year. Ultimately, Martinez reached the same conclusion, although he cautioned that doesn’t make the phrase “Wild America” a free for all, if there was “evidence of a non-artistic intent with respect to the use of the trademark.”
If this were instead called the Geigner test, it would go something like this: Hey, What is Untamed America about, oh it's about Americas that are untamed, well then it's allowed. The general idea is that whatever trademark law can do to curtail the rights of speech under the First Amendment, it most certainly cannot prevent a person from titling their creative work with a description of that creative work. And that appears to be precisely what Stouffer was claiming.
Now, I have no idea what sort of financial shape Stouffer was in, but the fact that he attempted a Kickstarter project to remaster his Wild America series in 4k, but only raising roughly $3,000 of the $1.25 million goal, does at least make one wonder if this lawsuit wasn't purely a money grab in the hopes of a settlement.
If it was, it most certainly has failed. Wildly.
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: marty stouffer, nature documentaries, trademark, untamed americas, wild america
Companies: national geographic
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Americas Gone Wild!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
How is there even a trade mark on Wild America?
One, the very trademark is descriptive, and not really original.
Two, the show ended 7 years before the national geographic series, so the trademark wild have been abandoned.
Three, its not like Wild America isn't generic, and commonly used.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: How is there even a trade mark on Wild America?
--One, the very trademark is descriptive, and not really original.
It doesn't have to be original, if applied to a limited domain ('tv show', here). "Apple"--hardly original, but applied to a computer, OK. Other fruits, however, remain available for use: Apricot, for instance. And other domains remain available: there's apparently an unrelated movie and an unrelated book also on the market.
Granted, it is mostly (but not fully or altogether descriptive.)
Two, the show ended 7 years before the national geographic series, so the trademark wild have been abandoned.
This would be irrelevant if true, but it's not even true. The argument wasn't on the word "wild"--that didn't even occur in the OTHER show's name. And the trademark is still valid if the older TV show is still being schlepped around cable, DVD, or PPV (which it is).
Three, its not like Wild America isn't generic, and commonly used.
True, but irrelevant: National Geographic used a DIFFERENT phrase: "UNTAMED America." Now if NG had used "Wild America" for THEIR show, then ... well, it'd be all about how generic, geographically, a geographic-based trademark can be.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
"Americas Gone Wild!"
Nice to see the naked truth prevail.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That was a stretch...
Word has it he's considering something to do with lasagna as his next silly lawsuit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: That was a stretch...
What about general Flynn?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Truth? Here?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Make America Wild Again
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Geiner test
I like the idea of a Geigner Test... and a Masnick test... and a cook test.
You gentlemen (and I use the expression like Red Reddington in The Blacklist, not like I talk in real life) really make this world a better place (ok, that part is me talking).
Thanks, Tim, TIm, and Mike!
E
P.S. Also a should out to occasional op-eds from EFF counsel et al who make for more entertaining education.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Shouldn't Amerigo, the mapmaker, hold registerable trademark in the terms "America" and "Americas" in all contexts? He used them for a commercial purpose - the marketing of printed maps - so to deny him the trademark would be just plain un-American (tm).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: How is there even a trade mark on Wild America?
No joke, I thought the name of the show was "Marty Stouffer's Wild America", and I won't ever forget that it was brought to me by Mutual of Omaha...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: How is there even a trade mark on Wild America?
The ghost of Marlin Perkins can sue all of them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I wish he would lock it up under billion year trademark and copyright and sue the pants offf everyone using it, if we want "IP" to function this way. Dumbest name for continents ever, and dumbest assumed name for a dumb country of which it is not the name.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: How is there even a trade mark on Wild America?
Well you'd better start forgetting, because that was Wild Kingdom.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Kingdom
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Geigner test
By that test they could have called it "Wild America". Not sure that's such a good idea, because anyone really could believe Stouffer had something to do with it, and/or it was a continuation of the previous show rather than a new creation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: How is there even a trade mark on Wild America?
Oh no, I've been Mandela'd!
My world is crumbling...
[ link to this | view in thread ]