Hey IMAX: IMAX Can't Threaten People With Trademark Infringement For Saying IMAX. IMAX. IMAX.

from the imax-imax-imax-imax dept

Over the years, we've certainly seen plenty of ridiculous attempts to overclaim trademark rights, often for the sake of censorship. While it's not always the case, generally speaking, it's smaller, less sophisticated companies and trademark holders who do this. Larger companies do have a habit of trademark bullying on the margins, but they tend to know better than to send absolutely insane trademark threats just because someone mentions their brand. Apparently, IMAX is an exception to that general rule. IMAX apparently believes that merely mentioning IMAX without a license is infringing on its trademark. Even if you're a media company writing about a product and you interview someone who says something nice about IMAX. IMAX is wrong. Also: IMAX.

You see, our friends over at Ars Technica recently wrote a review of the SteamVR offering, and it included a quote from a game designer, Denny Unger, who was talking about how cool SteamVR is and said: "It’s like saying, 'I have an IMAX theater in my house.' It’s so much better that we can get away with a cumbersome setup." That quote also did become a part of the headline to the story, which appears to be what tipped off IMAX's elite crack squad of trademark censors, who proceeded to send Ars Technica this ridiculous letter which states:

IMAX Corporation has been the owner of the federally registered trademark in the United States and Canada since 1970. Any unauthorized use of our trademark is expressly forbidden.

We believe that your incorrect reference to IMAX when describing this product is misleading to readers as we do not believe that it is possible for a virtual reality system to replicate the experience of an IMAX theatre, which is provided by cutting edge projection and sound technology on screens up to 35.72 metres. We request that all future articles regarding this "room-scale" virtual reality system make no reference to our registered trademark.

Ars Technica's response to this ridiculous threat is perfect. It points out, first of all, that the quote mentioning IMAX is actually praising IMAX:

In other words—Unger thinks SteamVR is awesome, and to express its awesomeness, he compared it to IMAX, another thing he clearly thinks is awesome.

But then explains some rather basic things about trademark law that you would think a company the size of IMAX would already know.

First of all, this isn't a story about IMAX, and it contains just one (nice!) reference to IMAX. The statement wasn't Ars' speech at all, but one that an Ars writer chose out of many possible interview quotes. But that's all a bit of an aside, because the important point is that despite Ruby's fantastical interpretation of what a trademark means, we're actually allowed to say whatever we want about IMAX. I can say IMAX screens look like SteamVR, or that they look like my 47" Vizio TV, or that they remind me of purple bunnies. We can review IMAX directly, we can compare it to other products, we can love 'em, we can hate 'em—all without their permission.

The standard in trademark law is to determine whether there's infringement by detecting whether there would be a "likelihood of confusion" between two products. But again, we're very far away from that test here. That standard would only apply if we were selling movie tickets; there are no consumers who confuse reading an article about virtual reality with going to the movies.

And, you know what, I don't think enough people have compared IMAX to purple bunnies.

Ars Technica's Joe Mullin also points to our own article about how, if anyone is messing with IMAX's trademark, it's IMAX itself, which for years now has been installing much smaller screens but still calling them IMAX, confusing lots and lots of people. It's been years since we mentioned that, and I don't think we otherwise would have had need to do so if IMAX itself hadn't reminded us of this little fact. So, yeah, IMAX, maybe send your staff to some remedial trademark school, because the media can absolutely say IMAX without your "authorization." IMAX. IMAX. IMAX.

IMAX.

Filed Under: ars technica, imax, journalism, trademark
Companies: imax

IMAX Threatens Open Source 3D Engine With Bizarre Reasoning

from the say-what-now dept

Proffer alerts us to the bizarre story of how IMAX (last seen suing competitors and misleading people about what an IMAX film really is) is now threatening the folks behind the Sandy3D open source 3D flash engine. Apparently, IMAX has some sort of 3D drawing system called SANDDE. So, maybe, if you squint, you could see how IMAX might be complaining about a trademark issue. But the letter from IMAX is quite odd. It doesn't mention trademark at all. Instead, it mentions a French patent.

This is quite odd, considering that there's clearly no patent issue here (beyond the fact that Sandy3D isn't in France and the products are entirely different). So why isn't IMAX talking trademark? Well, perhaps because IMAX's trademark on SANDDE was considered abandoned as of March 8, 2000. Yes, more than ten years ago. There's also the fact that this open source project is not a commercial endeavor at all, meaning that IMAX might have a lot of trouble proving "use in commerce" even if it actually had a trademark. Perhaps IMAX could get away with claiming a common law trademark, but even then, its ability to do anything to Sandy3D would be quite limited, and it's difficult to see anyone finding a likelihood of confusion existing between the two.

In the end, it looks like some IMAX lawyers decided to just threaten these open source developers, hoping that by spewing some totally unrelated info about a patent, it might scare the developers into changing the name on a product, even though the patent has nothing at all to do with the issue, and the company has no registered trademark on the name in question.

Filed Under: 3d, imax, patents, threats, trademarks
Companies: imax

AMC And IMAX Engaging In Deception? Calling Non-IMAX Films IMAX (And Charging More)

from the how-to-destroy-a-brand... dept

We've been big supporters of the idea that Hollywood and the movie theaters should be investing more in providing experiences like super large screen IMAX theaters, because that enhances the movie-going experience well beyond what can be replicated with a home theater today. And, indeed, we're starting to see some of that. However, it appears that some theaters and perhaps IMAX itself, have gotten the wrong message out of all of this. Via Digg, we're alerted to someone complaining that he drove out of his way and paid an extra $5 at an AMC theater in order to see the new Star Trek movie in IMAX. Except... he discovered it wasn't actually the IMAX that we all think about when we hear the word. A little investigating turned up the news that IMAX and some theaters have started marketing IMAX's new digital theater projection system as an IMAX-branded experience, despite it being nothing like what most people think of when they hear the word IMAX. It's difficult to see how that's not a deceptive and unfair business practice by IMAX and AMC -- especially when they're charging an extra $5 for it. What's really stunning is that IMAX would risk such massive damage to its brand with this stunt. It's difficult to fathom how massively such a move could backfire on a company whose brand image is probably its most valuable asset.

Filed Under: deception, imax, movies
Companies: amc, imax

More Reasons To Go To The Movies: Next Iron Man In IMAX And 3D

from the can't-get-that-at-home dept

We've been pointing out how the movie industry appears to finally be realizing that they need to give people a reason to go out to the movies, now that they're competing with home theaters, and many are doing that by making use of things like IMAX technology that simply can't be reproduced in the home yet. Now, Parker Mason notes that the next version of the movie Iron Man is supposedly going to be in both 3D and IMAX -- again, trying to give people real reasons to actually go out and see the movie as a social experience. It's nice to see the industry recognizing this, though it would be better if the rest of the industry stopped freaking out about piracy and DRM and put more resources into giving people reasons to pay.

Filed Under: 3d, imax, iron man, movies

Movie Theaters Finally Realizing They Need To Compete With, Not Whine About, Home Theaters

from the about-time dept

For the past few years, as home theaters have grown more and more common, we've seen movie theater owners constantly whining that they just can't compete with home theaters. They complain that if studios start releasing DVDs at the same time as theater runs, no one will come. This, of course, shows a profound misunderstanding of their own business -- which is to provide an enjoyable social experience that convinces people to go out. People can eat food at home where it's much cheaper, but most still go out to eat on occasion as well. They do so because it's a social experience and provides something that can be seen as different and better. So while too many theater owners seemed to think they couldn't offer anything better, it appears that a few of the big chains are at least realizing that if home theater screens are getting bigger, so should movie screens. Both AMC and Regal Entertainment are installing a bunch of new IMAX screens, recognizing that the IMAX experience still beats the home theater one. Now, if only these theaters would start improving other aspects of the theater-going experience as well.

Filed Under: imax, movie theaters, social experience
Companies: amc, regal cinemas