Hard Rock Cafe Trademark Issues: Not Too Happy About Free Publicity

Among the already-raunchy assortment of reality TV shows, the new “Rehab: Party at the Hard Rock Hotel” is pushing the envelope. And the Hard Rock Cafe International, Inc. chain (a different company than Las Vegas Hard Rock Hotel & Casino) doesn’t find the debauchery very entertaining. The Hard Rock Café recently filed a law suit for trademark infringement, trademark dilution, and a variety of other charges regarding the tarnishing of Hard Rock’s image. Hard Rock Hotel is a licensee of the Hard Rock brand. But Hard Rock Café now wants to revoke that license agreement.

The case is No. 1:10cv07244-UA, filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

According to the suit, Hard Rock Café was founded as a celebration of Rock and Roll, good times, and fun. But sexual harassment, violence and crime are not part of its credo. Apparently, TruTV has no plans for canceling, or altering the show, which it hails as a main revenue source. If Hard Rock Café wins, Hard Rock Hotel may have to change its name.

Trademark Infringement Pancakes v. Prayer

The International House of Prayer in Pasadena, along with another house of prayer in Kansas City, MO are attracting some attention – unwanted attention. International House of Pancakes, Inc. (IHOP) filed suit last week for trademark infringement. The case is No. 2:10-cv-06622-SJO, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

This might be a tough case for the pancake people, for a couple of reasons. First is the issue of likelihood of confusion. One organization is a light n’ fluffy breakfast food chain. The other is a small, aesthetically different house of worship. Additionally, the house of prayer in Pasadena actually uses the acronym PIHOP.

The Kansas City organization may have a tougher time, however. According to the complaint, the International House of Prayer “intended to misappropriate the fame and notoriety of the household name IHOP to help promote and make recognizable their religious organization.”

Facebook Trademark Infringement with Teachbook

You can bet social media megalith Facebook is actively scanning the horizon for would be intellectual property infringers. And a few weeks ago it found one. A new online community for teachers, called “Teachbook,” is using a similar networking platform to Facebook. Facebook fears that adding the “–book” suffix to words could create a whole plethora of networking Websites for different societal groups. This, in turn, would dilute the trademark brand.

Facebook sued for cybersquatting, trademark infringement, unfair competition, and trademark dilution in the US District Court for the Northern District of California (Case No. 5:2010cv03654). According to the complaint:

"The 'book' component of the Facebook mark has no descriptive meaning and is arbitrary and highly distinctive in the context of online communities and networking Web sites," the complaint explains. "If others could freely use 'generic plus BOOK' marks for online networking services targeted to that particular generic category of individuals, the suffix 'book' could become a generic term for 'online community/networking services' or 'social networking services.' That would dilute the distinctiveness of the Facebook marks, impairing their ability to function as unique and distinctive identifiers of Facebook's goods and services."

If the past is any indication of how this suit will go, Teachbook will may change its name. A startup online travel company called Placebook recently changed its name to TripTrace after a run-in with Facebook.

Jedi Mind Trademark Dispute with George Lucas

Really good trademarks often become so ingrained in the public mind that they start to take on a life of their own, distinct from the original source. Take the mega-lucrative Star Wars universe, for example. Ever since George Lucas created Star Wars, he’s had his full protecting trademarks like “Jedi,” “Lightsaber,” and even “Droid.”

A new software company calling themselves Jedi Mind, Inc. recently felt the sithlike wrath of George Lucas. They had a new set of headphones which (according to them) could sense brain waves and operate a type of remote control software. The product is called “Master Mind.” Lucas, after sending a few cease and desist letters, filed a trademark infringement suit against Jedi Mind in late August. The case is in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 10-cv-3632.

Probably due to the unfavorable results of past Lucasfilm trademark infringement suits, Jedi Mind promptly changed their name to Mind Technologies, Inc.

Black Sabbath Trademark Dispute: Ozzy vs. Iommi

Last year, Anthony “Tommy” Iommi, long-time guitarist for Black Sabbath, and Ozzy Osbourne got in contact with each other about the band. However, this new Black Sabbath collaboration didn’t involve any music. John “Ozzy” Osbourne sued Iommi for trademark infringement in the U.S. District Court (case no. 1:09-cv-04947)

Apparently, in 2000, Iommi filed a trademark application with the USPTO, to register the Black Sabbath trademark in his name only. Ozzy’s attorneys caught wind of this trademark hijacking, and filed suit in May of last year. According to the suit Ozzy was “the driving force behind the Black Sabbath band.” But Iommi referenced a 1980 agreement (when Ozzy originally left the band) in which Ozzy had surrendered his right to the band name. But in 1997, as part of the “Ozzfest” tour, Black Sabbath had reunited, and played for a couple years. Ozzy claimed this new arrangement superseded the 1980 agreement.

Fortunately, last week Ozzy and Iommi were able to settle the case on good terms. In the new agreement, all four original members of the band (including Geezer Butler and Bill Ward) are to share the trademark equally.

Lady Gaga Protects Her Trademark and Sues Knockoff Merchandisers

Lady Gaga started her 2010 “Monster Ball” tour with a pre-emptive trademark infringement lawsuit. In the past, non-licensed merchandise vendors were tolerated outside large concerts, so long as they didn’t interfere too much with legitimate merchandise sales. But lately, the music industry is taking greater measures to remain profitable. These cases, known as “John Doe” cases (because of the hundreds of “John Doe’s” named as defendants), are becoming more and more frequent.
Lady Gaga’s merchandise company is Bravado International, a division of Universal Music Group. The case was filed under trademark infringement, citing the Lanham Act, unfair competition, and right to publicity (Bravado International Group Merchandising Services Inc., v. John Does 1-100, 1:10-cv-04942-RJH, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York).

The Monster Ball tour is running from July 1 until sometime next April. Bravado International is asking the court to grant permission for law enforcement to confiscate any unauthorized merchandise at any show during the tour.

Mike Tyson Trademark Fight with Michael Landrum for the Title

Most people recognize “Iron Mike” as a long-standing nickname for Mike Tyson. Apparently, there may have been a previous “Iron Mike.” Michael Wayne Landrum, a small-time L.A. boxer is suing Mike Tyson for trademark infringement to the tune of $115,000,000. The complaint was filed June 28, 2010 in the U.S. District Court, Central District of California (case no. 2:2010-cv-04795).

Michael Landrum last boxed in 1985, and included with the complaint is a document from 1996, a letter from the California State Athletic Commission, stating that his “professional ring name was Iron Mike Landrum.” Landrum is suing for Trademark Infringement, and claims to have a registered trademark with the USPTO. It’s number 66404, which doesn’t appear to be a valid trademark number.

Is Mike Tyson still using the phrase "Iron Mike"? Are there any abandonment issues. How will priority be be duked out? All questions that will likely be issues in the litigation.