Know Your Rights: Your IP and Business Law Playbook
Trademark Tales of Terror: "Friday the 13th" and the Trouble with Jason Voorhees
di Julie King
https://youtu.be/VF-p6aLuaYw In this installment of Trademark Tales of Terror, “Friday the 13th” and the Trouble with Jason Voorhees, we embark on a journey to Camp Crystal Lake, a place cursed by the relentless presence of a silent hockey mask-wearing killer, Jason Voorhees. In the eerie woods of Camp Crystal Lake, Jason Voorhees became the stuff of legends. Armed with a machete and an unyielding thirst for vengeance, he carved his way into the annals of horror history. The "Friday the 13th" franchise brought Jason to life, making him a figure of terror and a cornerstone for the slasher genre. This is another highly successful New Line Cinema horror franchise. Beginning in 1980 on the not so peaceful shores of Camp Crystal Lake, there have been 12 films so far. Of course, there are also novels, comic books, video games, tons of decor, and costume merchandise. Not bad for a film that started with only a cool title and the notion to copy the slasher feel of the original "Halloween" movie. While the movies themselves, along with the TV shows, books, comics, and the character of Jason Voorhees are all covered by copyright law, there are numerous trademarks associated with this brand as well, including the name of the series itself, "Friday the 13th," and the name Jason Voorhees. I couldn't find any registration of the iconic masks worn by Jason as trademarks. That's likely because they would be deemed too generic, and the specific masks are likely covered by copyright registration instead. This is different from Freddy's glove from "A Nightmare on Elm Street," which was registered as a trademark. If something is common, it's going to be hard to register as a trademark. Here, a hockey mask, even a well worn or damaged one, after all hockey can be pretty rough, is a popular Halloween mask, even when not associated with Jason Voorhees. So while the mask, combined with a costume involving a mangled head and a large knife, boiler suit, or other accessories Jason Voorhees or his mother had in the films, would evoke the characters from "Friday the 13th," rather than a hockey player, the mask alone wouldn't do it, so it can't be registered as trademark. The studio has to rely instead on copyright alone to enforce its intellectual property rights to the mask. Similarly, "Camp Crystal Lake" isn't registered as a trademark, as it's also a little too generic to serve as a brand identifier. On its own, given the plethora of similar identical names for real camps, how can a common term like "Friday the 13th" be trademarked then? That's because it's trademarked only in connection with certain goods and services, like films, toys, and other franchise related merchandise for which the term is not a common phrase. The owners have no rights to use that term exclusively in any other context. This film franchise has been the source of a great deal of copyright litigation over who has the rights to the character of Jason Voorhees and in what form. Because Jason didn't don the famous mask until the third movie, Producers Horror Incorporated can use the masked character without the consent of the screenwriter of the first movie, who only has rights regarding the first movie and Jason's mother as the killer, not Jason as the killer. You'll recall Jason's brief appearance was as a child in the dream sequence, so he didn't actually kill anyone or have any kind of covering on his gross head. Technicalities are the thing lawsuit nightmares are made of. Now that that big copyright lawsuit has been resolved, we can look forward to some new projects like a prequel TV series and yet another reboot. The legend of Jason Voorhees continues to terrorize horror fans. He's al
https://youtu.be/xLhf_Xejy8k Welcome to the inaugural post of Trademark Tales of Terror. In this Halloween-season post we dive into the dark and chilling world of “A Nightmare on Elm Street.” Join me as we explore the trademark legacy of one of horror, cinema's most iconic figures, Freddy Krueger. In the gloomy realm of nightmares, the bladed-glove-wielding scarred slasher, Freddy Krueger, made his debut. He terrorized Elm Street youth, haunting their dreams and leaving a tale of spine-chilling movies in his wake. With his fedora and his sinister grin, Freddie became an enduring symbol of fear. The “A Nightmare on Elm Street” movies have been a huge success for New Line Cinema and its successors, including Warner Brothers. Not only have the nine movies in the franchise raked in millions of dollars, starting with the original 1984 film, but there have been an anthology television series in 1988 called “Freddy's Nightmares,” novels based on the films, comic book series, a documentary about film series and its legacy, video games, and a slew of officially licensed merchandise, including posters, t-shirts, figures, costumes, glassware, and of course, bedding for all your sweet dreams. The movies themselves, along with the TV shows, books, comics, and the character Freddy Krueger are all covered by copyright law. There are numerous trademarks associated with this brand as well, including the name of the series itself, “Nightmare on Elm Street,” the name, Freddy Krueger, the name Freddy by itself (but just for toys, you can still name your kids Freddy, and “Five Nights at Freddy’s” is okay as a movie title), and of course the image of the spiked glove Freddy wears. While an image like the spiked glove is usually covered by copyright, when it becomes a brand identifier as this glove has, it can be registered as a trademark. In 1994, New Line sued Russ Barry and Company over Russ’ toy, the “Ghostly Gasher,” a toy consisting of a glove with knife blades coming out of the fingertips, claiming both copyright and trademark infringement. In a nightmare for Russ, New Line won regarding copyright damages, but to New Line's horror, they lost the trademark part of the case. The folks at Russ claimed they didn't know the bladed glove was worn by Freddy Krueger in the “Nightmare on Elm Street” movies (REALLY?!?!). Recovery of damages for trademark infringement requires evidence of actual confusion or willful deception or bad faith on the part of the alleged infringer. It's really hard to believe that Russ decision-makers didn't know that Freddy had a glove with knife-like fingers sticking out of it, but as there wasn't solid proof they did know, they escaped owing damages for trademark infringement. The horror for the current trademark owners continues, as countless vendors and misguided individuals create and sell merchandise featuring the franchise names, characters, and other protected intellectual property without permission. The owners do license the copyright and trademarks to plenty of vendors, because that allows them to get a cut of sales, and that is no small chunk of change, especially this time of year. Licensing also allows the owners to control what kinds of goods and services the trademarks are associated with and how they're used. For example, the owners probably don't want Freddy showing up on diapers. Sales of unlicensed merchandise take away that control and don't provide any revenue for the rights holders, but that's not the only scary part. The specter of the owners finding out about the unlicensed merchandise and taking legal action against the bootleg vendors is truly the stuff of nightmares for those vendors. The “Nightmare on Elm Street” franchise has left a lasting mark on the horror genre, and Freddy Krueger's l