Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

The Intellectual Property StrategistKickerSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

'Buckyballs' Lawsuit May Limit Use of Celebrity Name

By Kyle-Beth Hilfer
December 21, 2012

“Buckyballs” magnetic toys have been in the news because of the manufacturer's public battle with the Consumer Products Safety Commission (“CPSC”). This past summer, the CPSC sought to ban the sale of the magnetic balls in the United States because of their misuse and threat to children who ingest the toy. Recently, the manufacturer Maxfield & Oberton Holdings, LLC faced another legal setback. In November 2012, a California federal district court denied its motion to dismiss the lawsuit of the Estate of Buckminster Fuller. If the Estate eventually prevails, the emerging precedent could strengthen the rights of a celebrity trying to protect use of his personal name.

The plaintiff in the case of The Estate of Buckminster Fuller v. Maxfield & Oberton Holdings, LLC, U.S. District Court Northern District of California, San Jose Division, Case No.: 5:12-CV-02570-LHK, 11/05/12 Order denying motion to dismiss, is the successor in interest to the rights of Richard Buckminster Fuller, the famous scientist who discovered the Carbon-50 molecule named after him as “Buckminsterfullerene” or “Buckyball.” Plaintiff controls rights to several variations of Fuller's name, including “Bucky Fuller.” The Defendant manufactures and sells the popular desk toy named “Buckyballs” and several other toys that incorporate the “Bucky” prefix, such as “Buckycubes” and “BuckyBlocks.” Throughout Defendant's literature, it refers to Fuller and his discovery. In 2011, Plaintiff had granted Defendant a limited license to use Fuller's name and likeness in connection with a specific limited edition of its “Buckyball” toy.

This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

Compliance Officers: Recent Regulatory Guidance and Enforcement Actions and Mitigating the Risk of Personal Liability Image

This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.