Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
No Trademark Protection for Dirty Dancing Phrase Used in Financial Services Ad
The U.S. District for the Central District of California declined to vacate a prior court order that dismissed Lions Gate Entertainment's trademark claims in a lawsuit over a financial services advertising campaign that included a phrase similar to a signature line “Nobody puts Baby in a corner” from the film Dirty Dancing. Lions Gate Entertainment Inc. v. TD Ameritrade Services Co., 2:15-05024. TD Ameritrade's ad featured the phrase “Nobody puts your old 401k in a corner” along with visuals that evoked Dirty Dancing. The district court ruled in March 2016 that the claims were preempted by federal copyright law. (Lions Gates' complaint also alleged copyright infringement.) In the recent ruling, District Judge Dean D. Pregerson noted: “Plaintiff claims that Defendants have used a slightly altered version of its trademark in advertising for services that Plaintiff argues will cause consumer confusion as to Plaintiff's endorsement or association with those services … even though the advertisements clearly promote TD's financial services and do not mention Lions Gate or Dirty Dancing, or attempt to pass off products of TD as from Lions Gate or vice versa.” District Judge Pregerson further explained: “Lions Gate alleged trademark violations arising 'not only on the alleged mark, but also on other elements from the film Dirty Dancing,' such as an image of a man lifting a piggy bank over his head, which evoked the movie's signature dance lift, and a reference to the song that played during the movie's closing dance scene with the line, '[b]ecause retirement should be the time of your life.'” The district judge concluded: “Together with these other elements, the use of a variant of Lions Gate's trademark phrase in TD's advertisement served to evoke the 'communications, concepts, or ideas' embodied in the movie Dirty Dancing. As such, the Trademark Claims are barred under Dastar [v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 539 U.S. 23 (2003)], as they do not protect rights in a communicative product that are distinct from those already protected by the Copyright Act.”
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
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.
In recent years, there has been a growing number of dry cleaners claiming to be "organic," "green," or "eco-friendly." While that may be true with respect to some, many dry cleaners continue to use a cleaning method involving the use of a solvent called perchloroethylene, commonly known as perc. And, there seems to be an increasing number of lawsuits stemming from environmental problems associated with historic dry cleaning operations utilizing this chemical.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.