Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Bit Parts

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.”

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance 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
Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It Image

Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?

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.

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.

A Lawyer's System for Active Reading Image

Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.

Protecting Innovation in the Cyber World from Patent Trolls Image

With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.