Secret Agent: IP Never Dies

Recently, as I was running an errand before work, I happened to notice an establishment called the 007 Barbershop.

Now, aside from thinking about some of the silliness that is related to giving men's salons names that evoke a certain kind of "manliness", I started to think about... the IP. Yes, it is everywhere, did you not see that blog post/dare? The barbershop in question was using a logo that was purposefully similar to the James Bond 007 logo. While slight alterations were made--scissors instead of a gun, etc.--it was still clearly styled after another highly recognizable IP.

This got me thinking. Would it be possible to register this logo or business name as a trademark at any level? How similar are they? Would the contexts be dissimilar enough to successfully claim distinctiveness and avoid likelihood of confusion?

It's hard to say; let's investigate some IP and see what we might determine. I happen to already know a fair bit about James Bone-franchise related IP (what did I say about the occupational hazard?), but here's a brief review of certain properties and ownership for those who may not have that familiarity. 

First of all, most of the James Bond (regarding the British spy originally conceived of and written by Ian Fleming) now belongs to Danjaq S.A., a Swiss corporation (it has holdings in the US as Danjaq LLC). [I am uncertain how the rights have migrated from probably copyrights for novels belonging to Fleming and (likely) his publishers to a Swiss corporation, but it happened, and that's not our focus today.]

Many of the trademark registrations that are related to the James Bond franchise are therefore international extensions from original Swiss filings. And, apparently, the Swiss are much happier to let corporations clump together many different classes of goods and services under one registration. 

One of the registered marks for a James Bond concept

Among the most recognizable properties is the 007 logo, with and without words, each separately registered. Both have a slew of associated goods AND services (really! they're technically both a service mark and trademark at once), including not only the obvious movie entertainment. The logo without words, registration no. 1739332, includes classes 003, 009, 014, 016, 018, 025, 028, 041. The same eight classes are included for the logo including words (James Bond), registration no. 1737876.

Logo with words, in case you forgot who 007 is

Of course, this is just one set of manifestations of the 007 logo. Several more are registered with a similar number of goods and classes. 

Familiar with the gun barrel sequence? If you've been exposed to any James Bond, you likely are. While I didn't find any motion picture marks, as in registrations for the exact sequence that precedes all Bond movies, I did find a couple registrations for the image of the gun barrel sans blood and Bond. Among them are registration nos. 4671991 and 4190845, which both claim motion picture/DVD/movie recordings as either entertainment or product, and one claims a couple other properties like shirts and fragrances. Again, there are more registrations for that same symbol.

Yep, this is trademarked

Quite a few registrations are listed for titles of Bond films. "But Hannah," I know you're saying, "aren't these movies productions from United Artists? Wouldn't they own the rights?" And you are partially correct--UA is the production company behind the James Bond movies. You may also know that I frequently say IP is very complex and one property may seem to be more than one type. This is especially true when it comes to mega-billion, long-running franchises like James Bond. UA's properties mostly reside in the realm of copyright. Without getting too far into that--really, this is about evaluating the ability to register the name of a salon I saw, not just nerding out over James Bond IP!--suffice it to say that a basic search revealed both Danjaq and UA on a LOT of Bond copyrights. 

A movie title mark, registration no. 3686854

The movie title trademarks are for goods and services that are marketed under those names, not for the movies themselves. So quite a few toys, items of apparel, etc. are all marketed using the titles as a mark, not the creative work.

A lot of familiar phrases and concepts are registered, too. For example, "shaken, not stirred" appears a few times.

This one is dead, though

I also was pleased to find the James Bond theme music registered, no. 4065012. I do so enjoy sensory marks! Visit the link, and the click on the Documents tag, and select any item that is an MP4 to view a movie clip, theatrical trailer, or DVD intro scene, all complete with the theme music. I've watched a few today.

Given what I reviewed, I would be reluctant to register the barbershop's name and logo. While I certainly would not confuse it as being one of Danjaq's holdings, that's in no small part because I have so much familiarity with the relevant IP. Might someone else mistake it? Or would Danjaq just take them to court? It's hard to say, but with some of the Danjaq registrations including beauty/styling products, there just too much similarity for it to easily pass.

 

BONUS! For everyone who follows the Instagram Library Cat, here's a fact that isn't shared in those posts: her name is Jimmi Bond, because she wears a tuxedo just like the British secret agent. And I was also originally informed she was a male cat, and called her James Bond for a few minutes before deciding that such a pathetic little scrap of kitten was more of a Jimmy Bond... and then changed the spelling when I got close enough to see she was female.

The famous Library Cat, Jimmi Bond

Flowbee: As Seen on TV (in 1989)

In a recent conversation with my husband, I mentioned that I needed to give some of my plants a "haircut", but I wasn't sure how to accomplish it. He facetiously recommended I use a Flowbee, and I responded with something along the lines of "Duh whuh?"

He proceeded to try to explain the concept of some kind of vacuum cleaner hair cutter device to me, without the aid of visuals, in a rare moment we were both without our phones. Very little was clarified except that it was fairly well known in the 1980s, mostly through TV advertisements. 

Later, once we were again fully plugged in and had phones available, he showed me a few YouTube videos--including this one I can't embed--that made sense of things, including some 80s and 90s hairstyles. Equipped with a better understanding of a Flowbee, I finally got the joke. But my mind was, of course, drawn to speculating on its IP.

The vacuum hair hero; image taken from flowbee.com

Despite my husband's immediate assurances, I wondered if it was patented.

Turns out, the guy behind the Flowbee™ has his IP locked down.

I'm telling you, not even Rice is this careful about international coverage. 

Yes, it also has trademarks, and this is the official specimen on record

Rick Hunts, the inventor of the Flowbee™, obtained his initial patent for "Hair Clipper" in 14 different jurisdictions, likely through this WIPO patent application. The patent was granted in at least 7 of those, including Germany (twice, potentially reflecting the geopolitical status in the 1980s), Australia, Canada, and the European Union. The US Patent for the Hair Clipper, US 4,679,322, was granted in July of 1987... shortly before I was born. 

There are a few other Flowbee™-related patents that were filed and granted later. These, I presume, are for improvements or new accoutrements, judging by the names "Grooming Attachment for Vacuum-Drawn Clippers", "Vacuum-Drawn Hair Clipper", and "Vacuum-Powered Hair Cutting Guide". All were filed within a few years after the initial hair clipper, but seemingly only in the US. Who knew a vacuum-enabled hair clipper could have so many improvements?

Hunts also owns a design patent in the US for the "Vacuum Cleaner Hose Attachment", D311,616. 

Apparently a distinct ornamental design

Today, all of the Flowbee™ patents have expired, so it's possible there are many versions available. 

And, as it turns out, I could have used one adapted for plants, because my pruning was a mess.

Eclipsing the Sun and Moon on Earth

I could look up some IP for anything directly related to the solar eclipse, or maybe even a lunar eclipse, but I've already done that for a display (go look at it), so to keep things fresh, let's look at plant patents.

You know, for plants with lunar or solar eclipse, or just eclipse, in the name. 

That's relevant, right?

Whatever, plant patents are cool, and I feel like I don't get enough opportunities to include them. 

Let's start with the most relevant first:

Heucherella plant named 'Solar Eclipse', PP23,647. Presumably it is named because the pattern of variegation is a lighter green outline of the leaf with an inner darker red, like the corona of the sun showing around the edges of the moon.

It would be more accurate if the variegation was a much darker red

Baptista plant called 'Lunar Eclipse', PP25,875. I don't know exactly what part of this plant is meant to evoke a lunar eclipse, but maybe you can look at the picture and tell me. It's certainly a pretty plant.

What nice flowers.

Veronica plant named 'Total Eclipse', PP18,912. I selected this one as more relevant because we're about to have a total solar eclipse. Or at least some of us are, most of us will have to make do with looking at neat shadows.

Are you a Heather? No, I'm a Veronica.

After that, the other plants are mostly just named 'Eclipse' or some kind of color plus eclipse. I liked these the most:

Hosta plant named 'Eclipse', PP24,625. Like the above baptista, it also has pretty flowers, which I clearly seem to favor over simple leafy plants.

Wheeeeee more flowers

Saintpaulia plant named 'Eclipse', PP10,103. This one has fun floral variegation, which may mean the inspiration for its name is similar to the heucherella above.

The digital discoloration of this photo is why we used to receive paper copies

Blackberry plant named 'Eclipse', PP30,448. No idea where they got eclipse for this one, they're blackberries that look normal and so does the plant. Maybe there's a whole line of astronomical berries?

I love berry season, I should get some blackberries tomorrow

And those are the best eclipsing plant patents! If you're in the area on Monday, April 8th, visit Fondren's eclipse viewing event. I won't be able to make it--it's time for the annual PTRCP Training Seminar.

Royal IP

There's been a lot in the media recently about Kate Middleton, Duchess and Princess of various locations (I could look it up but I don't want internet algorithms deciding I'm interested in royal family gossip). But did you know about Princess Kate IP?

If so, you shouldn't believe it belongs to her. A trademark--specifically a wordmark--was filed for "Princess Kate" in Nov. 2010 by Nieves & Nieves LLC. This New York-based company was seeking to sell various goods (including perfume, fashion accessories, and bedding) with that name, despite no connection to one very famous Princess Kate.

Although the filings denied that there was any implied connection to Kate Middleton, it is almost impossible to hear the phrase Princess Kate and not think of Kate Middleton, wife to Prince William. They're international celebrities and members of one of the few remaining European royal families.

Evidently, trademark examiners of the USPTO felt that was a significant enough issue to make the mark potentially misleading, and that it identified a living person who did not consent to its use. I imagine that Kate Middleton, had she been aware of the mark, would also have objected to its use. 

It's Cambridge, I think I did actually know that

No approval? No live peoples' names!

The final dismissal, after numerous appeals, was made by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board in April of 2014. The company in question also failed to file a required brief within the permitted time window. Perhaps they chose to give up, rather than keep fighting this battle.

You can find all of the relevant files and information on the dead "Princess Kate" mark at this TSDR link. And while it isn't as interesting to conspiracy theorists and scandal rags, I think it's a very interesting IP/trademark case that illustrates an intent to deceive fairly well.

Triple Dog IP Dare

You know, I spend a lot of time thinking about IP, even outside working hours. It's a side effect of not only my position, but this blog. Because I've made a point to investigate aspects of IP that are more likely to apply to an average person's life, or perhaps spark some interest in a person who isn't concerned with the technical side of things, I now find that I can't stop myself from considering IP. After all, who knows when I might be able to pick up a topic that will make for a good blog post, or perhaps lead to some exciting search possibilities?

Unfortunately, that means a lot of people around me have to think about IP more than they might like, too. 

It's a hazard of the occupation, and I'm sure it's not unique to this one, either. 

Recently, it was during one of the involuntary, impromptu, work-unrelated IP moments that I had a small, yet terrifying epiphany.

IP is everywhere and concerns everything in our lives. It can be applied to everything. You cannot escape the presence of IP!

Try me, I dare you. You name it in a comment, and I'll show you some relevant IP. In fact, I triple dog dare you. There's no going back from that.