google logo variants.jpg
Johnson Banks: “All Change” (On ‘dynamic’ that is to say multiple brand identities):
“The age of the static brand is coming to an end. Organisations, companies, institutions, even charities are realizing that having identity schemes that ‘flex’ and adapt to circumstances are more appropriate in the multi-channel, multi-lingual world that brands now inhabit.”
Discussion of scope of protection for ‘dynamic’ brand here.

esquire jolie 07.jpg
A while back the sex columnist from Esquire called me up to ask whether, in theory, a new sexual position could be protected. Well, let’s see. A physical position probably couldn’t be patented, although devices to enable the position could be. The idea of a new position couldn’t be copyrighted, but, viewing a sexual position as analogous to choreography or yoga, some fixation of the position, such as a book of diagrams, or a video, could be. As for trademark, the inventor could name the position and then merchandise it.
The column is out now in the July issue of Esquire (no online version available – I’ll email it to you). Oddly, the column didn’t contain the comprehensive discussion of intellectual property law that I thought was warranted, opting instead for an illustration of naked people. Well, whatever turns you on.

This is the link to Hillary Clinton’s Soprano parody video. It starts out well with a shot of a diner in Mt. Kisco near my old office. It then proceeds to refer to the final scene of the Sopranos (complete with cameo by Vince Curatola, the actor who played Johnny Sack), with Journey’s ‘Don’t Stop Believing’ playing through-out. I tried to have an argument with my M&S colleague Paul Fakler but couldn’t, as we both agree as to the analysis.
Assuming that there is no authorization (and we have no information one way or the other on that point), the Sopranos reference is most likely permissible and the use of the Journey song is not. Without doing a shot by shot analysis, it seems that the video only borrows common ideas also used by the Sopranos finale (which itself borrowed bits from, among others, the Godfather). The idea of a razor cut ending instead of an anticipated event (in this, case the announcement of the winning song) is the same; the expression is different.
As for the Journey song, again, bearing in mind that we don’t know if permission was granted, we can’t think of a reason why a sync license wouldn’t be required. No fair use factors come reasily to mind as to why this would be a fair use.

I’m not ignoring commenting on AVVO, the numerical lawyer rating service that is the subject of lawsuits – it’s just that if to answer a question such as whether I thought AVVO was good or not, I was required to analyze numerous factors, and I didn’t have the time to competently evaluate all, or even a significant majority of those factors, then to offer an opinion prior to completing the analysis would certainly be premature, and perhaps even negligent (assuming that I had even chosen the relevant factors in the first place). It certainly wouldn’t speak well of my opinion at all.