Via CRN.COM, a report that SCO will pay the Boies Schiller firm (the other law firm around here) approximately $9 million ($1 million in cash and stock valued at about $7.9 million) for its representation in the Linux dispute against IBM.

UPDATE: An article from Forbes.com indicating that on top of the $9 million, the Boies firm has some type of option to receive 20% of SCO in case of a sale of the company.  The CEO of SCO points out that SCO’s market cap has increased $187m since it retained the Boies firm.

Front page article in today’s Wall Street Journal on rivalry licensing, the practice by which Universities allow their sports team mascots to be seen defeated in some way by mascots of rival Universities (for a fee).  Depicted here, the Auburn Tiger strangling the Alabama elephant and vice versa.  One argument for allowing the practice is that if they don’t allow the rivalry merchandise, the fans will buy unlicensed (and more graphic) rivalry merchandise.

Question for discussion: consider various rationales for prohibiting tarnishment, such as those discussed in the John Deere case.  Now consider this practice. 

More on tarnishment here.  Your favorite team defeating its rival courtesy of The Memory Company (makers of the figurines above) here.

‘K Street’ is an HBO drama in which political consultants (and real-life husband and wife) James Carville and Mary Matalin play ‘slightly fictionalized’ versions of themselves.  The show trades on verisimilitude – Carville and Matalin interact with real politicians (playing themselves) and refer to real events that occured only weeks before air-date.  In the most widely reported ‘bit,’ Carville is hired to prep Governor Dean for a debate and feeds him a joke, a joke that Dean used in that debate in real life.  According to the NY Times, the taping of that episode of K Street was in fact the source of the joke (and the ‘dramatized’ debate prep was ‘real’ debate prep).

In a recent episode, Carville is seen talking to (an unseen and unheard) Matt Drudge over the phone and essentially accuses Drudge of libeling Matalin, by falsely claiming that she was the “CIA Operative” leak.  A screen shot of The Drudge Report is depicted.  Now, in real life, Drudge is reportedly contemplating legal action.

‘Pure’ news shows and ‘pure’ entertainment shows have differing types of protections against IP and Personality/Privacy/Libel claims.  This FindLaw column argues that by attempting to straddle the line between news and entertainment, K Street may have lost both sets of protection.

More commentary on K Street here.

 

If you clear copyrighted materials for a living then you may wish to read this Ninth Circuit case that applies the fair use test to various bits and pieces relating to Elvis (such as his appearance on the Ed Sullivan Show) that were used in a documentary.  Interesting dissent.

Elvis Presley Enterprises, et. al. v. Passport Video, No. 02-57011 (9th Cir. Nov. 6, 2003).

While I have no quarrel with Elvis’ version of ‘Hound Dog,’ I prefer that of Big Mama Thornton, recorded in 1953, written by Leiber and Stoller (who were also plaintiffs herein).

The band ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT (I have their 1992 CD with “Tennessee” on it), has sued Fox TV, producer of the situation comedy ARRESTED DEVLOPMENT for trademark infringement.

The band’s founder issued a statement that “Fox has no more right to use ‘Arrested Development’ for its show than a band would have to name itself after one of Fox’s sitcoms.”

Some of you may recall that in the early 90’s, Fox’ sitcom IN LIVING COLOR (the big break for the Wayans brothers and Jim Carrey) was sued by the band LIVING COLOUR.

Trademarks often start life as the surnames for talented individuals, but to become perennial luxury trademarks, such as TIFFANY, CHANEL, CARTIER, or VUITTON, the trademark owner must find a succession of talented individuals to maintain the quality that customers come to expect.  This week Gucci was affected by the news that star designer Tom Ford was leaving.  Articles here in the Times and Vogue, about the challenge in maintaining cachet when the reputation of a mark is dependent upon a ‘star.’

The NY Times (free registration required) today reported on a surge in forged counterfeit coupons  The surge is attributable in part to the distribution of coupons over the Internet.  As a result, retailers are declining to honor coupons that appear to have been created on copiers or printers. Consumer marketing consultant and syndicated columnist Martin Sloane cautions that the most-often forged type of coupons is the free product coupon which tends not to be distributed over the Internet, as opposed to the ‘cents-off’ coupon, which is distributed over the Internet.  He has written a piece suggesting that refusing to honor all Internet coupons is an over-reaction.

Whatever else it is, a forged coupon is likely trademark infringement.  Sloane advises trademark owners to increase the producion values of their free-product coupons (for example with regard to paper stock and complexity of printed design), and to use watermarking if feasible.

Note: If you were to Google the term “free coupon” then you would encounter yet another Internet sub-culture.

Note: the coupon above (offer here) is depicted to illustrate free coupons and NOT to suggest that this particular coupon has been the object of forgery.  It was selected because it has the cool blinking light thing.