Canadian Folk Band Wants Harry Potter DVDs, CDs, Games Destroyed Due To Similar Name
from the oh-come-on dept
With all the attention the Streisand Effect is getting these days, don't be surprised when we see more people trying to use it on purpose to their own advantage. Witness the story sent in by reader Jon R, where a Canadian folk singing group is suing Warner Bros. Studios, demanding that all Harry Potter DVDs, CDs and video games that mentioned "The Weird Sisters" be destroyed. Why? Because the folk group has a name similar, but not the same as "The Weird Sisters." It seems like such a blatant "lawsuit for the sake of publicity" that we won't even bother to name the actual folk group's name. The band isn't suggesting that the Harry Potter stories are riding on its fame (which would be the normal trademark claim), but is saying that because they're such an unknown act, people will think they ripped the name off from Harry Potter: "Consumers will assume that the smaller and less famous Canadian band is trying to take advantage of the Harry Potter fame." Actually, my guess is that they'll think that a lot more for this bogus lawsuit than for having a different, but similar, name. Warner Bros., for its part, notes that the folk group filed a similar suit before, and was told to pay $140,000, which it has not.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Wyrd Sisters by Le Blue Dude on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 6:16am
The norns, controllers of fate, and part of mythology are sometimes called the wyrd sisters. Clearly potter and the band drew from the same source. Last I checked, the norns and the Moirae Atropos, Clotho and Lachesis were both combined by pop mythology as the wyrd sisters. (wyrd means fate)
Clearly the Canadian band is a bunch of jackasses.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Too Wyrd! by Scott on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 7:02am
Perhaps they should also try to sue author Terry Pratchett for his almost 20-year-old book entitled, "Wyrd Sisters."
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Wyrd Sisters by Ben Fulton on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 7:02am
One also wonders if Terry Pratchett could sue the band out of existence based on his book of that same name, which probably predates the band!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Overcast on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 7:05am
The "Streisand Effect" does not Equal GOOD attention.
There's no way I'd buy their music just because of this. Lil' whiners.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
JKR prolly knew this by Hellsvilla on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 7:07am
JKR prolly knew the band existed (she did do her homework in other similiar matters) and thusly used a slightly different name in the books.
So even when you do your due diligence, it can come back to haunt you.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Yep by PaulT on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 7:07am
To those guys above who had the same idea as me, quick and dirty wiki research shows that Pratchett should counter-sue
The band formed in 1991
The book was published in 1988
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: JKR prolly knew this by PaulT on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 7:08am
You're kidding, right? "The Weird Sisters" is such an unthinkably unusual name that Rowling couldn't have thought of it independently?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: by Chronno S. Trigger on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 7:13am
Far too many people believe (erroneously) the adage "Any publicity is good publicity".
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
More like The Scary Sisters! by Scott on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 7:19am
Checked out their website.
From the photo, looks more like The Scary Sisters. Yikes!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Martin Edic on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 7:20am
This suit is nothing more than PR linkbait. I'd like to see Techdirt do some pieces on how people are using IP laws to promote themselves...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Err... Shakespeare anyone? by Mat on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 7:27am
It was Shakespeare who popularised the term 'Weird Sisters' in Macbeth - it's the name for the three witches. And even that wasn't original.
So please no more comments about Rowling or Pratchett - you're about 500 years too late...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Err... Shakespeare anyone? by Hellsvilla on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 7:32am
No kidding? What part made you believe anyone is not taking this into account?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Err... Shakespeare anyone? by Scott on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 7:35am
We all know it was Shakespeare who originated the "weird sisters" but, it was Pratchett who coined the phrase "The Wyrd Sisters." Since the band is called "The Wyrd Sisters," I think Prachett is a little more relevant than Shakespeare.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Err... Shakespeare anyone? by Anonymous Coward on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 7:41am
More relevant that Shakespeare?!? How dare you sir. Once I get my cod piece back on I shall slap your face with my glove and demand satisfaction. Shakespeare irrelevant... indeed.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Shake, spear, kick in the rear by Anonymous Coward on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 7:55am
Shakespeare wrote better prose accidentally whilst wiping his bottom with a dung rag than all the novels of Pratchett and Rowling combined, sir!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
suing warner bros by iPhone on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 8:20am
Guess they're not selling out their shows and very few cd's. Gotta pay the rent somehow
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by nipseyrussell on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 8:52am
how does one write accidently while wiping their bum???
also - cod piece jokes are always funny!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Ben Fulton on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 9:04am
Shakespeare was foolish enough to let his copyright expire. If only he'd sold it to Disney...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Shake, spear, kick in the rear by sigh on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 9:08am
Good for him. He still wrote about weird sisters, not the Wyrd Sisters.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
what's left? by demonr6 on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 9:15am
No really.. when you think of it all of the unique and imaginative names have been long since taken so where do you draw the line? Someone is bound to come up with a name of a band, movie, book etc that has been used up at some point in time so freaking deal with it. If it is something absolutely blatant like you wanting to name your kid themed playground "Disney World" then for crap sake you should be kicked in the nuts and slapped with a lawsuit but what these retards are bringing up a lawsuit for is absurd. Change your name to the Flaming RoachCocks and be unique. Wait, that name was taken already. Nevermind.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Keith on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 9:16am
These same fools tried to sue Warner Brothers Entertainment Canada, Warner Brothers Records, Pulp’s Jarvis Cocker and Radiohead’s Phil Selway and Jonny Greenwood over the same issue a few years ago:
http://www.ateaseweb.com/2005/10/01/canadian-folk-group-sues-jonny-phils-wyrd-sisters/
No t sure how that all ended, but I know a judge blocked their attempt to keep the movie out of distribution:
http://www.ateaseweb.com/2005/11/05/judge-dismisses-wyrd-sisters-motion-to-block-hp -film/
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 10:50am
wtf! is wrong with people now? The band probaly sucks anyway. Beyotch!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 10:52am
you whore!!! (funny though)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Too Wyrd! by Anonymous Coward on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 10:54am
ok! :)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Too Wyrd! by Anonymous Coward on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 10:56am
dahm it stop that, crap!, again
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 10:59am
wtf! is wrong with people now? The band probaly sucks anyway. Beyotch!
can i sue for no apperant reason too!? :)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Crockbender on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 4:57pm
The Wyrd's are weird. I think I shall avoid them, their music, their website, and any further articles about them.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Err... Shakespeare anyone? by Anonymous Coward on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 5:09pm
Weird was spelled Wyrd back then
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Shake, spear, kick in the rear by Anonymous Coward on Mar 4th, 2008 @ 5:10pm
He wrote wyrd. Read the orriginal, if you can stand the spelling :-p
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: JKR prolly knew this by John Duncan Yoyo on Mar 5th, 2008 @ 12:25am
No Rowling borrowed Wyrd Sisters from Pratchett who may have lifted it from Shakespeare. The Bacon estate should sue.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Chrisropher Tatman on Mar 5th, 2008 @ 11:03am
harry potter bin around since 1990
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment