RSS
Twitter
Zazzle Sued Because Twilight Fans Like Making Their Own Merchandise
from the safe-harbors-anyone? dept
It looks like "print-on-demand/create your own t-shirt/mug/mouse pad store" company Zazzle has been sued for infringement by Summit Entertainment, who owns the licensing rights to the oh-so-popular Twilight movies. Apparently, all those excited tweens have been making their own Twilight merchandise. Now, basic common sense would tell you that Zazzle is the tool provider, and not the actual infringer here. But, Summit is claiming trademark violations, and (tragically and inexplicably) the official safe harbors cover things like copyright and defamation, but not trademark (hurray for legal loopholes). The only ones doing the actual infringement are the users, not Zazzle itself, but Zazzle has to hope that a court actually realizes this, and sometimes the courts get very, very confused on these sorts of things.
Reader Comments
(Flattened / Threaded)
But...
...Zazzle didn't just provide a program. They actually print and sell these items. If printing and selling these items would be illegal without the pre-orders, then how do these pre-orders change that?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: But...
Zazzle isn't selling Twilight items, they're selling users the ability to create their own merchandise - Twilight doesn't actually have anything to do with Zazzle's business model. And like Jesse, I can't fathom how users are infringing on the trademark here, either. They're just writing "Twilight" on a t-shirt or something, they're selling them; if that was infringement, then we have a whole boatload of free speech issues here.
It appears rather clear to me that there is no legitimate trademark claim here...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: But...
Correction: ...They're just writing "Twilight" on a t-shirt or something, they're not selling them; if that was infringement...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: But...
Because they did not design the shirts. This would be like suing HP because someone used one of their printers to print a copyrighted work. Zazzle isn't making money off of selling designs; they're making money off of giving others the possibility to make any kind of T-shirt they want.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: But...
"...Zazzle didn't just provide a program. They actually print and sell these items."
Yeah, and if I owned a shop I'd sell you a t-shirt with "Rose M. Welch" printed on it. If "Rose M. Welch" turns out to be copyrighted by some company or other, it should be on your ass. Not mine.
Welcome to the ownership society. Have you staked your claim yet?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
So you if you can make a website/sign that says xyz trademark sucks, why can't you make a mug that says: "I love twilight"
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
>why can't you make a mug that says: "I love twilight"
Where is the money in that?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Cafepress part of this?
Thats funny--I have never seen Twilight but I figured they "got it" since they openly allow (and even encourage) users in Zazzle's competitor, Cafepress, to make Twilight-themed T-shirts. I wonder if Cafepress is involved somehow.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
In Other News
I make a collage of Harry Potter images, glued to a piece of cardstock paper using Elmer's Glue. Elmer sued by JK Rowlings.
My daughter buys art supplies from the retailer Michael's, and makes her own Wonder Woman Halloween costume. Michael's sued by Silver Pictures.
A guy stores shared Metallica music on an HP hard drive, plays it on his HP computer, burns a new CD copy in his HP burner, prints a CD page on his HP printer. HP sued by Metallica.
A policeman arrives at the scene of a reported bank robbery. A masked man takes a bag of money from the teller. Turns out it's not a robber, just a guy making a withdrawal. So the policeman shoots the bank manager.
All equally logical. As in, not very.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: In Other News
>My daughter buys art supplies from the retailer Michael's,
>and makes her own Wonder Woman Halloween costume. Michael's
>sued by Silver Pictures.
I think Warner Brothers/DC Comics would be the ones with standing. They don't go after costumers at cons so I think she is safe.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: In Other News
I actually dug into this for that quick post, and found that a random guy, William Moulton Marston created Wonder Woman, and the estate may still own the rights. I figured it would be funnier and punchier if I just mentioned the studio working on the movie.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: In Other News
Brillant.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: In Other News
Those things aren't equal at all. Those involve purchasing materials and doing it yourself. This is placing an order for them to do it. So... They are doing it. If Zazzle sent out a printer, ink, and a T-shirt, then it would be equitable.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: In Other News
So you think some human at Zazzle lovingly accepts the job order, does a full check to make sure no content is copyright, checking all sources of copyright images, animations, words, etc, runs it past the lawyers for sign-off, hand-holds it personally through the production process, and ships it off?
Or do you suppose it's machine-produced with maybe 20 seconds of a minumum-wage associate feeding the blank shirt into the machine?
Zazzle doesn't design the t-shirt, and aren't responsible for the design. Zazzle itself is just a tool, as is an HP printer
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Derek Kerton, I like where you are headed.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Suing over free advertising?
Silly lawyers, suing because Zazzle has enabled fans to provide free advertising and marketing. Why are entertainment companies so hell bent on pissing off fans?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
re: Suing over free advertising?
I'm telling ya--go to Cafepress.com and you'll see that user-generated Twilight shirts are a large part of their current business model. I'll bet that this is a large part of this because whether or not it is genuine copyright infringement, that is probably the most threatened aspect of the shirts appearing on Zazzle.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Licensing...
It was my understanding that Zazzle gives you a small cut of every sale of any item that you create that someone else buys. So, if you create a mug of XYZ and someone else wants the same mug you get your 10 cents sort of thing.
Interestingly, I believe some people actually make a lot of money doing this - to the tune of 100k if my source is right.
I think this is probably where the grey line is. You can create it for your own use is fine ??? but you start making money off it and it involves trademark type material, then the line isn't so clear.
Freedom
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Licensing...
That...makes it very interesting. Zazzle just provided the tool to sell user-created content and didn't have any creative discretion, so they aren't liable for trademark infringement. The users don't actually sell any of the items they designed, so they can't be liable.
It seems to me that there still shouldn't be any trademark infringement because buyers should recognize if they're on the site that these are not official Twilight merchandise, which eliminates the need for trademark protection. However, perhaps some feature such as the "official" seal on twitter to indicate legitimate items would end any doubt--I suppose I could accept a law that required something of the sort in exceptions like this.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
So much money to be made here
I'm going to create one of those "alphabet" banners for kindergarden then sue anyone using those letters
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Disturbing
I find the whole "Twilight" phenomena very disturbing. I mean seriously, Vampires that aren't killed by sunlight that glitter? Really?
Can we all agree to be outraged about the movie at least. Vampires should only come out at night, be bad-ass-motherfuckers, and most certainly NEVER, EVER, EVER-EVER-EVER, freaking glitter.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
HEAR HEAR!!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Silly lawyers, suing because Zazzle has enabled fans to provide free advertising and marketing.
Fuck your "free advertising and marketing". I thought artists were supposed to become expert merchandisers? Now you think they should allow the merchandise to be pirated too?
Oh Techdirt...
lol
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Hint: There will always be a market for official merchandise over random images shoved onto t-shirts by fans.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re:
Hint: There will always be a market for official merchandise over random images shoved onto t-shirts by fans.
Not if anyone can replicate the "official" merchandise without fear of the law.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re:
You've never heard of collector's items? Official merchandise will always have more value than a unofficial reproduction.
This is especially true in the fashion industry. You'll find plenty of people who prefer the more expensive originals than the off brand knock-offs.(even when the materials are of the same quality)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment