October 03, 2009
Capitalism in Action
Young capitalist Jimmy Winkelmann saw through the irony of thousands of couch potatoes sporting North Face gear, calling them all "sheep", and decided to start his own company, The South Butt, to poke fun at them. Now The North Face is telling Winkelmann to cease and desist and threatening to sue for trademark infringement. Winkelmann is being represented by attorney Albert Watkins for "a really good bottle of burgundy".
What's ironic about this case and what The North Face doesn't realize (or maybe they do and are just blinded by their own impressions of righteousness) is that by threatening to sue Winkelmann they've unleashed a firestorm of positive media coverage for the boy.
Good luck to you, Jimmy. I'm running over to TheSouthButtWeb.com right now and purchasing my own South Butt t-shirt.
Posted by MarkGriswold at October 03, 2009
05:09 AM | Email This
1. I think The North Face has a case. The word "the" can be clearly seen in both names.
2. If he were really serious about marketing to the couch potatoes he would carry larger sizes.
I do think he will win. After all parodies are protected under free speech.
3. Vince, not with trademarks they aren't. Parody is generally considered safe for copyright cases, but copyrights and trademarks are two very different things.
That said, I don't see how this could be considered infringing on North Face's trademark, because it's not being passed off as being a part of North Face, and no one would ever confuse the two.
Methinks North Face shot itself in the foot with this one.
4. You know what, having now actually gone over to the site and seeing the stuff... I think they might actually have a possible case. The logos are similar enough, and at first glance those fleeces could pass off as North Face fleeces.
5. The North Face has a responsibility to protect their trademark or they can lose it. They aren't trying to be the bad guys. Hopefully they can come to an agreement where North Face and South Butt can coexist peacefully.
6. Many years ago, Jockey (tm)went after the Greenlake running store Super Jock 'n Jill. Fortunately, Jockey lost.
7. Two of the three words are different, different orientation of the arches (upper right for North Face, lower left for South Butt), different number of arches, and the logos are put on opposite sides of clothing.
There really is no similarity between the two logos, IMHO...
8. I think NF has a case. But that's just me.
9. Buy all the T-shirts you want because when the TSB loses he will owe North Face some $$$
10. I think North Face has a case. It's not the wording alone, but the remarkable resemblance of the logo in appearance clearly shows the intention to ride on North Face's market recognition. If this was done in a different color with different logo, say shape of two butt chicks, would have rendered this case moot, but there is no escaping the similarity in appearance.
11. I can't see this passing as 'parody'. Taking trademark, essentially inverting it horizontally, and changing a word or two with the intention of making a profit is what's going to sink him. If he'd merely made one for himself? Probably not a problem.
12. I can't see this passing as 'parody'. Taking trademark, essentially inverting it horizontally, and changing a word or two with the intention of making a profit is what's going to sink him. If he'd merely made one for himself? Probably not a problem.
13. I can't see this passing as 'parody'. Taking trademark, essentially inverting it horizontally, and changing a word or two with the intention of making a profit is what's going to sink him. If he'd merely made one for himself? Probably not a problem.
14. I can't see this passing as 'parody'. Taking trademark, essentially inverting it horizontally, and changing a word or two with the intention of making a profit is what's going to sink him. If he'd merely made one for himself? Probably not a problem.
15. I can't see this passing as 'parody'. Taking trademark, essentially inverting it horizontally, and changing a word or two with the intention of making a profit is what's going to sink him. If he'd merely made one for himself? Probably not a problem.
16. I can't see this passing as 'parody'. Taking trademark, essentially inverting it horizontally, and changing a word or two with the intention of making a profit is what's going to sink him. If he'd merely made one for himself? Probably not a problem.
17. I can't see this passing as 'parody'. Taking trademark, essentially inverting it horizontally, and changing a word or two with the intention of making a profit is what's going to sink him. If he'd merely made one for himself? Probably not a problem.
18. I can't see this passing as 'parody'. Taking trademark, essentially inverting it horizontally, and changing a word or two with the intention of making a profit is what's going to sink him. If he'd merely made one for himself? Probably not a problem.
19. Ugh. I am so sorry. And we have no way to delete our own double (or quadruple) posts.
20. There is no way that any conusmer would be confused and buy TSB when there intention was to buy TNF. It would appear that Jimmy simply was offering his buddies an alternative. Regardless of the outcome this story has brought a smile to me and millions of others!
21. There is no way that any conusmer would be confused and buy TSB when their intention was to buy TNF. It would appear that Jimmy simply was offering his buddies an alternative. Regardless of the outcome this story has brought a smile to me and millions of others!
22. I don't know Louis... if he's only selling it on his website, then yeah, it's hard to confuse them since you have to know about the site to go there, so it's reasonable to assume that if you know to go to his site, then you know it's a joke. But if he were selling this in a retail shop with other non-gag stuff... then someone might purchase this thinking that it's North Face stuff since the cloths and logo bear more than a passing resemblance to the real thing, and the purchaser might not be aware of the "South Butt" brand and thus not feel the need to inspect the logo more carefully to check to see if it's North Face.
23. Now if North Face meets South Butt does it result in a smothered crevasse'? Obviously this is stated "tongue in cheek".
24. Having been involved in trademarks and patents for the last 12 years, The North Face doesn't have a case. What will happen is the defense attorney will show the two logos and ask "would you think these two logos are close enough you cannot tell them apart"?
And remember, the words are part of the logo. Would an average person who is familiar with "The North Face" be confused for "The South Butt"? The phrase is quite plain and easy to read. The only thing in common is the most common article in the English language, "the" which cannot be trademarked or copyrighted on its own.
I don't think anyone would confuse the phrases "The North Face" with "The South Butt". The North Face doesn't have to worry about brand dilution from this guy.
25. Thank you, Smokie, for putting things in perspective! LOL!
26. The intent of The South Butt is to play off the established name and trademark of The North Face for financial gain. However, the logo design is not structured in a way that a successful lawsuit for trademark infringement can be made and The North Face knows it. The North Face's threat of a lawsuit is merely a Scare Tactic against a young entrepreneur with the hope that he would cut and run. I feel that The North Face has no intention of proceeding with the lawsuit. Well, The South Butt did not cut and run and the threat of a lawsuit has served to increase The South Butt's business substantially. Such a Deal!
27. I'm in the North Face doesn't have a case camp. There are many more dissimilarities than similarities and I doubt anyone with an IQ above room temperature could ever get the 2 products confused with one another. North face needs to do an about face in order to save face. The kid is getting some great free advertising courtesy of them.