If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Atlanta Braves suing Pixar over calling their upcoming film "Brave"   (marquee.blogs.cnn.com) divider line 76
    More: Stupid, Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Scottish Highlands, single player  
•       •       •

4836 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 21 Dec 2011 at 2:55 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



76 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-12-21 12:16:37 PM
OR, what actually happened:

This summer, the Atlanta National League Baseball Club (owners of the Atlanta Braves), reportedly filed an objection to Disney's attempts to trademark the title "Brave."
 
2011-12-21 12:24:42 PM
They might have a case if the movie is really really good up until the last five minutes, and then turns into an episode of Whitney.
 
2011-12-21 12:51:14 PM
Wanna know what most people's response to your biatchiness will be?
i232.photobucket.com
 
2011-12-21 12:57:53 PM
If they're worried about movie titles being mistaken for their team, they should have also sued the producers of "Choke."
 
2011-12-21 01:22:17 PM
Don't the Braves have spring training at the Disney sports thingy facility?
 
2011-12-21 01:43:25 PM
This is part of why people don't like lawyers. I understand the need to protect your IP, but nobody is going to confuse or even associate Disney's Brave with an Atlanta Brave. Well, they wouldn't have, except for this news story.

JerseyTim: OR, what actually happened:

This summer, the Atlanta National League Baseball Club (owners of the Atlanta Braves), reportedly filed an objection to Disney's attempts to trademark the title "Brave."


Even if this is the reason, no judge would ever side with Disney over Atlanta from their use of "Brave" in the context of their team or properties. Hell, even if five years from now, Atlanta put out a movie called "Brave," if it was about one of their players/owners/fans etc., nobody would confuse the two.
 
2011-12-21 02:15:16 PM
Meh, some of this trademark crap is kind of stupid anyway. The only winners are attorneys.
 
2011-12-21 02:30:16 PM
Can you actually trademark the name of a film?

Because I know plenty of movies that are not related, but have the same titles.

Drive
Crash
etc...
 
2011-12-21 02:35:38 PM

RodneyToady: This is part of why people don't like lawyers. I understand the need to protect your IP, but nobody is going to confuse or even associate Disney's Brave with an Atlanta Brave. Well, they wouldn't have, except for this news story.

JerseyTim: OR, what actually happened:

This summer, the Atlanta National League Baseball Club (owners of the Atlanta Braves), reportedly filed an objection to Disney's attempts to trademark the title "Brave."

Even if this is the reason, no judge would ever side with Disney over Atlanta from their use of "Brave" in the context of their team or properties. Hell, even if five years from now, Atlanta put out a movie called "Brave," if it was about one of their players/owners/fans etc., nobody would confuse the two.


Nobody would confuse them, after seeing the movie. But seeing just the title? Here, you tell me: "Brave" vs. "Brave". Which one did I use to refer to the Disney Movie? Say you want to order a DVD of Disney's Brave. Which of those two will you put your money on?
Of course, there's not enough information there to know. And without more information, consumers could be confused.

But, nonetheless, the bigger issue is Disney's trademark application. The movie is called "Brave" and it's about a girl who has to learn the meaning of true bravery. There's nothing arbitrary or even suggestive about the word - they're using it literally to mean 'brave'. The application should be denied as merely descriptive.
 
2011-12-21 02:45:44 PM

downstairs: Can you actually trademark the name of a film?


Of course. Any word, title, symbol, color, sound, etc.

Because I know plenty of movies that are not related, but have the same titles.

Drive
Crash
etc...


Ah, but the problem there is that those titles are merely descriptive. You could trademark "Gone with the Wind" for example, but it would be a lot more difficult to trademark just "Gone", unless you could show that when consumers hear "Gone", they think of your movie.
 
2011-12-21 02:48:42 PM

Theaetetus: downstairs: Can you actually trademark the name of a film?

Of course. Any word, title, symbol, color, sound, etc.

Because I know plenty of movies that are not related, but have the same titles.

Drive
Crash
etc...

Ah, but the problem there is that those titles are merely descriptive. You could trademark "Gone with the Wind" for example, but it would be a lot more difficult to trademark just "Gone", unless you could show that when consumers hear "Gone", they think of your movie.


Got it, thanks.

Now... I'll never understand WHY someone would title their movie "Crash" when there was a somewhat popular movie of the same title just a few years before.
 
2011-12-21 02:51:02 PM

downstairs: Now... I'll never understand WHY someone would title their movie "Crash" when there was a somewhat popular movie of the same title just a few years before.


Marketing people are notoriously unimaginative (new window).
 
2011-12-21 03:06:37 PM
Flimsiest trademark dilution case ever.
 
2011-12-21 03:12:47 PM
I guess they'll also have to take Brave out of the dictionary, or change its definition...
 
2011-12-21 03:12:48 PM

Theaetetus: Nobody would confuse them, after seeing the movie. But seeing just the title? Here, you tell me: "Brave" vs. "Brave". Which one did I use to refer to the Disney Movie? Say you want to order a DVD of Disney's Brave. Which of those two will you put your money on?
Of course, there's not enough information there to know. And without more information, consumers could be confused.


i used to get confused when they released two movies about Steve Prefontaine and they didn't even have the same title.
 
2011-12-21 03:14:10 PM
did someone get sued when 'major league' was made?
 
2011-12-21 03:14:34 PM
Disney/Pixar's
Brave

There, I fixed it for you.
 
2011-12-21 03:14:44 PM

Diogenes: Don't the Braves have spring training at the Disney sports thingy facility?


At the ESPN Wide World of Sports complex in the Walt Disney World resort area?

Why yes, I do believe you are correct. Since Disney owns ESPN and their spring training complex, I imagine this may be a bit awkward. Hasn't anybody told the owners of the Braves that little line about biting the hand that feeds them?

If they are successful, I'd love to see the announcers the next time Atlanta plays on ESPN: "Now, folks, look at the owners in that box there. Don't they look like the biggest douches ever? They thought an animated movie could be mistaken for their team, and given the way they play, it turns out they were right!"
 
2011-12-21 03:15:55 PM
Once again Fark misses the big picture. A multi-national super conglomerate which owns both Disney and Atlanta National League Baseball Club is only doing this to set a legal precedent. Once the precedent is set the conglomerate will sue every one who uses the word brave include sing the national anthem. Follow the money, man.
 
2011-12-21 03:20:03 PM
Home of the free and the Disney.
 
2011-12-21 03:20:07 PM
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2011-12-21 03:29:37 PM
Didn't disney also try to copywrite the "Team 6" or whatever seal team took down Bin Laden?
 
2011-12-21 03:31:44 PM
Seems like they're just jealous that more people will watch Brave than will watch the Atlanta Braves over the course of an entire season.
 
2011-12-21 03:35:35 PM
What the Atlanta Braves are missing is the fact that every 5 years or so a group of people complain about the "racist" name of the Braves, Redskins, and/or Indians. If Disney own it, then the whining and lawsuits should all go straight to them.
 
2011-12-21 03:36:43 PM

Andrew Wiggin: did someone get sued when 'major league' was made?


No, they got permission and the movie makers were not trying to "trade mark" major league.
 
2011-12-21 03:37:17 PM

Theaetetus: Nobody would confuse them, after seeing the movie. But seeing just the title? Here, you tell me: "Brave" vs. "Brave". Which one did I use to refer to the Disney Movie? Say you want to order a DVD of Disney's Brave. Which of those two will you put your money on?
Of course, there's not enough information there to know. And without more information, consumers could be confused.


At this point, ordering a DVD typically involves the Internet, which will include other information, including the box art, the company that produced it, etc. I have trouble picturing a scenario in which the typical customer would make that mistake. Even getting the movie in person at a video store would require looking at the title and description. We're rapidly getting to the point at which consumers have at least some responsibility in making informed purchase decisions.

If it was a few years ago, and my wife told me to go to Blockbuster and pick up a copy of Oceans Eleven, I'd be faced with the question of "which one, the new one or the old one." It's my responsibility to make the proper rental by asking my wife which one she meant, and selecting it based on the description on the box. If another movie came out at that time about oceans called "Oceans Eleven" it would still be my responsibility to see which one she meant.
 
2011-12-21 03:38:33 PM

akula: Diogenes: Don't the Braves have spring training at the Disney sports thingy facility?

At the ESPN Wide World of Sports complex in the Walt Disney World resort area?

Why yes, I do believe you are correct. Since Disney owns ESPN and their spring training complex, I imagine this may be a bit awkward. Hasn't anybody told the owners of the Braves that little line about biting the hand that feeds them?

If they are successful, I'd love to see the announcers the next time Atlanta plays on ESPN: "Now, folks, look at the owners in that box there. Don't they look like the biggest douches ever? They thought an animated movie could be mistaken for their team, and given the way they play, it turns out they were right!"


Alternatively ESPN/ could refuse to broadcast any Braves games, give them no media coverage and not even list them in the standings/power rankings.
 
2011-12-21 03:43:07 PM

ogie666: [4.bp.blogspot.com image 400x299]


I met an IT guy who was hired into a position where the 'server room' was a repurposed janitor's closet. There were foot deep tangles of cable and unsupported cables joined in midair. He said, "Whenever I go in there, I look like the Indian from the old polution commercial."
 
2011-12-21 03:52:02 PM
Just title it "This is not Brave (A XXX Parody)"

Everything will work out
 
2011-12-21 04:03:15 PM
I going to copyright every word in the English language and name I can. So if somebody wants to name any type of commercial enterprise they have to come through me.
 
2011-12-21 04:06:58 PM
And the HOOOOOOME of THEEEE [redacted for copyright infringement]!
 
2011-12-21 04:08:36 PM

jake_lex: If they're worried about movie titles being mistaken for their team, they should have also sued the producers of "Choke."


And we're done here.
 
2011-12-21 04:20:44 PM
Anyone that can try to prevent a Pixar film being released is evil.

IT BRINGS ME JOY. YOU ARE DENYING ME JOY, ATLANTA BRAVES.
 
2011-12-21 04:22:42 PM
I preferred the original title of the movie -- The Bear and the Bow.

It's like Pixar has some sort of need to have the shortest, most 'generic' possible titles for its movies. @_@
 
2011-12-21 04:30:21 PM
So two of the biggest douches in the trademark/copyright world, Disney and MLB, are going to go toe to toe? This should be awesome.
 
2011-12-21 04:31:58 PM
In other words, we're looking for a hand-out. You have some extra money, right Pixar?
 
2011-12-21 04:41:50 PM

Felix_T_Cat: ogie666: [4.bp.blogspot.com image 400x299]

I met an IT guy who was hired into a position where the 'server room' was a repurposed janitor's closet. There were foot deep tangles of cable and unsupported cables joined in midair. He said, "Whenever I go in there, I look like the Indian from the old polution commercial."


sounds like my life... anytime i see any pics of like horrible cabling..i laugh cause ive seen a million times worse.
 
2011-12-21 04:42:22 PM

ongbok: I going to copyright every word in the English language and name I can. So if somebody wants to name any type of commercial enterprise they have to come through me.


Just because you've heard "copyrights," "patents," and "trademarks" discussed in connection doesn't mean the three words are interchangeable.
 
2011-12-21 05:05:40 PM
Stupid. They could call the movie, "Stupid."
 
2011-12-21 05:12:14 PM
I'll just leave this here.

Microsoft Patents Ones, Zeroes (new window)
 
2011-12-21 05:20:22 PM

Theaetetus: Nobody would confuse them, after seeing the movie. But seeing just the title? Here, you tell me: "Brave" vs. "Brave". Which one did I use to refer to the Disney Movie?


Considering that no one refers to the team as "Brave", I'm pretty sure that you're not talking about them unless you're having some sort of stroke.
 
2011-12-21 05:34:40 PM
Grumble. They aren't suing. I submitted this two days ago with an ACCURATE headline, almost exact same wording. Stupid tag and everything.

Atlanta Braves organization files trademark dispute against Pixar for naming their next film "Brave"
 
2011-12-21 05:49:32 PM

downstairs: Can you actually trademark the name of a film?

Because I know plenty of movies that are not related, but have the same titles.

Drive
Crash
etc...


Highlander and Highlander II?
 
2011-12-21 05:53:32 PM
As a native american I find it offensive that this movie is called brave ...
that is the white name that you gave to the natives ...

Googled brave and all that came up is the movie.
 
2011-12-21 06:04:47 PM

droosan: I preferred the original title of the movie -- The Bear and the Bow.

It's like Pixar has some sort of need to have the shortest, most 'generic' possible titles for its movies. @_@


I think that trend started back with "Oliver!" Marketeers love that shiat, they don't need to learn to spell as much.
 
2011-12-21 06:07:58 PM

Some 'Splainin' To Do: Theaetetus: Nobody would confuse them, after seeing the movie. But seeing just the title? Here, you tell me: "Brave" vs. "Brave". Which one did I use to refer to the Disney Movie?

Considering that no one refers to the team as "Brave", I'm pretty sure that you're not talking about them unless you're having some sort of stroke.


Thank you for providing the lesson in why quoting out of context leads to confusion.

Let's see the entire quote, shall we?

Theaetetus: RodneyToady: Hell, even if five years from now, Atlanta put out a movie called "Brave," if it was about one of their players/owners/fans etc., nobody would confuse the two.

Nobody would confuse them, after seeing the movie. But seeing just the title? Here, you tell me: "Brave" vs. "Brave". Which one did I use to refer to the Disney Movie? Say you want to order a DVD of Disney's Brave. Which of those two will you put your money on?
Of course, there's not enough information there to know. And without more information, consumers could be confused.


See? Amazing how it's suddenly clear that we're comparing two movies, both called "Brave".

Context: it means something, even if you have no idea what.
www.tsbmag.com
 
2011-12-21 06:13:08 PM
www.swotti.commedia.tumblr.com


Hmmm.
 
2011-12-21 06:13:53 PM

jake_lex: If they're worried about movie titles being mistaken for their team, they should have also sued the producers of "Choke."


lol

/Cards fan
//Thanks for the memories, Atlanta
 
2011-12-21 06:21:57 PM
i41.photobucket.com
 
2011-12-21 06:31:57 PM
The Chicago Fire should trademark the word Fire and sue any and everyone that uses it.
 
Displayed 50 of 76 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report