Lucasfilm Sues ‘Lightsaber Academy’ and ‘Jedi Club’ Over Trademark Infringement

I've read through several topics on the Temple with the same concerns as this one, and I will confess they worried me.

So I sat back and meditated on the situation, and this is what I came up with:

As Jedi, we live in the moment. There is no point fretting about if we have broken trademark or copyright laws in the past; nor is there any point in worrying about potential letters from Disney. We must be patient and diligent.

IF a letter is sent, then it is time to act, but we must act calmly, logically and again, with patience. At the end of the day, if Disney for whatever reason want us to change our name or stop using the term "Jedi", then that isn't the end of the world for us. Yes, it could have repercussions in the short term, but in the long term I am certain we will prevail.

I can 100% say however, that I am a Jedi; and no name changing or infringement can stop that or change my beliefs. I am a Jedi and I have the utmost faith in this Temple. May the Force be with it, and within all of us

one thing that gets me, is that they trademarked "lightsaber", a while back several sabersmiths received c&d letters because they either used "lightsaber" in their business name or in reference to their product...most have dropped any mention of the term "lightsaber" and simply use saber instead...now up until disney took over everything lucasfilms/lucasarts was more than happy to leave things be. however disney is a much different, greed inspired beast and seeks to "protect the brand"...it began by shutting down a lightsaber dueling show that was drawing crowds of 12000+ spectators...

it just seems to me that the house of mouse isn't so much interested in "protecting the brand" as it is in protecting their wallets...

on a sort of related note, i've been using uber to get to work, and one of the drivers i met only drives 1 or 2 days a week just to get out of his studio...so i asked him what he did and he said he was a digital artist for disney. then i noticed a starwars wristband, so i asked if he was a fan, turns out he works for disney's lucasarts division...he was one of the digital artists that worked on phasma's armor...he showed me tons of pics from inside skywalker sound and of the ranch.....

steamboat28 wrote: Also, I'm going to say this one more time because it's really, really, really f***all important:
This case is about Trademarks, not Copyrights.

Why do I keep bringing that up, you ask?
Because copyright is the one with Fair Use. There is no fair use with Trademark. Period. Ever. Because it's intended to keep brands identities separated and cut down on competition, there cannot be any kind of fair use in a trademark case. The only times you can get away with using a trademark if you don't own it is if you are discussing it, or if it is a general word that has or had other meanings in general speech.

This -- well, mostly. There actually is something called trademark fair use, as John says stemming from the First Amendment, though it's not the same as the fair use doctrine that everyone knows and that applies to copyrighted material, and likely would not apply in this case because "Jedi" is not a term that has another common use. Questions about our use of the term "the Force," however, may well fall within this type of First Amendment protection.

Your broader argument, though, actually brings up the point I came here to weigh in on. But first . . .

Br. John wrote: We are not using 'Jedi' or 'Jedi Order' under a theory of fair use. We're using it for a purposes not covered under LucasFilms trademarks. I cannot prove it. Nobody can prove that we're violating it either. The only way to do that is have it go to court and have a judgment. Then there's an appeal and that ruling would be the final say unless the Supreme Court took up the matter. Then they would have the final say. Until that day comes anything anyone says is an opinion and a guess. I do not believe we are in violation of any trademarks because what we are and what we do are not covered under any trademark. There are also First Amendment constitutional issues but that can never be tested unless it's brought to court.

Does anyone think LucasFilms attorneys and TPTB (The Powers That Be) don't know about us? It costs a few dollars to send a certified letter to me. My name and address are public record for anyone who want's to file a lawsuit against The Order or send an official letter.

Them not doing so is not permission at all. They could send a letter tomorrow or years from now. But as of the time I write this they have not.

I'm no IP expert, but this is pretty solid. What I would add, though, is that arguably the term "Jedi" has become somewhat genericized by use outside of its original meaning. I'm sure most of us have done a broad Google search for "Jedi" and had all kinds of things come up that have little or nothing to do with Star Wars or its characters: a software language here; a crew of IT pros there; a specific mountain bike; a band or twelve; the Jellyfish Database Initiative; the Jobs and Economic Development Impact models at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory; etc. Forty years of this with only occasional action on Lucasfilm's part is a good thing from our perspective -- not that we're not potentially infringing, but that there ain't that much left to infringe.

What I mean by genericization is that the protections afforded to trademarks erode when the trademark becomes a common word for the thing the trademark describes. Escalator, aspirin, heroin all used to be trademarks but were found to be genericized when they became the customary nouns for the product. In the late 80s and early 90s, corporations used to be much more stringent about preventing this than they seem to be now. I recall a few corps used to take out ads in Writer's Digest warning people not to use their trademarks generically: you have to call it a "photocopy," not a Xerox. Call it a "tissue," not a Kleenex. Johnson & Johnson added a word to their recognizable jingle: "I am stuck on Band-Aid brand . . . " rather than "Band-Aids," because they were concerned that the song could lead a court somewhere, someday, to find that they had encouraged the genericization of their own trademark.

Ultimately, though, I think John has it right. I doubt we are infringing, and I'm not certain there's much left to infringe, and only a court of competent jurisdiction could make that call. So if and when we get the cease-and-desist letter is the time to be concerned about it.

Disclaimer: The above is for discussion and educational purposes only and is not meant to constitute legal advice.

I'm very sorry if it crosses some, but without any further apology from that, whatsoever, my heart and spirit does not fecking care one iota what any "societal organization" says... and being fully aware that to be a *real* Jedi is to understand that it is NOT all about the movies, but rather, that the movies are really, in a "universal-fable" sense, made to be all about us the world over, I AM STILL A JEDI no matter what anyone says, and HAVE BEEN, since *at least* the time I was nine years old, back in 1977, if not before then - and so shall I ever be. Courts may force us to alter our Temple's name, but it matters not, nor will it ever. Even if our reality's version of "the Empire" tries to squash me away, I SHALL REBEL - and the Force shall EVER be with me, and a powerful ally it is - and may the Force be with us all, forever - so mote it be!!

Tarran wrote: I'm very sorry if it crosses some, but without any further apology from that, whatsoever, my heart and spirit does not fecking care one iota what any "societal organization" says... and being fully aware that to be a *real* Jedi is to understand that it is NOT all about the movies, but rather, that the movies are really, in a "universal-fable" sense, made to be all about us the world over, I AM STILL A JEDI no matter what anyone says, and HAVE BEEN, since *at least* the time I was nine years old, back in 1977, if not before then - and so shall I ever be. Courts may force us to alter our Temple's name, but it matters not, nor will it ever. Even if our reality's version of "the Empire" tries to squash me away, I SHALL REBEL - and the Force shall EVER be with me, and a powerful ally it is - and may the Force be with us all, forever - so mote it be!!

I agree wholeheartedly! Copyrighting 'Jedi' won't change our personal opinions, preferences and choices. I concur! I am a Jedi, and nothing Disney says or puts in a letter can stop me! Well said Tarren!!!

Tarran wrote: I'm very sorry if it crosses some, but without any further apology from that, whatsoever, my heart and spirit does not fecking care one iota what any "societal organization" says... and being fully aware that to be a *real* Jedi is to understand that it is NOT all about the movies, but rather, that the movies are really, in a "universal-fable" sense, made to be all about us the world over, I AM STILL A JEDI no matter what anyone says, and HAVE BEEN, since *at least* the time I was nine years old, back in 1977, if not before then - and so shall I ever be. Courts may force us to alter our Temple's name, but it matters not, nor will it ever. Even if our reality's version of "the Empire" tries to squash me away, I SHALL REBEL - and the Force shall EVER be with me, and a powerful ally it is - and may the Force be with us all, forever - so mote it be!!

Nobody here is questioning anybody's resolve as a Jedi. Even Disney would not be questioning your resolve to be Jedi. They would be protecting a trademark, not attacking what that mark has come to mean to you or anybody else. It is easy to get on a high horse about standing up to the evil corporate empire of Disney, but the reality is that nothing they would be doing by sending us a C&D letter or filing a lawsuit is evil. It is within their right as holders of the trademark to do so. The court would have to decide if it is a legitimate case or not. If they decide it is, we would have to stop using the term or face consequences. That wouldn't invalidate our faith or rewind the progress we have made along our paths.

To put it into perspective, we would likely become concerned if someone took our Temple logo and started using it to represent a group of white supremacists. We would take whatever action we could to stop them from using it that way. If we were to do something here that Disney believed would be damaging to the Jedi trademark, I would expect them to react just as we would to the white supremacists, and they would be right to do it.

Senan wrote:

Tarran wrote: I'm very sorry if it crosses some, but without any further apology from that, whatsoever, my heart and spirit does not fecking care one iota what any "societal organization" says... and being fully aware that to be a *real* Jedi is to understand that it is NOT all about the movies, but rather, that the movies are really, in a "universal-fable" sense, made to be all about us the world over, I AM STILL A JEDI no matter what anyone says, and HAVE BEEN, since *at least* the time I was nine years old, back in 1977, if not before then - and so shall I ever be. Courts may force us to alter our Temple's name, but it matters not, nor will it ever. Even if our reality's version of "the Empire" tries to squash me away, I SHALL REBEL - and the Force shall EVER be with me, and a powerful ally it is - and may the Force be with us all, forever - so mote it be!!

Nobody here is questioning anybody's resolve as a Jedi. Even Disney would not be questioning your resolve to be Jedi. They would be protecting a trademark, not attacking what that mark has come to mean to you or anybody else. It is easy to get on a high horse...

Actually, not a high horse, but I had gotten on a couple/few chu-hais after work LOL - think of them as a tall, fizzy, fruity, Japanese version of a screwdriver, with 9% al-ca-ma-hoooooool... *ehe* ^-^;

Oh, I still maintain the very same sentiment, of course... but at this moment, in a more calm, sober manner lol

Do we have any lawyers among the members? Someone who could really analyze the situation? I'm not suggesting to lawyer up (at all), but it might be useful to simply have a legal assessment that goes beyond guesswork and lay analysis.

If there are legal issues, it's probably better to go about them in a proactive manner (internally, again, not suggesting to give up our 'fly under the radar' approach)

This is way off topic, but I wanted to entertain it with Jestor...

but, I did not do it for myself, but rather for the greater good...

This always sounds good doesn't it?

I grew up on Pratchett, and one of my first fictional role models was "Samuel Vimes"

One of his lines that I remind myself almost daily when faced with decisions is

“And if you did it for a good reason, you’d do it for a bad one. You couldn’t say “we’re the good guys” and do bad-guy things.”

Similarly

“Once you had a good excuse, you opened the door to bad excuses.”

Anyway, return to your scheduled programming

She'll be right mate!!!!.

Tsst.

Can we get "No wuckers" put into the doctrine? :laugh:

JamesSand wrote: Can we get "No wuckers" put into the doctrine? :laugh:

Fhat the wuck's a "wucker"?? lol