Hasbro sues DC over Bumblebee name

[Starchild]

Yes, exactly. This has only become an issue, because Paramount has plans to expand their TF brand with all the spin-offs they have planned. A Bumblebee spin-off is the first one they plan to do. There was never any worry about confusing the two characters before now, and they've both existed for 3+ decades.

Given Paramount's financial situation, with every movie they've released in the last 20 months (with the exception of Mission Impossible 5) underperforming or flopping at the BO (seriously, only Sony studios have it worse). I can imagine this move is meant to maximize their returns and muscle out competition.

Right on. I can't see this being confusing to people. Everyone has seen the Transformers movies and i feel if a kid asked mom for a Bumblebee toy, they'll know exactly what to look for. I can't see them coming home with a black women with wings.

[gwangung]

Right on. I can't see this being confusing to people. Everyone has seen the Transformers movies and i feel if a kid asked mom for a Bumblebee toy, they'll know exactly what to look for. I can't see them coming home with a black women with wings.

I can.

Parents are dumb. Their kids make them that way.

[Icefan]

Hasbro's Bumblebee trademark

"Goods and ServicesIC 028. US 022 023 038 050. G & S: Toy action figures, toy vehicles and toy robots convertible into other visual toy forms. FIRST USE: 19831003. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19831003"

That's pretty damn narrow. Unless the SHG Bumblebee is "convertible into other visual toy forms" I don't see how it's in violation of Hasbro's trademark.

[Vanguard-01]

DC Bumblebee is part of a billion-dollar franchise that is only growing.

Hasbro Bumblebee is part of a potent, though still diminishing, franchise.

No wonder they feel threatened. God help them if DC wins this case and then decides to bring Bumblebee into the DCEU or even one of the TV shows.

[Starchild]

]I can.[/B]

Parents are dumb. Their kids make them that way.

Even if the parent makes it their business to know what their kid is into?

[Starchild]

DC Bumblebee is part of a billion-dollar franchise that is only growing.

Hasbro Bumblebee is part of a potent, though still diminishing, franchise.

No wonder they feel threatened. God help them if DC wins this case and then decides to bring Bumblebee into the DCEU or even one of the TV shows.

I was hoping she would be in that Titans show. I'm skeptical as all hell now.

[theoneandonly]

will DC now take over the transformers franchise by ruining them or will this be settled out of court?

[MRP]

Hasbro's Bumblebee trademark

"Goods and ServicesIC 028. US 022 023 038 050. G & S: Toy action figures, toy vehicles and toy robots convertible into other visual toy forms. FIRST USE: 19831003. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19831003"

That's pretty damn narrow. Unless the SHG Bumblebee is "convertible into other visual toy forms" I don't see how it's in violation of Hasbro's trademark.

It's the Toy action figure. Hasbro has the trademark to action figures using the name Bumblebee. It was granted in 2015, so DC had not filed for a trademark for action figures named Bumblebee prior to that. Trademarks are narrow and specific, and trademark application notices are public record, so if DC had plans or wanted to challenge the granting of the trademark, they needed to have objected to the application before it was granted. Once it is granted, after the trademark office does its due diligence to see if it is already trademarked or if there is any objections, it is free and clear tot he new trademark holder, in this case Hasbro. Hasbro then has the obligation to challenge anyone using their trademark in the field it is granted or they lose the trademark. Trademarks are valuable to companies, and it is a use it or lose it thing, so if you hold the trademark you have to use it every so often or you lose it. That's why DC publishing revives titles it has a trademark for every so often, for instance having a GI Combat title during the new 52 run, or doing a Mystery in Space one shot for Vertigo, etc.

Copyright, when characters were created, use in other media outside the purview of the trademark, etc. are all irrelevant in the matter of trademarks. If the trademark is granted by the government it belongs to the holder and they are obligated to defend it. In this case, DC dropped the ball when Hasbro applied for the trademark in 2015 by not challenging the application, and the trademark office granted it to Hasbro. Now DC is in the wrong selling action figures using the name Bumblebee because someone else holds the trademark i.e.e the legal right to use that name commercially, which is what a trademark is. It's not a case of Hasbro greed, it is a case of legal necessity. Iif they do not defend their trademark, they lose it, it is their legal requirement to challenge anyone infringing on their copyright, which is what DC is doing by selling action figures under the name of Bumblebee even if their comic book character predated the trademarked character, because they don't own the trademark for selling action figures under that name, Hasbro does. That's how trademarks work.

There's no side to be on in this case, it is simply a matter of how trademarks work according to the law and who legally holds the trademark.

-M

[Güicho]

will DC now take over the transformers franchise by ruining them or will this be settled out of court?

What!?
You're probably being sarcastic, but DC wining doesn't mean they will suddenly own the Transformers franchise.
Just that DC can continue to put out their own unique Bumble Bee merchandise without conflict with Hasbro's.

... or will this be settled out of court?

Or?
I doubt DC will settle.
They have a pretty strong case since their character was created first.
And their "Bumble Bee" has been marketed as a unique toy well before the film, without Hasbro defending against it.

[MRP]

What!?
You're probably being sarcastic, but DC wining doesn't mean they will suddenly own the Transformers franchise.
Just that DC can continue to put out their own unique Bumblebee merchandise without conflict with Hasbro's.


Or?
I doubt DC will settle.
They have a pretty strong case since there character was created first.
And their "Bumblebee" has been marketed as a toy well before the film, without Hasbro defending against it.

Doesn't matter which character was created first, it matters who applied for and was granted the trademark. If DC didn't apply for and get the trademark for action figures marketed using the name Bumblebee, and another company did, they cannot sell action figures using the name Bumblebee regardless of whose character came first. They also did not challenge Hasbro's application for such when the application was made, so no DC does not have a good case because of the way trademark law works. DC did not do their due diligence and the trademark has been granted to Hasbro. That's a clear loss for DC and they have no one to blame but their won legal and marketing departments.

-M

[Güicho]

Hasbro's Bumblebee trademark

"Goods and ServicesIC 028. US 022 023 038 050. G & S: Toy action figures, toy vehicles and toy robots convertible into other visual toy forms. FIRST USE: 19831003. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19831003"

That's pretty damn narrow. Unless the SHG Bumblebee is "convertible into other visual toy forms" I don't see how it's in violation of Hasbro's trademark.

It's the Toy action figure. Hasbro has the trademark to action figures using the name Bumblebee. It was granted in 2015, so DC had not filed for a trademark for action figures named Bumblebee prior to that. Trademarks are narrow and specific, and trademark application notices are public record, so if DC had plans or wanted to challenge the granting of the trademark, they needed to have objected to the application before it was granted. Once it is granted, after the trademark office does its due diligence to see if it is already trademarked or if there is any objections, it is free and clear tot he new trademark holder, in this case Hasbro.

Just curious.
Why would DC challenge a trade mark associated with a transforming car when they never intended to produce one.
Their already established character and eventual product is a girl dressed somewhat like a bee.
Seems like a very important difference.
And since Bumble Bee is a generic term, they can't own it. Only when applied to a specific unique product.
The girl dressed like a bee vs a transforming car.

Hasbro then has the obligation to challenge anyone using their trademark in the field it is granted or they lose the trademark.

Since DC had product (based on their own character) out well before this movie, and Hasbro didn't challenge.
DC could be safe.

And I'm not challenging this, I'm genuinely asking.

[Flyattractor]

If Marvel hasn't sued them for ripping off their Wasp Character for their Bumble Bee, I don't see what hope Hasbro has.

[MRP]

Why would DC challenge a trade mark associated with a transforming car.
Their already established character and eventual product is a girl dressed somewhat like a bee.
Seems like a very important difference.
And since Bumble Bee is a generic term, they can't own it. Only when applied to a specific unique product.



Since DC had product (based on their own character) out well before this movie, and Hasbro didn't challenge.
DC could be safe.

The trademarks are for categories of products, that's the way trademarks work. The category is for toy action figures, not just transforming cars. And DC didn't have a trademark for Hasbro to challenge. When Hasbro was granted the trademark in 2015, there was no pre-existing trademark in the toy action figure category that was active. Determining that is part of the application process. Even if DC put out toys under that name, they did not file for a trademark so it was available for Hasbro to get. When Hasbro applied, the application is public record and any company should be doing research as to what trademarks are in the works that could affect their business and file a challenge notice with the trademark office. DC did not challenge the Hasbro application, and the trademark was granted in 2015 for action figures using the name Bumblebee. Doesn't matter what kind of action figure, doesn't matter if its girls toys or boys toys, the trademark covers it all. DC didn't get the trademark, Hasbro did. DC cannot now legally market toy action figures using the name Bumblebee without violating that trademark. Doesn't matter if they did prior to the trademark all that matters legally is that Hasbro owns the trademark now and DC doesn't/ That's how trademark law works. ll the things people here int he thread are citing why DC should win are irrelevant to the way trademarks work and how trademark law is written. DC dropped the ball legally and Hasbro now has the trademark. Hasbro is legally obligated to protect the trademark and challenge anyone else using it if they want to retain the trademark. DC offering for sale an action figure under the Bumblebee name now violates Hasbro's trademark which was legally attained and granted. DC doesn't have a legal leg to stand on in this case, because they did not do their due diligence and did not acquire a trademark for Bumblebee toys when it was available.

-M

[Rogue Star]

Similar to the whole Captain Marvel/Shazam thing I'm pretty sure Bumblebee will be subjected to a name change. DC won't fight this.

https://www.newsarama.com/36176-hasb...e=notification

Man! That's stupid! I always buy Bumblebee merchandise for my daughter. I love her DC Superhero Girls design. My daughter dressed up as her last Halloween. Hasbro is on some serious bullcrap.

[Doctor Know]

It's the Toy action figure. Hasbro has the trademark to action figures using the name Bumblebee. It was granted in 2015, so DC had not filed for a trademark for action figures named Bumblebee prior to that. Trademarks are narrow and specific, and trademark application notices are public record, so if DC had plans or wanted to challenge the granting of the trademark, they needed to have objected to the application before it was granted. Once it is granted, after the trademark office does its due diligence to see if it is already trademarked or if there is any objections, it is free and clear tot he new trademark holder, in this case Hasbro. Hasbro then has the obligation to challenge anyone using their trademark in the field it is granted or they lose the trademark. Trademarks are valuable to companies, and it is a use it or lose it thing, so if you hold the trademark you have to use it every so often or you lose it. That's why DC publishing revives titles it has a trademark for every so often, for instance having a GI Combat title during the new 52 run, or doing a Mystery in Space one shot for Vertigo, etc.

Copyright, when characters were created, use in other media outside the purview of the trademark, etc. are all irrelevant in the matter of trademarks. If the trademark is granted by the government it belongs to the holder and they are obligated to defend it. In this case, DC dropped the ball when Hasbro applied for the trademark in 2015 by not challenging the application, and the trademark office granted it to Hasbro. Now DC is in the wrong selling action figures using the name Bumblebee because someone else holds the trademark i.e.e the legal right to use that name commercially, which is what a trademark is. It's not a case of Hasbro greed, it is a case of legal necessity. Iif they do not defend their trademark, they lose it, it is their legal requirement to challenge anyone infringing on their copyright, which is what DC is doing by selling action figures under the name of Bumblebee even if their comic book character predated the trademarked character, because they don't own the trademark for selling action figures under that name, Hasbro does. That's how trademarks work.

There's no side to be on in this case, it is simply a matter of how trademarks work according to the law and who legally holds the trademark.

-M

Thing is, can you trademark a word/name that is in the open domain? That's what the fight will be over. Hasbro didn't create the word bumblebee. They took it from an existing animal. The example I mentioned earlier with Disney trying to trademark "Day of the Dead" for a movie got them into trouble. Another example would be, characters from classical mythologies. Hercules is a popular one that is frequently adapted. Just about every studio has made an adaptation about the character, but no one has thought to trademark the name. Because no one can prove ownership or the creation of the name and the stories attached to him.


Paramount's claim hinges on whether the judge will see DC's character as infringing on their own. Unlike the case involving Superman v Captain Marvel, there's nothing similar about the two bumblebees accept their color coding and the name they use.