From Paddington to Paris

The success of many merchandised properties is based as much upon the endearing nature of their characters and personification as on the skill with which their commercial potential is identified and exploited. So when a character appears to "change", this perception may have profound ramifications. Perhaps it is for this reason that Michael Bond - creator of the popular Paddington Bear - has been reported in the BBC as having reacted to criticism over a decision to use the marmalade-loving bear in a TV advertisement for the love-it-or-loathe-it yeast-based Marmite spread.

Right: Paddington in experimental mode - the "P.B." on his case stands for "peanut butter" ...

So why, then, did Paddington and Co, the company that owns the rights to the bear's image, license his use in a Marmite ad? Said a company official:
"Unilever wanted to encourage people to try Marmite in their sandwiches, and they were looking for a character famous for eating sandwiches. The point of the advert is that Paddington always has marmalade in his sandwiches. He simply tries Marmite".
The IPKat is reluctant to swallow this, since he is thinking of the damage that can be inflicted on Paddington's image in the eyes of kids who have been forced to eat Marmite by their parents and deeply detest it.

Left: here's something for Paddybear to try once he's finished with the regular Marmite.

Merpel notes the implication of the above quote: if Paddybear (i) always has marmalade and (ii) tries Marmite, he must have eaten a marmalade-and-Marmite sandwich.

Paddington Bear recipes here
Make your own Paddington Bear Mobile here

Meanwhile, definitely real but stranger than fiction character Paris Hilton is hitting the IP headlines again, according to this item which Tom Cowling (Swan Turton) slipped into the path of the oncoming IPKat. The fashion celebrity has just filed a lawsuit against greetings card manufacturers Hallmark, alleging that the company used an unauthorised image of her signature phrase "That's hot" on a series of its cards. The card on the right depicts "Paris' first day as a waitress": Hilton's face is superimposed on a cartoon body. This apparition hands a plate to a customer and warns: "Don't touch that, it's hot". The customer asks, "What's hot?" to which Hilton-as-waitress replies, "That's hot". The IPKat can't see what's funny about this. Neither, it seems, could Paris because she's asking for half a million dollars in damages plus injunctive relief. The IPKat awaits further development with unabated indifference.
From Paddington to Paris From Paddington to Paris Reviewed by Jeremy on Thursday, September 20, 2007 Rating: 5

1 comment:

  1. Sorry... an "unauthorised image of her signature phrase". I wasn't aware signature phrases give rise to legal rights - I guess they could be registered as TMs, but they'd have to be distinctive etc.

    Mind you, if the defence is going to be humorous pastiche then Hallmark will struggle to get any laughs. IT JUST AIN'T FUNNY. I guess though you'd have to look at the series of cards, so if the joke was, eg Paris Hilton as librarian, shop assistant etc maybe we have the basis of, um, a joke. No, thought not.

    Thursday Felicitations everyone. Woops, sorry Jeremy, I've abused your "signature phrase" in a non-alliterative but temporally (is that the right word ?) correct manner.


All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.