tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post8740700372984636714..comments2024-03-28T09:05:22.006+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Obama, Romney in a flap as Big Bird enters politicsVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-41352414736555269542012-10-10T16:45:28.803+01:002012-10-10T16:45:28.803+01:00The IPKat assumes that Big Bird does not roam the ...<i>The IPKat assumes that Big Bird does not roam the prairies as a free-range bird but is protected by at least some of the usual intellectual property rights.</i><br /><br />Why do ask? Is the IPpuddykat interested in bagging himself the overgrown Tweety bird?<br /><br />Of course did Henson protect most of his characters as soon as they were created. The USPTO TESS is a bit tedious to use, but I can provide a link to the <a href="http://www.opic.ic.gc.ca/app/opic-cipo/trdmrks/srch/vwTrdmrk.do?lang=fra&status=OK&fileNumber=0352774&extension=0&startingDocumentIndexOnPage=1" rel="nofollow">Canadian</a> trademark registration filed back in 1972 when Big Bird was barely hatched.<br /><br />In Germany it is only the BB's bill which is <a href="http://register.dpma.de/DPMAregister/marke/register/996037/DE" rel="nofollow">protected</a>, see the mugshot.<br /><br /><i>If this is indeed so, he wonders whether, in the litigation-happy United States, a failure to commence legal proceedings against the legal entity behind the Obama campaign, seeking injunctive relief and a seven- or eight-figure sum in damages, would be taken as a tacit endorsement.</i><br /><br />But initiating proceedings against one side might be interpreted as an endorsement for the other side which had made this an "issue" in the first place... I saw the ad, and my gut feeling is that it falls under fair use and free speech provisions. Sesame's counsels might think the same, and could also fear a sort of Streisand effect.Roufousse T. Fairflynoreply@blogger.com