http://www.ipbrief.net/2011/02/19/naked-cowboy-sues-the-pants-off-cbs
An article submitted by John Conlon to the American University Intellectual Brief:
- Naked Cowboy Sues the Pants Off CBS -
The Naked Cowboy has his panties in a bunch again. The New York City street performer, Robert Burck, is suing CBS and Bell-Phillip Television in Manhattan Federal Court for trademark infringement, seeking $1.5 million in damages.
In 2010, the television character "Oliver" from CBS's "The Bold and the Beautiful" appeared in an episode with an acoustic guitar slung across his unmentionables. Now Burck has dropped his undies and reached for his legal briefs. According to the complaint, "Oliver" imitated the Naked Cowboy and behaved in a "drunken and sexually charged manner." The complaint also alleges that CBS purchased the search term "The Naked Cowboy" on both Google and YouTube to promote the character.
For a clip of the allegedly infringing material, click http://tv.yahoo.com/show/29204/videos/23061037 and scroll down to find Date: Two spots below the 11.5.10 clip. Title: "The Bold and the Beautiful -- Naked Cowboy." Description: "Oliver has a surprise for Amber."
While Burck is being criticized as overly litigious, he owns a recognizable trademark and should succeed in arguing his case {see registered trademarks here: http://www.nakedcowboy.com/tm/1.jpg - http://www.nakedcowboy.com/tm/2.jpg - http://www.nakedcowboy.com/tm/3.jpg }. In order to prevail on his claim of trademark infringement, he will have to prove that CBS's character caused a likelihood of consumer confusion as to the source of this character. In the Second Circuit, the court will analyze the likelihood of confusion as a balancing test under these factors:
(1) The strength of the plaintiff's mark. Burck owns trademarks in the term NAKED COWBOY and his Naked Cowboy character. He has worked under that name and owned his marks for over a decade. See Burck's daily Trail Of Events Here: http://www.nakedcowboy.com/trailofevents.html - He makes roughly $1,000 per day as a street performer in New York City's Times Square. He is a local icon that works hard year-round to maintain a strong brand. He has appeared in various news programs, television shows, and movies since the late nineties including a documentary titled "One Man Brand." On his personal website http://nakedcowboy.com he sells books, dvds, underwear, t-shirts, hats, guitars, and autographed photos. [This factor should favor Burck.]
(2) The similarity of the plaintiff's and defendant's marks. Both the Naked Cowboy and "Oliver" wear only a hat, necklace, underwear, boots, and an acoustic guitar. The resemblance is strong. In addition, CBS used the term "Naked Cowboy," Burck's exact trademark, to describe many of its online video clips advertising the show. [This factor should favor Burck.]
(3) The competitive proximity of the products. Burck's trademark covers services for "entertainment in the nature of . . . television programs." Defendant's use of the mark obviously also appeared in the television entertainment business. [This factor should favor Burck.]
(4) The likelihood that the plaintiff will "bridge the gap" and offer a product like defendant's. There is no "gap" to bridge since the plaintiff already makes television appearances. [Neutral]
(5) Actual confusion between products. Whether Burck can show evidence of actual confusion (about something other than his fashion sense) is yet to be determined. Either way, a showing of actual confusion is not required for him to prevail on his claim.
(6) Good faith on the part of the defendant. Typically, bad faith intent may be inferred solely from the fact that the parties' marks are similar and the fact that the defendant had knowledge of the plaintiff's mark when it adopted its own, similar mark. Since CBS used a character strongly resembling Burck AND use the term Naked Cowboy to mark its video clips on the internet, this may serve as evidence of bad faith intent. [This factor is neutral / slightly favoring Burck.]
(7) The quality of defendant's product. CBS's depiction of the Naked Cowboy as an untalented, drunken, and lustful singer is a far cry from Burck's friendly, good-natured approach. [This factor should favor Burck.]
(8) The sophistication of the buyers. The relevant consumers here are viewers of "The Bold and the Beautiful" and fans of the Naked Cowboy that come across this clip. It is unlikely that the consumers in either category would know whether "Oliver" was affiliated with or sponsored by the Naked Cowboy himself. [This factor should favor Burck.]
While there is room for creative lawyering on each side of this case, the balance seems to weigh in Burck's favor. If he can strip down to the core of the issues and dig in his spurs, the Naked Cowboy will soon have a few extra dollars in his waistband.
Loading...
0:39
Times Square Naked Cowboy blow Jobby indfilmr364 views
Oh my god who cares about this It was part of the show not like anybody seriously cares about a Naked cowboy besize them being hot and gorgeous but serious lets get to the point: What can the Cowboy possibly get out of this I Wouldn't be suprised if he got nothing but a slap in the face cause this whole thing is Bull and A Waste of time. But Tmrpro thanks for uploading this anyways.
rockboytv1 1 year ago
@rockboytv1 ... We care about. It is a BLATANT theft of intellectual property and WE won't stand for it. So, here's the point: Thieves ... BEWARE!!! It isn't "BULL" it is real intellectual property that requires authorization and payment when used. <---- That is a "PERIOD". Let's make our own daytime drama TV show and call it "The Bold & The Beautiful" then promote it with the CBS logo and see what happens... Maybe, that's the answer... seriously!
tmrpro 1 year ago 6