The Energon Pub

Hi everyone,

I saw about this new product today and I was left wondering since the "autobot" name is a registered trademark by Hasbro if this is copyright infrigement:

http://www.mavizontech.com/MeetAutobot.htm

This left me wondering how are they able to use this name on the product they're creating.

It's not copyright, it's trademark infringement, were it not for the fact that Hasbro's "Autobot" trademark is under "Toys and Games" and "AutoBot" is spelled a bit differently, plus it's under "Electronics". That's why it's presumably allowed and has the tm sign.

JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:It's not copyright, it's trademark infringement, were it not for the fact that Hasbro's "Autobot" trademark is under "Toys and Games" and "AutoBot" is spelled a bit differently, plus it's under "Electronics". That's why it's presumably allowed and has the tm sign.

So, if I released a product for a different category and called it DeceptiCon it would be ok? I always thought that couldn't be done.

capellamusic wrote:

JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:It's not copyright, it's trademark infringement, were it not for the fact that Hasbro's "Autobot" trademark is under "Toys and Games" and "AutoBot" is spelled a bit differently, plus it's under "Electronics". That's why it's presumably allowed and has the tm sign.

So, if I released a product for a different category and called it DeceptiCon it would be ok? I always thought that couldn't be done.

Probably not: it also depends on how generic a word or part of a word is. In other words, the more generic it is, the less of a grip a company can exercise, to the point a word can't even be trademarked at all. Both "Auto" and "Bot" are fairly generic, and in law, "AutoBot" is a combination of these two words, while "Autobot" is a single word. Confusing, isn't it.

capellamusic wrote:

JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:It's not copyright, it's trademark infringement, were it not for the fact that Hasbro's "Autobot" trademark is under "Toys and Games" and "AutoBot" is spelled a bit differently, plus it's under "Electronics". That's why it's presumably allowed and has the tm sign.

So, if I released a product for a different category and called it DeceptiCon it would be ok? I always thought that couldn't be done.

It can be done, but its not easy.Its kind of like I could write a story about the "superintendent" of a building and call him "the Super-man".

Now, being the "little guy" that I am, I most likely will get hit with threating lawsuits and no way to fight it.

But a big named publisher could make a fight of it, and most likely win.

cocolove wrote:So, if I released a product for a different category and called it DeceptiCon it would be ok? I always thought that couldn't be done.

Your missing part of whats been said.

"how generic a word or part of a word is".

Edit by Dead Metal:
*Removed the links the spambot had posted*

I vaguely remember doing about this at College. As I understand it the Transformer names most of them anyway are legally owned by Hasbro for example they could no longer call Rodimus, Rodimus Prime anymore due to infringement for some reason.

The same thing also happened to WWF which was forced to change its logo to WWE after the World Wildlife Fund attempted to sue them for using there initials. I know it sounds silly to me to be honest.

As far as i'm concerned the names autobot/decepticon are owned by Hasbro so I don't think that is technically legal.

In addition you can't use Transformer symbols/images owned by Hasbro for use on websites or redistribute them without there consent.

In regards to the internet I'm also not sure its relevant at the moment as Copyright laws have not yet been "updated" to cope with the digital age.

norwichchris wrote:I vaguely remember doing about this at College. As I understand it the Transformer names most of them anyway are legally owned by Hasbro for example they could no longer call Rodimus, Rodimus Prime anymore due to infringement for some reason.

The issue was with the vname "HotRod" not Rodimus Prime.

norwichchris wrote:I vaguely remember doing about this at College. As I understand it the Transformer names most of them anyway are legally owned by Hasbro for example they could no longer call Rodimus, Rodimus Prime anymore due to infringement for some reason.

As explained before, it's "Hot Rod" that's giving problems. The trademark now belongs to another company, plus it's too generic to use by any other.

As far as i'm concerned the names autobot/decepticon are owned by Hasbro so I don't think that is technically legal.

That's why we have courts to argue such cases. Would anybody mind mailing Hasbro about this?

In addition you can't use Transformer symbols/images owned by Hasbro for use on websites or redistribute them without there consent.

Actually, you can, as long as you provide a disclaimer, declare the images to be the property of Hasbro, and most importantly not make money off of them. In law that's called "Fair Use".

In regards to the internet I'm also not sure its relevant at the moment as Copyright laws have not yet been "updated" to cope with the digital age.

Updated how? Distributing commercial copyrighted material no matter the medium is illegal, that goes for the internet as well.

Updated how? Distributing commercial copyrighted material no matter the medium is illegal, that goes for the internet as well.

As the internet is getting bigger and bigger everyday images can and have been distributed almost everywhere so. The countries that use the internet need to draft up a legal agreement as most have very different copyright laws or have none at all.

You are correct about the Hotrod name. At the end of the day it is just a name though absolutely anything can be called Hotrod, someone may decide to name there child hotrod is that infringement?

I don't really see what the problem with that is.

norwichchris wrote:

Updated how? Distributing commercial copyrighted material no matter the medium is illegal, that goes for the internet as well.

As the internet is getting bigger and bigger everyday images can and have been distributed almost everywhere so. The countries that use the internet need to draft up a legal agreement as most have very different copyright laws or have none at all.

Copyright law is international by standard, so it extends borders if the product does as well depending on the country of origin. China, for instance, may be lax in copyright laws, but bootlegs exported will be intercepted and confiscated and the manufacturers prosecuted

You are correct about the Hotrod name. At the end of the day it is just a name though absolutely anything can be called Hotrod, someone may decide to name there child hotrod is that infringement?

I don't really see what the problem with that is.

It's all about product placement. If many products had the same name at the same time it would not just confuse the consumer, but more importantly it would dilute the economic market. Hench the copyright laws and the trademarks for names and logos. Personal names are exempt (we are not product after all), so you can officially name anyone anything, as long as it's reasonable by the proper authorities. We do have some men called "Optimus Prime" or "Megatron" running around, not kidding you.

Copyright law is international by standard, so it extends borders if the product does as well depending on the country of origin. China, for instance, may be lax in copyright laws, but bootlegs exported will be intercepted and confiscated and the manufacturers prosecuted

It is international standard but it is still very difficult to police worldwide. In regards to bootleg products does that apply to Botcons? or custom made Transformers? Also is it legal to take a Transformer mould and repackage/renmae as something else so long as you have Hasbro's permission.

I was merely stating that it is harder to enforce copyright over the Internet and it does need to change for example. Wikileaks distributing sensitive military information and private memos etc. What they did was illegal totally anyway but they could still do it.

In regards to the name Auto-Bot it is legal as it is not tied in directly with Hasbro.

It's all about product placement. If many products had the same name at the same time it would not just confuse the consumer, but more importantly it would dilute the economic market. Hench the copyright laws and the trademarks for names and logos. Personal names are exempt (we are not product after all), so you can officially name anyone anything, as long as it's reasonable by the proper authorities.

But surely if you had rights to the name Hotrod first then surely you can still name products that. No one would get confused by say a toy named hotrod and a deodorant??

I agree with what your saying but you have google images where you can download logos and edit them freely is that legal?

norwichchris wrote:

Copyright law is international by standard, so it extends borders if the product does as well depending on the country of origin. China, for instance, may be lax in copyright laws, but bootlegs exported will be intercepted and confiscated and the manufacturers prosecuted

It is international standard but it is still very difficult to police worldwide. In regards to bootleg products does that apply to Botcons? or custom made Transformers? Also is it legal to take a Transformer mould and repackage/renmae as something else so long as you have Hasbro's permission.

BotCon figures are made with Hasbro's permission and guidance, as they provide the molds and the trademarks for Fun Publications to use. It all has to do with the license they hold. As you can imagine, Hasbro takes that very seriously, and won't give them out to just anyone.

I was merely stating that it is harder to enforce copyright over the Internet and it does need to change for example. Wikileaks distributing sensitive military information and private memos etc. What they did was illegal totally anyway but they could still do it.

All suggestions to policing the internet without breaking privacy laws are extremely welcome. Mind you that the founder of WikiLeaks has yet to be prosecuted for leaking sensitive information, he's currently arrested on other charges.

It's all about product placement. If many products had the same name at the same time it would not just confuse the consumer, but more importantly it would dilute the economic market. Hench the copyright laws and the trademarks for names and logos. Personal names are exempt (we are not product after all), so you can officially name anyone anything, as long as it's reasonable by the proper authorities.

But surely if you had rights to the name Hotrod first then surely you can still name products that. No one would get confused by say a toy named hotrod and a deodorant??

True, but thanks to Mattel's use of the "hot rod" trademark, the term has become generic, and generic terms can't be trademarked. Also, company can choose to register a trademark across several categories to keep a firm hold. That's what happened with the "Outback" trademark thanks to Outback Steakhouse.

I agree with what your saying but you have google images where you can download logos and edit them freely is that legal?

Just don't make money off of it, or try to register the edited logo. They'll bite hard.