Board 8 > Hasbro files suit against DC comics over Bumblebee name

(+) Yeah! (+)

http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/bumblebee-trademark-transformers-dc-comics-warner-bros-1202541577/

Hasbro, owner of the Transformers brand, filed a lawsuit on Monday accusing Warner Bros. and DC Comics of trademark infringement. The suit claims that the DC “Bumblebee” — a teenage girl with the ability to shrink — could easily be confused with the Autobot “Bumblebee.”

Apparently the superhero slightly predates the transformer, so who knows how that goes.
---

Yeah this is going to fail so badly. Bumblebee the chick debuted first.
---

trademark lawsuits are fucking stupid

scarletspeed7 posted...

Yeah this is going to fail so badly. Bumblebee the chick debuted first.

Doesn't matter

when it comes to the toy aisle, Hasbro has Bumblebee trademark
---

the insect predates both of them
---

Yeah, I mean it's so easy to confuse a superhero with a fucking car/robot. I don't think anybody on Earth that has DC info has ever mistaken the two

Wonder why Hasbro waited this long....
---

PrinceKaro posted...

the insect predates both of them

oh fuck

BEE MOVIE 2

MAKE IT HAPPEN

I actually saw a Bumblebee figure a couple days ago and thought "is this some weird line of toys that imagines transformers as teenage girls?" then noticed she was part of a series with other DC characters I recognized.

I'd never heard of her before then, and am shocked to learn she is from the late 70's.
---

Johnny Eagle posted...

Wonder why Hasbro waited this long....

Has DC made a lot of Bumblebee toys? I've never seen any until now.

swordz9 posted...

Yeah, I mean it's so easy to confuse a superhero with a fucking car/robot. I don't think anybody on Earth that has DC info has ever mistaken the two

Yeah, most people on Earth don't have DC info, especially not parents buying toys for their kids.

MoogleKupo141 posted...

I actually saw a Bumblebee figure a couple days ago and thought "is this some weird line of toys that imagines transformers as teenage girls?"

This is a common reaction and reason why Hasbro's going to win this
---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

weird line of toys that imagines transformers as teenage girls

don't give japan any ideas
---

can you trademark names like that?

don't both DC and marvel have a captain marvel?
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

can you trademark names like that?

don't both DC and marvel have a captain marvel?

and DC stopped calling him Captain Marvel because of legal stuff

all Shazam all the time now
---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

and DC stopped calling him Captain Marvel because of legal stuff

all Shazam all the time now

what about both companies having a scarecrow?
---

Marvel has a scarecrow?
---

DeepsPraw posted...

scarletspeed7 posted...

Yeah this is going to fail so badly. Bumblebee the chick debuted first.

Doesn't matter

when it comes to the toy aisle, Hasbro has Bumblebee trademark

is that actually how stuff works?

can/should DC sue to stop comics like this:

https://d1466nnw0ex81e.cloudfront.net/n_iv/600/980027.jpg

because they have the Bumbleebee of the comics realm?
---

Natwaf_akidna posted...

Marvel has a scarecrow?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scarecrow_(Marvel_Comics)
---

There have gotta be almost no Bumblebee (the girl) toys. I mean there are obviously some, but they are probably so few in number that nobody would mistake them. I mean they would even have DC literally right on the label so you would immediately know it's different unless you somehow think DC owns Transformers. I have literally only seen 1 Bumblebee girl toy and it was part of DC's Superhero Girls tv short thing

MoogleKupo141 posted...

can/should DC sue to stop comics like this:

https://d1466nnw0ex81e.cloudfront.net/n_iv/600/980027.jpg

because they have the Bumbleebee of the comics realm?

I mean, they could.

It would be very difficult to prove in court that people would mistake a major Transformers character for their obscure superhero, though
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

MoogleKupo141 posted...

and DC stopped calling him Captain Marvel because of legal stuff

all Shazam all the time now

what about both companies having a scarecrow?

I dunno. You're right, there are other character names that both companies use. Maybe the difference is that both Captain Marvels are lead characters with their own comics?

Marvel will never put out a comic starring their Scarecrow, so there's no risk of brand confusion on the bookshelf.
---

swordz9 posted...

There have gotta be almost no Bumblebee (the girl) toys. I mean there are obviously some, but they are probably so few in number that nobody would mistake them. I mean they would even have DC literally right on the label so you would immediately know it's different unless you somehow think DC owns Transformers. I have literally only seen 1 Bumblebee girl toy and it was part of DC's Superhero Girls tv short thing

There being so few DC Bumblebee toys is the reason I initially did mistake her for a version of the Transformer. If she were a more prominent character I wouldn't make the mistake because I'd know she existed.
---

of course looking slightly more closely tipped me off that she was a DC character. There's no way someone would make it all the way to purchasing the thing somehow being duped into thinking they were buying a transformer.
---

Hurrrrrr
---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

DeepsPraw posted...

scarletspeed7 posted...

Yeah this is going to fail so badly. Bumblebee the chick debuted first.

Doesn't matter

when it comes to the toy aisle, Hasbro has Bumblebee trademark

is that actually how stuff works?

can/should DC sue to stop comics like this:

https://d1466nnw0ex81e.cloudfront.net/n_iv/600/980027.jpg

because they have the Bumbleebee of the comics realm?

What matters most isn't what existed first, but which trademark came first.
---

I don't see how anyone could confuse the two


At all
---

"Now, Hasbro does hold the actual trademark for Bumblebee, which they filed on July 15, 2015. It was officially registered on December 22nd of that year, and though the DC Comics character predates the Transformer (1977 vs.1983), that trademark might be an issue for the studio."

Like, this means Hasbro has a 99% chance of winning.

The only way DC wins is if they manage to go "Come on, the trademark shouldn't matter. They're so different that nobody could confuse them" convincingly enough.
---

I don't think they will have a hard time showing the difference. One is literally a black girl who can shrink and wears a bee costume while the other is a giant robot that spends some time as a car. It would be like confusing Batman with a ninja turtle or something

swordz9 posted...

I don't think they will have a hard time showing the difference. One is literally a black girl who can shrink and wears a bee costume while the other is a giant robot that spends some time as a car. It would be like confusing Batman with a ninja turtle or something

Hasbro has a decent shot if they argue "People may think it's a version/different take of Bumblebee, and if the quality is bad/etc. it could hurt our rep."
---

I suppose, but have the Transformers literally ever been given human figures or anything? The DC label is gonna be all over anything with their Bumblebee too. I mean I know next to nothing about both characters and I can't imagine how anybody could confuse them or think they're the same.

Pretty sure Bumblebee isn't enough of a wholly original name that they can claim full ownership over it. Especially since they're two wildly different characters.

What's most strange about this is where the hell did this even come from? It's not like Bumblebee is getting any more use in comics and media than she ever did before.
---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Pretty sure Bumblebee isn't enough of a wholly original name that they can claim full ownership over it. Especially since they're two wildly different characters.

What's most strange about this is where the hell did this even come from? It's not like Bumblebee is getting any more use in comics and media than she ever did before.

Probably DC Superhero Girls. It's an animated short and she's one of the characters in it. It has a toy line and even like some Lego or offbrand Lego stuff. Seems to me more like Hasbro is having money issues and wanting to make a quick buck out of nonsense

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Pretty sure Bumblebee isn't enough of a wholly original name that they can claim full ownership over it. Especially since they're two wildly different characters.

What's most strange about this is where the hell did this even come from? It's not like Bumblebee is getting any more use in comics and media than she ever did before.

1. Hasbro literally has the trademark for Bumblebee, so they not only can but already did claim ownership over it. >_>

2. New line of DC toys has Bumblebee
---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

What's most strange about this is where the hell did this even come from? It's not like Bumblebee is getting any more use in comics and media than she ever did before.

Maybe there is some stupid reasoning that she'll get more exposure in Young Justice Season 3? Who knows?



or this>_>


swordz9 posted...

Probably DC Superhero Girls

---

Basically, it comes down to this:

What Hasbro needs to do to win:
"If a kid tells their parent they want Bumblebee for their birthday, the parent could see something black and yellow named Bumblebee and buy it, and it may be the DC toy."

What DC needs to do to win:
"There can't possibly be any confusion. A kid would say key words like "He" or "Robot" for Hasbro's Bumblebee, thus making the parent aware that our Bumblebee isn't the same thing."

I'd HOPE the latter would win, but Hasbro has the much easier case to make since they have the trademark, and often it doesn't ever get further than that.
---

I imagine the order the parents thoughts go would be:

"What the hell is a Bumblebee?"
"Oh the robot guy"
"What do you mean there's a Superhero girl called Bumblebee?"

Maybe more parents know Transformers than I give them credit for, but I'd be amazed if most even knew the Superhero one at all.

swordz9 posted...

I imagine the order the parents thoughts go would be:

"What the hell is a Bumblebee?"
"Oh the robot guy"
"What do you mean there's a Superhero girl called Bumblebee?"

Maybe more parents know Transformers than I give them credit for, but I'd be amazed if most even knew the Superhero one at all.

Remember that parents are the ones that bought a terrible Triple H comedy because kids asked for an animated Pixar film and the parents couldn't tell the difference.
---

Wait what. What movie is that?

Inside Out
---

swordz9 posted...

I imagine the order the parents thoughts go would be:

"What the hell is a Bumblebee?"
"Oh the robot guy"
"What do you mean there's a Superhero girl called Bumblebee?"

Maybe more parents know Transformers than I give them credit for, but I'd be amazed if most even knew the Superhero one at all.

Well, parents don't have to know the superhero one at all if they don't know what Bumblebee is, period. Hasbro's case isn't "The parents may know the superhero and get that." It's basically "They may not know what Bumblebee is, period, and so having more than one could cause them to get the wrong one."
---

Now, to be fair, I don't imagine this would be a problem for the action figures. Boy and girl action figures typically aren't kept together, so you'd assume a boy that wants a Transformer isn't going to have parents that are looking for it near the Barbies

That said, Hasbro has a pretty decent case when it comes to the Lego sets, since somebody who doesn't know what "Bumblebee" is are just going to look for a Lego set that says Bumblebee.
---

Actually, after some quick Googling, I'd bet it really is the Lego sets that spawned the issue.

https://target.scene7.com/is/image/Target/51301197?wid=3000&qlt=70&fmt=pjpeg
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/91zQd8fj%2BsL._SY355_.jpg

Just hits on too many notes. "Bumblebee." The fact that both showcase vehicles. And while the Transformers one isn't Lego, it's what one typically thinks of when they think of building block toys, and what a kid may actually call it ("I want Lego Bumblebee!") and they'd be in the same section, with the Legos having more space and prominence.

That's gonna make it tougher on DC.
---

Imagine a world where parents genuinely gave a shit about the interests of their children, and all of these confusion arguments were invalid.
---

To be fair, it can be pretty tough to keep up with what a kid likes, especially since kids are very particular.

When I was a kid, I liked Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Street Sharks, and Biker Mice from Mars. They're all basically the same thing. Get me any one of those and I was happy. But for some reason, I didn't like the dinosaur TMNT rip-off, despite liking all the other rip-offs. So I never wanted the dinosaur ones. But as an adult, I can see how I could definitely make that mistake for my kid.

Having worked in retail, I remember a case where a parent knew their kid wanted Shopkins, but then panicked when they didn't know if the kid wanted the food Shopkins, the Shopkins based on shoes and purses and shit, the Shopkins based on electronics, etc. Because the kid just said "Shopkins."
---

Even the legos say DC Superhero Girls right on the box. If you can't tell whether your kid wants a robot or a super girl I think you've got bigger issues to worry about.

swordz9 posted...

Even the legos say DC Superhero Girls right on the box. If you can't tell whether your kid wants a robot or a super girl I think you've got bigger issues to worry about.

To be fair, if you're a parent who has no idea what "Bumblebee" is, and your kid says "He turns into a car and stuff." and you know they want "Lego Bumblebee," I could actually see how "Bumblebee Helicopter" could be a bit confusing, especially if you saw it first.

Obviously, these are pretty specific examples... But that's all Hasbro really needs, sadly.
---

StealThisSheen posted...

"Now, Hasbro does hold the actual trademark for Bumblebee, which they filed on July 15, 2015. It was officially registered on December 22nd of that year, and though the DC Comics character predates the Transformer (1977 vs.1983), that trademark might be an issue for the studio."

Like, this means Hasbro has a 99% chance of winning.

god our legal system and patent system are trash
---

Are there even Transformers Legos? Also I don't want to label or use gender stereotypes or whatever, but like 99% of boys asking for it would likely mean the robot and 99% of girls would likely mean the Legos aimed at girls or the Barbie-like dolls. I mean if I had a son and he said Bumblebee I wouldn't even think he meant the Barbie or girl themed toys

swordz9 posted...

Are there even Transformers Legos? Also I don't want to label or use gender stereotypes or whatever, but like 99% of boys asking for it would likely mean the robot and 99% of girls would likely mean the Legos aimed at girls or the Barbie-like dolls. I mean if I had a son and he said Bumblebee I wouldn't even think he meant the Barbie or girl themed toys

Again, though, that's assuming the parent even knows these characters exist. Hasbro's argument would be about people who don't know the robot exists/what it looks like/etc.

You have to realize that both Hasbro and DC are going to be arguing that we, as consumers, are either complete idiots who would do no research and/or not be able to tell the difference, or nerds who know all of these characters and would scoff at the thought of getting them confused and/or label our kids with gender stereotypes.

That's how trademark cases go.
---

2015 isn't that long ago. If DC can show they made and sold even a single Bumblebee toy before 2015, Hasbro's case might just fall apart.
---

Too bad there's no teenage girl superhero named Optimus Prime.
---