Default judgment sought against DC and Marvel over superhero trademarks

Posted in: Comics, Comic Publishers, Latest News, DC Comics, Marvel Comics | Tagged: ip, superhero, superheroine, trademark

US courts have been asked to enter a default judgment against DC Comics and Marvel Comics over ownership of the Super Hero trademark

In 1977, DC Comics and Marvel Comics launched the biggest crossover of all time between their legal departments. They worked together to register the “superhero” trademark that they wanted to use together. The US authorities granted it in 1979/1980. Since then, they have successfully defended it with their legal departments and rejected numerous appeals in many countries.

Today he is a British comic book writer. Scott Richold of Superbabies Ltd, courtesy of Reichman Jorgensen Lehman & Feldberg, is challenging the trademark, arguing in an American trademark court that “Super Hero” is a generic term that does not enjoy trademark protection, stating: “DC and Marvel claim that no one can use the term Super Hero (or superhero, superheroine or any other version of the term) without their permission,” the petition states. “DC and Marvel are wrong. Trademark law does not allow companies to claim ownership rights over an entire genre.” “By challenging these trademarks, we want to ensure that superheroes remain a source of inspiration for all, rather than a trademarked commodity controlled by two corporate giants,” said Superbabies’ attorney. Adam Adler it said in a statement.

The legal documents were compiled by a real comic book fan who enjoys panels from the last Ryan North Fantastic Four, to make a point, as well as Brian Bendis And Mark Bagley‘S Ultimate Spider-Man.

As well as Batman from the Silver Age And Justice League of America.

They also point to the unchallenged use of the words “superhero” or “superheroine” by other notable publishers like Image Comics. And also to Marvel’s own use in this comic.

And company bosses who use “superhero” as a generic term. Including some from Bleeding Cool’s favorite film I’m Tom Brevoort.

And this week, Superbabies Limited asked the court for a default judgment in their favor. They stated that DC Comics and Marvel Characters filed a motion for an extension to respond to the allegations until July 24, but they did not do so and did not request another deadline to respond, so they were in default. Are we potentially facing the end of “superhero” as a trademark? Or will Marvel and DC get that extension? Here are some examples of previous challenges…

• In 1996, the Australian company Hero Marketing Pty Ltd registered a trademark, DC Comics and Marvel filed an opposition and eventually had the trademark annulled.
• In 2004, another Australian company, Intrinsic Alliance Pty Ltd, applied for such a trademark. DC Comics and Marvel Characters objected and the trademark application was withdrawn.
• In 2005, Australian supermarket chain Metcash Trading Limited registered a trademark for “Superhero Specials.” DC Comics and Marvel objected to the registration and it was withdrawn.
• In 2006, a US company called The Lucky Drink Company Pty Ltd registered the trademarks “Superhero Beer” and “Superhero Cola”. DC Comics and Marvel objected to the application, which was subsequently withdrawn.
• In 2006, US comic book publisher GeekPunk was forced to change the planned title of its comic “Super Hero Happy Hour” to “Hero Happy Hour” after a trademark letter from Marvel and DC.
• In 2007, a trademark for “Superhero Sam” was filed for charity. DC Comics objected to the trademark and in 2009 the actual trademark was transferred to DC Comics and Marvel, who now own it.
• In 2009, the US company HP Assets Holdings Pty Ltd registered the trademark “Superhero” for pizza; in 2010, DC Comics objected to the trademark, which was subsequently withdrawn.
• In 2010, Ray Felix self-published A World Without Superheroes in the United States and filed a trademark application. DC Comics and Marvel filed for default judgment against Mr. Felix and were successful. Felix withdrew the application.
• In 2015, the US company Tech Girls Movement Pty Ltd registered the trademark “Tech Girls Are Superheroes”, but DC Comics and Marvel filed an objection. The proceedings are still ongoing.
• In 2016, lawyers for DC Comics and Marvel sent a cease and desist letter to British author Graham Jules, who wrote a book on business startups for entrepreneurs called “Business Zero to Superhero.” Jules applied to the UK Trademark Registry to cancel DC Comics and Marvel Entertainment’s trademark registration for “SUPERHERO.” Although Jules failed in court, DC Comics and Marvel abandoned their claims against Mr. Jules, citing “commercial reasons.”
• In 2016, a US company called Will & Caro Pty Ltd registered the trademark “Superhero Pills”, which DC Comics and Marvel opposed. The proceedings are still ongoing.
• In 2019, The Best Of Organic filed a trademark for Superhero Organs, but DC and Marvel objected and the application was withdrawn.
• In 2020, Darnell Ferguson filed a trademark application for “Superhero Chefs,” but DC Comics objected and the application was withdrawn.
• In 2020, Florida-based US publisher Liquid Help Drinks filed a trademark for “Release Your Inner Superhero,” which DC Comics objected to. The matter was settled and no trademark was claimed.
• In 2022, Pow Entertainment filed a trademark for Stan Lee’s Superhero Kindergarten, against opposition from DC Comics and Marvel. The application was denied.
• In 2023, a US company, Superhero Latina Entertainment, registered the trademark, against opposition from DC Comics and Marvel. The process is still ongoing.

Stay up to date and support the site by following Bleeding Cool on Google News today!