I agree. And the fact that someone is making $$$'s on it even further justifies the lawsuit.
Posted on 09/14/2007 9:25:16 AM PDT by Cagey
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) - The Lance Armstrong Foundation has sued a man, alleging his animal charity's pet collars infringe on the foundation's trademark yellow LiveStrong wristbands.
The lawsuit seeks to stop Animal Charity Collar Group Inc. from using the phrases Barkstrong and Purrstrong, the yellow bands and the website barkstrong.net. It also seeks unspecified monetary damages and the cancellation of the company's Purrstrong trademark and its pending application for the Barkstrong trademark.
Animal Charity Collar Group, a for-profit company based in Tulsa, Okla., makes the collars for animal rescue groups to sell. It also sells them on its website for US$4.99.
The pet collars "are confusingly similar to, and are likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception" about their origin or affiliation with the Lance Armstrong Foundation, according to the lawsuit filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court.
Armstrong, a seven-time winner of the Tour de France, started the foundation bearing his name in 1997 after recovering from advanced testicular cancer that had spread to his abdomen, lungs and brain.
Since 2004, the Austin-based foundation has sold more than 70 million LiveStrong wristbands for $1 each to raise money for cancer research and programs for survivors. The wristbands are a symbol of the foundation's goodwill, the lawsuit says.
Chris Ohman, CEO of Animal Charity Collar Group, said the glow-in-the-dark pet collars were his company's idea. They come in white, yellow-green, pink and orange and have paw prints embedded on either side of the phrase.
"It is not something that could be confused with a bracelet or any other product they have," Ohman said.
He said he approached the Lance Armstrong Foundation when he started the collar project in 2006, but the foundation declined to participate because it was not related to cancer research.
Trademark is tricky, but him going to the foundation with the idea shows he himself thinks there is enough similarity between the products. And I don’t think a free speech/parody argument works here because he’s not making fun of Armstrong, but riding on his coattails.
I can understand that he is a hero (to many). None-the-less, he is still being an a—hole. It’s a dog collar, deal with it, I say.
I agree. And the fact that someone is making $$$'s on it even further justifies the lawsuit.
His timing is off. Had these collar been around a few years ago when the Livestrong bracelets were at the height of popularity, he would have done better. Now, those rubber bracelets of all colors are everywhere. I think Lance’s group will have a tough time with a lawsuit. Will any combination of a yellow bracelet and the word strong be grounds for a lawsuit?
Personally, I prefer the black bands that say, “LIVE WRONG”.
I see bands of all types and colors sold in convenience stores now. Is going to sue them too?
And the very idea of a rubber band is not very unique IMO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.