Fox Sues Humor Writer for Using 'Signature' Slogan (Al "Irrelevant" Franken)

Yahoo! News ^ | August 12, 2003 | Reuters

[El Conservador]

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Fox News Network is suing humor writer Al Franken for trademark infringement over the phrase "fair and balanced" on the cover of his upcoming book, saying it has been "a signature slogan" of the network since 1996.

According to court papers made available on Monday, Fox is seeking a temporary or permanent injunction against Franken and publisher Penguin Group to stop them using the phrase in connection with the book to be published next month.

The network, part of the News Corp group, also asked Manhattan Supreme Court for compensatory and punitive damages.

The title of liberal satirist Franken's new book is "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them." At the bottom of the planned cover is the tag line, "A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right."

Fox claims the use of the phrase is intended to confuse the public and boost book sales.

In the lawsuit, Fox said the network was created "as a specific alternative to what its founders perceived as a liberal bias in the American media."

A spokeswoman for Penguin imprint Dutton, Lisa Johnson, called the lawsuit "extraordinary."

"In trying to suppress Al Franken's book the News Corp is undermining First Amendment principles that protect all media by guaranteeing a free, open and vigorous debate of public issues," she said.

"The attempt to keep the public from reading Franken's message is un-American and runs contrary to everything this country stands for."

Franken worked as a comedy writer in the 1970s and has appeared frequently on "Saturday Night Live."

Reuters/VNU

[syriacus]

Is it REALLY Satire?

Good question. Lately Franken has been insisting he tells the truth. He is acting as though his book is filled with facts.

[optimistically_conservative]

The Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995 indicates that companies can claim infringement if the defendant's use of a trademark (such as corporate names Coca-Cola and Xerox, or their logos) causes "blurring" or "tarnishment" of the trademark in the eyes of consumers. The act makes no clear exception for parodies or satires.*

Proving dilution of a mark: Under the Dilution Act, famous marks are protected against the dilution of the distinctive nature of the mark. There is no need to prove a likelihood of confusion, nor is there any need to show competition between the goods of the plaintiff and the defendant. Therefore, it is possible to use a dilution cause of action against users of the same mark even when the defendant's goods and services bears no relation to the goods or services of the famous mark.

Dilution causes of action are normally brought when the defendant's use of the mark causes either

• "Blurring", by which the connection in consumers' minds between the plaintiff's mark and the plaintiff's goods or services is weakened; or
• "Tarnishment", which means that the defendant's use is unsavory or unwholesome, or the mark is used in connection with inferior products.

However, the Act makes clear that certain actions will not be subject to the provisions of the Act. Specifically, the Act states that fair use (such as comparative advertising), noncommercial use (such as noncommercial web pages), and all forms of news reporting and news commentary (which would apparently include reporting and commentary appearing on the Internet) would not constitute dilution under the Act.

[Hildy]

But if they're using their trademark in conjunction with pictures of people are their network, doesn't that make a difference?

[CWOJackson]

Since when was Al Franken a humor writer?

[SerpentDove]

Interesting cover.

The title is "Lies, liars and the lying liars who tell them."

And the most prominent person on the cover is...

[longtermmemmory]

Depends on if Franken is a parody or a serious work.

The Martin Luther King Jr. family has denied the use of King's speeches in serious analysis works for decades. In essence preventing any discussion.

DC comics automatically prevents homosexual revisionists from using Batman/robin works.

From what I have been seeing, Al Franken is trying to do a serious work. He has a problem. Enough of a problem to withstand at least the motion to dismiss.

Can you imagine the trial exposing the bitter small person that franken is? Its sid blumenthal all over.

[Consort]

It looks like FOX will lose it and the Dems will milk it and Franken will gain credibility.

[longtermmemmory]

Are there other books with the "fair and balance look at..." in the title?

I would not be so quick to dismiss the case. I can see how this could be mistaken for a Fox news sanction SERIOUS book.

No one has answered the question if this is a serious analysis. From the AP story its a serious analysis. Serious does not equal parody. Al will pay $$$.

[xm177e2]

I think Fox knows in its heart it's just a big joke, and it deliberately acts in an outrageous manner--it's the Ann Coulter of TV News.

[longtermmemmory]

If you mention Coulter etiquete requires a post of her picture.

FR is nothing if not civilized.

[Consort]

No one has answered the question if this is a serious analysis. From the AP story its a serious analysis. Serious does not equal parody. Al will pay $$$.

Fox reported today that the book is #1 in pre-published books as a result of its lawsuit. Al will make big bucks and probably donate some to help Dems beat Repubs. It may not matter matter how serious the book is.

[AgThorn]

Since when was Al Franken a humor writer?

I believe in the early days of SNL