It has come to my attention that a company owns the copyrights to our beloved Route 66 Symbol. This company is based in the Netherlands. It is beyond words to think that a foreign company can own an American Roadside Symbol such as a highway sign that I pay to maintain, my father paid for the construction and they own the image...I say BULLSHIT!Regardless of any copyright claims, the symbol for Route 66 should be considered property of the US, all people should have the ability to use the symbol for whatever reason they have whether it's a promotional tool or something they use for a location guide. It has and always been used for a number of things. A claim like this could require all property owners, businesses, shops and retail chains to drop the use of this image. Thus continuing to cripple the economy of the people who for years have used the symbol to promote their goods and services. I think it's a shame a foreign company can dictate the use of the symbol that's become synonymous with the US. It's time to correct this here and now or lose what's left of the remaining Route 66.
We the people of the Untied States of America created the road, developed the symbol, paid for the maintenance of the road and the mark call for company to consider the impact they will create and the image their company will gain by forcing the copyright claim. (If they have a claim in the Untied States). It is my understanding you cannot copyright government symbols and images, specifically roadside markings. I am researching this as I write. If a claim to the symbol and terminology is available I am sure KMart and the Route 66 Brand was copyrighted by KMart many moons ago. If they have a claim they should start at the top and stop hounding the little guy about the use. Google Route 66 and you'll find a million uses of the image
Hey Netherlands...Let me know when you come through Missouri on your next Route 66 adventure I'll make your trip one to remember through Missouri. Google the image on Route 66 and they will be in court from now till the end of the next century enforcing their claim. I also believe that first usage right would come into play and in that case they would have a tustle on their hands.
Here's the culprits...
Tempting Brands B.V.
Westerkade 27-3
1015 XE Amsterdam
The Netherlands
T: +31 (0)20 778 2156
http://www.temptingbrands.com
Martijn Berkhout MA
Managing Director
E: mberkhout@temptingbrands.com
Mark, I couldn't agree with you more. My dad had made several great digital works with classic American cars in the middle of the shield and Zazzle just started pulling them in the past 24 hours. What's worse, they initially pulled just one, then when I replied back to Zazzle and the rightsclaimer (I won't say rightsholder because that isn't an accurate term, at least not in the US.) they pulled a bunch of other ones. My dad just passed away last month and it really infuriates me that some scammer in Europe is succeeding in having his work pulled from Zazzle on this ridiculous claim.
ReplyDeleteCasey,
ReplyDeleteIt's a ridiculous claim. Zazzle doesn't want to deal with it, they only want to sell a product and care nothing about their customers who provide the art and work they sell. It's pretty cut and dried in that aspect.
I don't care where the company is located, NO corporation should be allowed to trademark Route 66.
ReplyDeleteTempting Brands doesn't own copyright to Route 66. They own the right to use Route 66 as a brand for specific purposes. They can't generally claim exclusive rights to the use of the phrase "Route 66" and the shield sign; in fact, several other companies own trademarks for entirely different uses of the phrase. Furthermore, they have not filed with the USPTO for trademark rights Route 66 on memorabilia.
ReplyDeleteA trademark is only valid if it is distinctive for a specific purpose, say "Route 66 Bananas". If a mark is widely in a specific context it is considered generic and cannot be trademarked. A basic Google search shows that generic Route 66 memorabilia is widespread. Therefore, Tempting Brands' trademark claim against Route 66 is full of shit.
However, contesting an existing trademark costs like $300, and Zazzle is perfectly entitled to deny your use of Route 66, even if you are legally allowed to. (Companies generally don't like getting sued, even if they would win.) So unless you were planning on making more than $300 on your merchandise or justice is otherwise worth $300 to you, you kind just have to deal.
John,
ReplyDeleteTempting Brands does own the copyright in the Europe, according to our (sources) and their paperwork. It does not apply to the US. So we are both correct. Zazzle, being an international seller was handed the paperwork and chose to drop designs. Since they have reopened many of those closed files and reintroduced those products. I don't think that the moneies involved was the real issue with many of us artists, it had to do with public domain and public images that as a taxpaper we had paid for. It has all washed out and Tempting's strongarm tactics again, have not worked. This is not the first time they have tried to apply pressure to those using the images.
In nearly every case life goes on as usual and the work is produced.