Some campaign slogans violate law
During the week of the Associated Students of Utah State University elections, propaganda banners, slogans and logos were seen all over campus. These logos and slogans might appear to be funny and catchy to many students, but many of them violated the federal trademark law, and in a more serious scenario, the school might end up in a million-dollar lawsuit.
“Trademarks are exclusive rights to use a symbol or other identifiable logo, and it is granted by the federal government for a period of 10 years,” Penny Byrne, professor of communication, said. “It grants exclusive rights to use that mark.”
She said anyone else who uses the mark for any other purpose without the owner’s permission is in violation of the federal trademark law. Byrne said in a case such as the election, the federal trademark law was definitely broken.
Among the slogans and logos that were subjected to the violation were Michael Baker’s Got Mike? slogan, Jake Stevens’ Superman symbol, Kelly Mendenhall’s Circle K logo, Brad Jowers’ Superman character icon, and Mike Wagonner’s Volkswagen logo.
Commenting on Steven’s Superman logo, Byrne said it is owned by a corporation which markets the character. She said the logo is kept in such tight control that even Dean Cain, the actor who played Superman in the television series, ended up in a big lawsuit because he had used the logo without permission.
“I can see how Superman can be an issue,” said Donald Linton, ASUSU students’ attorney.
Linton said in the case of the Superman logo, the logo itself is worth more than the company which markets it. The DC comics company may not respond positively, he said.
To Jake Stevens, one of the election candidates, the use of the Superman logo was out of just pure innocence. He said the actual logo used during his election was modified to not look the same as the original one.
“I don’t think about the trademark things until after the election,” Stevens said.
He said he could not remember the ASUSU election committees informing him of such rules. The reason he used the logo for his election campaign was because it catches people’s eyes, he said. It is also a recognizable symbol
Realizing his violation, Stevens said he wished he would have adjusted the logo enough to stay away from the original resemblance. He also said he would be a more creative if he were to run again.
‘If recommended by authorities to not do it,” Stevens said. “I won’t do it again.”
Michael Baker’s Got Mike? slogan was yet another example of a violation of the federal trademark law. Baker said he does not think he violated any laws. He said the reason he used the slogan was because he did not think it was wrong. Furthermore, he said, instead of Got Milk?, his slogan was Got Mike? which was different.
But according to Black’s Law Dictionary on trademark infringement, any suggestive trademarks used are also in violation of the trademark law. The segment describes suggestive mark or term as “One that suggests, rather than describes, some particular characteristics of goods and services to which it applies and requires consumer to exercise imagination in order to draw conclusion as to nature of goods or services.”
“If the American Dairy Association (ADA) wanted to, there will be sufficient justification for a court case to be heard on that,” . Byrne said. “I don’t think the ADA will be amused by having their trademark slogan in a campus election.”
Byrne said one main reason companies go through the time and expense to register their trademark is to not have other people use it. The owner basically owns exclusive rights on these logos and slogans, she said. In a case such as Baker’s, she said, if a lawsuit was filed and he lost, he might have to pay damages from his own pocket.
“It is probably not going to be a real nice situation for a 23-year-old college student to find himself with the worse end of a hundred thousand dollar damage reward,” she said.
Although the election candidates were violating trademark laws, they were not encouraged to do so, said Nollie Haws, ASUSU vice president of public relations. Haws, who also chaired the election committee, said the candidates were asked to not use any copyrighted materials in the election bylaws.
She said most of the candidates did not get permission because they knew they were not going to get caught. But if something were to happen, she said, the responsibility falls on the candidates.
“So far, no one has gotten into trouble, so it keeps repeating,” Haws said.
Although there are no “trademark police” who would run around to watch out for these violations, Byrne said, “It is a civil violation.
“This is not the first election in which trademarks have been borrowed liberally,” she said.
Haws, who had also infringed the trademark law in her previous election campaign, said ASUSU is not responsible or any of the violations since the election bylaws clearly states that trademark copyrights should not be violated.
“I hope that if something did happen, the companies would take it in good humor,” she said. “Copying is the highest form of flattery.”
She also said that once the election committee had run the bylaws through with the candidates, they were not liable anymore. In addition, the logos used during the election might serve as a publicity tool for their owners.
“Law is an art, not a science,” Linton said. “The better approach is to come out with a design of our own.”
He said although it may seem harmless, candidates were taking risks. He said that students may not be targets for a lawsuit, but the school might be because it was sponsoring the campaigns.
“The appropriate thing is to secure permission from the owner of the mark to use it,” Byrne said. “The fact is, none of the owners of those marks would grant permission.”
Haws said, “I guess we were playing with fire.”
Although carrying out a strict trademark rule in an election campaign may be the right thing to do, it is going to be less fun, Haws said.
Michael Waggoner, ASUSU executive vice president elect whose campaign logo resembled that of Volkswagen, said he understood the trademark laws and thought by altering the logo, he would not be violating the law. He said if he had known more about the law, he would not have done it.
It might not be a bad idea for the university to look at the situation, Linton said.
“The simple fact is that students are not a good target for a lawsuit, but the university is,” he said.
Haws said if she were to chair the next election, she would draw the line and not permit such laws to be violated. She said hopefully this will encourage creativity on the students’ part.
“The main thing that bothers me about this is that students are more creative than that, and they shouldn’t have to steal or borrow these other identities,” Byrne said.