I was chuckling to myself at the thought of someone thinking they were buying granola only to realize when they got home that it was granola, or vice versa, and realized how much music is now purchased online.
You have to be really high confused to think you’re buying granola through iTunes.
Your Grist Is On My List.
Yes, correct. It’s not a matter of granola and music being confused, it’s the implied connection to or endorsement by the existing trademark.
Ben and Jerry’s ice cream saw fit to get permission from Jerry Garcia and pay him royalties for the use of his name on Cherry Garcia ice cream. Cherry Garcia ice cream, while being rated as mediocre by more than a few online reviewers, was the best selling Ben and Jerry’s flavor for over a decade. Lending his name to the flavor sent a clear message to deadheads that if they liked Jerry, they should buy this ice cream. And they did. It’s a fun name for a yucky flavor. And Haulin’ Oats tried to do the same thing, except without getting permission or paying any money. Yes, music and granola are different items, but there is a long tradition of celebrities endorsing products and getting paid for it.
Zappa Franks
Is Daryl Hall singing on Fripp’s album, or is Fripp playing on Hall’s album?
UPDATE: I’m wrong (that’s a first) !
Afterwards, Hall recorded vocals for most of the tracks on Fripp’s solo debut, Exposure
(1979), however due to pressure from RCA and Hall’s management this was
cut back to just two songs on the final release (“You Burn Me up I’m a
Cigarette” and “North Star”). These are included on some CD versions of Sacred Songs.
Coincidentally, I was in an LA bar with a very good “I play requests” pianist about a month ago, and asked for “Family Man.” He had a wide repertoire but had never heard of it. They’d do better by appreciating and leveraging this publicity than by being copyright jerks.
Whoah, Here she comes. Watch out now, she’ll chew you up -
She’s a grain eater…
I can’t groat for that.
Maybe he just wasn’t that into Mike Oldfield.
Haulin’ Oats granola
I could go for that, no can poo.
You’ve got trademarks and endorsements confounded here. If Hall & Oates (human beings) were suing Haulin’ Oates because Haulin’ Oates fraudulently implied that Hall & Oates (human beings) endorsed their product then I think they’d have a pretty tough hill to climb to prove that, and I don’t think they would likely win unless Haulin’ Oats actually had suggested they were the granola of Hall & Oates.
But for trademark infringement they have to prove likelihood of confusion between Haulin’ Oates and Hall & Oates (trademark name for musical group), and one of the elements of testing that is the similarity of the product or service. Because we are talking granola vs. music, this seems pretty fanciful.
I’ve got nothing confounded. It’s an exact parallel. Jerry Garcia - musician is to Cherry Garcia - ice cream as Hall and Oats - musicians are to Haulin’ Oats - cereal. One gave permission to use their name ™ and got paid, and one didn’t.
Relying on context? Dude, that’s how we communicate, every time someone opens their mouth. Context is a fundamental part of communication, so I think - as @anon50609448 noted - it is not an unreasonable burden to expect people will grok the contextual difference between breakfast today and music from three decades ago.
I often wonder if decisions like this aren’t in part due to the labels as much as it is individual artists?
that would be my guess. sometimes the labels do this without even consulting the artist(s) in question first.
It’s BS, their logo art etc has nothing musical about it, it’s a truck, hauling oats, which is how they get to market.
Fuckwads want to pretend they own two words together forever, even phonetically, because they made cheesy pop music in the 70’s/early 80’s of the last century? Fuck those guys.
Acrimonious assholes I’d say, but it’s probably just their lawyers/labels lawyers who saw money. I mean, people be ripping them off left right and centre on sites like zazzle.com and spreadshirt, but they don’t act on that despite it being actually about their shitty band name.
Maybe they’re basing it on how oats can help you shit? Bathrooms are commonly stocked with Hall n Oats Muzak.
This does not surprise me. It’s just the method of modern law. If Haulin’ Oats didn’t expect this then they’re out of touch.
Just because Ben & Jerry’s got permission and paid, that doesn’t mean that they were required to by law.
Since they wanted to deliberately associate their product with the person it was both correct & indemnifying to do so, but
had they wanted to call their product “Cherry Garcia” without associating it with Jerry Garcia then they could have done so.
That’s why it’s a shitty comparison. Just because some people can’t hear x x x combination of vowel & consonant sounds without thinking of something entirely unrelated to what they are viewing/reading/actually hearing about does not mean someone is entitled to a payday over an unrelated thing.
That some coupla dudes came to epitomize the ugly fashions of the early 80’s does not mean they own all or any share of intellectual property that references the transportation of a major commodity. The very thought is stupid.
