Jimmy Buffett suing Six Flags for copyright infringement.

Short story, so not really newsworthy.

I have to laugh at this one. Besides rhyming (Carrothead and Parrothead), I don't see how SF is committing copyright infringement.

Click here.

My favorite MJ tune: "Billie Jean" which I have been listening to alot now. RIP MJ.

Even the JB fan boards are saying he should back off.
Jeff's avatar
Well, for one thing, it's trademark infringement, not copyright infringement.

Jeff - Editor - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog

O.K. that's fine.

But it's still a joke.

My favorite MJ tune: "Billie Jean" which I have been listening to alot now. RIP MJ.

Mamoosh's avatar
Is Buffet that desperate? Is he wastin' away and in need of the dough? Maybe we don't know the full story and there's a woman to blame? Nah...I bet it's his own damn falt.

Maybe he'll settle for some sponge cake, a tatoo, some flip-flops, a blender, a Mexican cutie, and a shaker of salt?

Heck I don't know...I haven't a clue.

*** Edited 10/2/2007 3:45:23 AM UTC by Mamoosh***

Good times are always to be had when sponge cake and a Mexican Cutie are involved ;)

I have a lot of respect for Mr. Buffet (I like his involvement with the Save The Manatees program) but this is just silly. Regardless of any kind of infringement, I see no harm being done.

Jeff's avatar
Any big company that manages a well known brand has to look out for its marks though, if for no other reason than to demonstrate that they have value. I doubt Jimmy had anything to do with it. They have lawyers to look after this sort of thing.

Jeff - Editor - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog

Jimmy must want his Cheese Burger in Paradise and eat it too. LOL
Doesn't Jimmy's lawyers still have to get the clear from him to pursue a lawsuit?

Heck, the comedian Carrot Top has more of a case then Jimmy does.

My favorite MJ tune: "Billie Jean" which I have been listening to alot now. RIP MJ.

I'm a JB fan, and I never considered Carrothead and Parrothead to be close until I read this story. I need to get out more. *le sigh*
Lord Gonchar's avatar
From what I understand the Buffett empire is really uncool about things like this and it doesn't seem uncharacteristic.

I seem to recall stories about lawsuits for equally 'harmless' things.

This is lame so if i call somebody anything head (you figure out the curse lol) then he can sue more?

Carrothead is nowhere near his trademark. This is a stupid lawsuit. Also six flags had this for atleast a year or two and is just suing now?

Ajrides said:
Jimmy must want his Cheese Burger in Paradise and eat it too. LOL

LOl, or maybe he just didn't want to pay 7.50 for it.

Great Lakes Brewery Patron...


Back in the late 80s Disney was being chastised for "defending it's trademarks" when they filed suit against a town in Canada for using Winnie the Pooh and they also sued a chain of daycare centers in South Florida for putting Disney characters on the outside of the building. In the latter case Disney claimed that those characters implied Disney's support, approval, involvement in the daycare centers.

At issue with Trademarks, as I understand it, is that when a company does not defend them they can...after a period of time...be considered part of the public domain.

Considering the value of Mickey and friends to Disney (and of Jimmy Buffett's "brand" for that matter to Buffett) you can understand why they would be vigilant in the courts.

Jeff's avatar
Is everyone here an intellectual property attorney now as well?

Like I said, if you don't enforce your trademark, even if you or Six Flags doesn't see the similarity, you risk losing it.

Jeff - Editor - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog

While I'm no attorney, I can clearly see the huge difference between using actual Disney characters painted on a building and the term "carrothead". But, I can also see why Buffett would go after the term. I bet they wouldn't be as upset if carrot didn't sound just like parrot. I'm sure he doesn't go after the Green Bay Packers for having cheeseheads.
Jeff's avatar
No one is "upset" over anything. Claims like this are based on two factors: That the infringing mark can cause confusion in the marketplace, and that infringing mark profits from similarities to an existing mark. Most case law in the US seems to focus on the confusion part, but I've read about cases that were reinforced by the profit from another mark angle as well.

Jeff - Editor - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog

I'm no attorney...but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express once. (Actually, I was just re-reading one of my many Disney books that talked at great lenght about those lawsuits.)

I'm sure if a new softdrink came out called KokaCola you would see pretty swift action out of Atlanta. Or, if there was a new chain of restaurants called Kenttuckey Fried Chicken. You get what I'm saying.

It is easy to bash large companies. In fact, it is good sport. But, sometimes, those companies aren't as "evil" as it might appear they are.

^ Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. Carrothead is clearly trying to pan off of the parrothead recognition. Cheesehead is not. If they had the Bugs Bunnyhead club, I bet no one would have said anything.
But he does not "own the rights" to each and every ________-head. He may have some trademark over "parrothead" in regards to a fan club or merchandising or whatever,but "Carrothead"? No way. What about Pothead, or Radiohead, does he "own" those trademarks too? It's a common-used phrase and besides - Six Flags probably has Carrothead branded as a trademark as well - do we know for sure that they don't?

This is another nuisance law suit.

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2024, POP World Media, LLC