North Face Didn't Get The Message; Sues South Butt
from the yeah,-that'll-go-over-well dept
Earlier this year, we wrote about how outdoor clothing firm North Face was seriously overreacting in threatening a small parody clothing manufacturer run by an 18-year-old student creating clothing under the "South Butt" brand name. At the time, we were amused by the boy's lawyer noting:
"I did try to explain with a great deal of candor to counsel for the North Face that the general public is aware of the difference between a face and a butt."Well, now he may get the chance to explain that in court as well. Despite all of the publicity around those original threats, which resulted in many people trashing North Face for threatening this parody operation, North Face has apparently decided to still move forward with a lawsuit against the kid (thanks Jackie). Apparently, North Face has no sense of humor whatsoever. It's really amazing that no one at North Face paid much attention to what was being said online about the company even in bringing the threat of a lawsuit. Now that it's actually filed, the backlash may be an even bigger deal. While it is true that companies need to police misuses of their trademark, this was an opportunity for North Face to act cool about it (and, hell, why not just grant the kid a license). It would have made them look cool. Instead, they look like big corporate bullies, beating up on a kid who was having fun selling a parody line of clothing.






Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Cue AC's "moral panic" rant in
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cue AC's "moral panic" rant in
Seriously, any pet of mine which acted so ignorantly would be kept away from everybody until it had learned to reason...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Cue AC's "moral panic" rant in
Sometimes you just have to put the animal down for the sake of society....
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Cue AC's "moral panic" rant in
Oddly enough, this is the primary reason I've rarely kept a pet...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Cue AC's "moral panic" rant in
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
A vast, vast, vast majority of customers will never know, and a vast majority of those that do know won't care or spend less as a result. This registers as a "huh!" to most people.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Let's assume you're right, and the backlash produces nothing more than a blip on North Face's radar. The question remains, how is this a more beneficial reaction than selling the kid a cheap license to use their trademark or whatever and having fun with this whole thing? Protection doesn't become an issue if it's licensed, and maybe they make $20 off of a license rather than the gobs of money they're spending on counsel to strike down the horrific threat posed by a college kid that uses potty language....
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Great idea, I totally agree, but the problem is that attorneys cannot bill their clients for "having fun with this whole thing." And that's the root of this problem, as far as I'm concerned.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
It doesn't cost 200% more than a comparable Columbia Jacket because there is 200% more materials in the jacket, there's 200% more attorney fees, all FREE!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
+1 accurate
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Why does he need a license?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why does he need a license?
Am I way off? I don't get the omission on Mike's end...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why does he need a license?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why does he need a license?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why does he need a license?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why does he need a license?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
no news is bad news
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Never buy from them
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Never buy from them
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Never buy from them
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Helps me narrow down my shopping list
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Helps me narrow down my shopping list
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
The way I see it is that his only crime is in drawing a couple of curved parallel lines and then having the audacity to name his company the South Butt. I am not a sheep & don't buy the North Face crap any way but now I will make a point of not even accepting their product if it is offered free of charge - as a prize or a gift.
It might not hurt their bottom line, but if enough rain-drops fall in quick enough succession I've seen entire mountain sides washed away. Now that would be something I'd like to see the lawyers for the North face at the bottom of.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Now they are the Members Only of this decade ...
Oh well. Nice knowing you North Face ....
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
It's Burton or Columbia for a new snow jacket this yr. Im certainly not going to help North Face
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Well...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Pfft
http://www.elpippodelagente.blogspot.com/
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
The holder of a well-known trademarks is not exactly thrilled when someone decides to use a colorable imitation of the mark in a manner representing comical relief or even ridicule.
Advice? Settle ASAP, apologize, adopt another trademark, and then get on with the business of selling your products.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Wait, you forgot to mention your typical "moral" panic!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The logo looks quite different upside down, so it may not be confusing. We will see how the court rules, but assuming they stick to the purpose of trademark law, North Face will need to demonstrate that the change to the logo is not significant enough to avoid consumer confusion. That may not be all that easy to do in this case.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
South Butt should...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/12/14/SouthButt.pdf
It'd be great if Techdirt linked to the legal documents involved in cases like these instead of relying on others' reports.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
North face rocks and i would sue South Butt too!!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
which he had no qualms of doing, i hope they sue his ass into the grass and into the dirt!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
when does the kid get to say, hey i went to high school, i saw this crazy thing that my peers were all buying a brand that doesn't make its own clothes; then i remembered the story about THE EMPRUOR AND HIS CLOTHES.
North Face really did make their own clothes in Berkeley Calif but they went bankrupt being knocked of by off shore labor with other brands like Columbia and Polo to mention just two of a hundred more.
So VF really Vanity Fair a famous lingerie company decided to get into the great outdoors first buying backpack companies and jeans makers.
Then they won the auction bid for North Face for around $40 million.
The factory was gone in Berkeley, the retail outlet remains.
The brand grew making everything but Goretex and Polartec and Down.
Placed in Macy's and other non technical retailers the North Face has changed from a brand about the most difficult side of a mountain to climb to a brand that has paved over malls with parody tee shirts, sneakers, sweatshirts and anything else you ever saw or bought in a Mall rather than a ski shop or a famous outdoor barn like REI.
A Butt is a butt and a Face is a face. But the real meaning of those words changes as fast as anyone grows to become ten times bigger than the original founder who never allowed the North Face brand beyond the scope of the original retail store that started it all called North Face.
So now the bra and panties of VF (Vanity Fair) are really upset that the BUTT has found their roots.
North is North and South is South if the brand can't tell you that then do not go climbing or exploring in North Face or you will go the wrong way. And if you do relax with South Butt instead of exploring make sure the kids and the family dog are enjoying it too.
Yes the PARODY worked and is near perfect.. It broke the tried and true needle of a compass
Up's that last three letters might become a parody of compbutt..
As in hey Vf comp it and leave the kid alone.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
More people who dont like NorthFace
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Add Your Comment