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.

Filed Under: , , ,
Companies: north face, south butt

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “North Face Didn't Get The Message; Sues South Butt”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Dark Helmet (profile) says:

Re: Re:

“Mike, I think you truly (and often) greatly overestimate the backlash for events like this.”

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….

Ima Fish (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

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?

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.

Ragaboo (profile) says:

Re: Why does he need a license?

Frankly, I was wondering the same thing. I find it interesting that Mike doesn’t say that North Face doesn’t have a legal leg to stand on, he simply jumped to, “They should offer him a license,” with an implied, “and he should accept!” Why should he pay them for an unnecessary license? Parody is allowed, especially when you’re selling a product that could NOT be confused for the actual product by an idiot in a hurry. Even if his line becomes popular somehow and starts getting offered in stores (which is obviously incredibly unlikely), there is still no danger of someone grabbing a South Butt jacket thinking it’s from North Face.

Am I way off? I don’t get the omission on Mike’s end…

Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile) says:

Re: Why does he need a license?

If you click through the links you will see that the South Butt logo is an upside down North Face logo. I am pretty sure that is the major to do. This is the first I heard of South Butt so I am going to try to get some clothing if still possible. Hilarious stuff, really. Thanks North Face for bringing the brand to my attention through lawsuit.

Dementia (profile) says:

Not to side with North Face, I think they’re being amazingly stupid, but while the entire logo IS pretty much completely opposite of the North Face logo, I can see where they might be confused due to the general style. However, although I can see a possibility of confusion, I would tend to agree that a licensing agreement, while cheaper than a lawsuit, shouldn’t be necessary.

kilroy says:

rounded corners on every web page are in danger of being next …

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.

Anonymous Coward says:

To the parodist all I can say is “Welcome to the real world of business.” Perhaps if he had stifled his intent to play cutesy for long enough to learn even a little bit about trademark law he may have realized that he was inviting precisely this type of reaction and that the law is not in his favor.

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.

dorp says:

Re: Re:

To the parodist all I can say is “Welcome to the real world of business.” Perhaps if he had stifled his intent to play cutesy for long enough to learn even a little bit about trademark law he may have realized that he was inviting precisely this type of reaction and that the law is not in his favor.

Wait, you forgot to mention your typical “moral” panic!

Michael (profile) says:

Re: Re:

North Face may be unhappy, but whether or not they have a legal leg to stand on is pretty questionable. The real question is if turning the North Face logo over is enough of a change to make sure consumers know the difference (remembering that is the purpose of trademarks).

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.

Dave H says:

Re: Re: Re:

No offense, Michael, but do you know anything about trademark law? Likelihood of confusion is evaluated by using an 8-factor test (in most jurisdictions). If you think this isn’t nearly a slam dunk case for likely confusion given the virtually identical goods and the blatant attempt to piggyback on North Face’s accumulated goodwill, you’re wrong. Also, this “purpose of trademark law” talk is misleading. The purpose of trademark law is not consumer protection but protecting businesses from illegitimate diversions of their trade. Consumer confusion is sometimes used as a proxy, which is why you see a lot of it in the case law, but let’s not kid ourselves about whose interests are being protected here. The South Butt’s only shot here is a parody defense, but there’s very little shot of that succeeding given the pretty weak parody.

Dave H says:

This isn’t quite as frivolous as you think it is. First of all, in response to one of the commenters, this isn’t the kind of parody that trademark dilution law is likely to protect. Second of all, counsel for the South Butt said they’re trying to get North Face to buy them and their inventory for a million dollars. Seems like a case of a lame company blatantly taking advantage of another’s brand goodwill and doing the equivalent of cybersquatting on their trademark. I don’t think this is a case of North Face just being unable to take a joke.

anonymous says:

Re: Re: Re:

i read the lawsuit, im completely on northfaces side, there are many ways to become an entrepreneur this kid could have done it in a number of ways. hell, if he had a half a gram of talent he could of created his own logo, but he doesn’t, so whats the next best thing to fast riches? rip off another companies already solid business model.

which he had no qualms of doing, i hope they sue his ass into the grass and into the dirt!

Anonymous Coward says:

tell the kid to do this… tell the kid to do that.
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.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...