Today In Bananas Copyright Law: Court Urged To Rule That A Banana Costume Is Not Infringing

from the scenes-a-faire? dept

In the fall of 2017, we wrote about a, well, bananas copyright lawsuit filed by costume maker “Rasta Impsta” against K-Mart, alleging that it was selling an infringing banana costume.

That case quickly settled (so, it’s likely K-Mart just paid off Rasta Imposta to go away), but around the same time the company had sued a few other companies over similar costumes, including one operation called Kanagroo Manufacturing, for making a similar banana costume. As we had noted at the time of the Kmart case, historically, there’s been no recognized copyright in costumes, since articles of clothing are considered uncopyrightable. Except, in a truly awful Supreme Court ruling in 2017, the court swung open the door to clothing/costume copyrights, by arguing that certain elements in a piece of clothing could be considered copyrightable as “design” rather than as a “useful article” (which is not subject to copyright).

And, thus, last year a District Court judge issued an injunction against Kangaroo Manufacturing, arguing that its banana costume likely infringed on the banana costume of Rasta Imposta. The court, not surprisingly, cites that awful Star Athletica Supreme Court ruling to argue that elements of the banana costume are separable and thus can be covered by copyright. Rasta argued that the following elements were separable and could be covered by copyright:

Rasta Imposta claims the following as the unique features of the banana design: the overall shape and cutout holes of the costume, the black ends of the banana, and the vertical lines running down the middle of the banana.

Really. The lower court ruled that the cutout holes are not subject to copyright, as they are utilitarian, but decides otherwise on the shape, lines, and black ends of the banana. Oh, and also the placement of the cutout holes, rather than the holes themselves. Which is… bananas. The following is from a real, actual court ruling:

The Court can easily identify the features of the Banana Costume having a pictorial, graphic, or sculptural quality.

These features include: a) the overall length of the costume, b) the overall shape of the design in terms of curvature, c) the length of the shape both above and below the torso of the wearer, d) the shape, size, and jet black color of both ends, e) the location of the head and arm cutouts which dictate how the costume drapes on and protrudes from a wearer (as opposed to the mere existence of the cutout holes), f) the soft, smooth, almost shiny look and feel of the chosen synthetic fabric, g) the parallel lines which mimic the ridges on a banana in three-dimensional form, and h) the bright shade of a golden yellow and uniform color that appears distinct from the more muted and inconsistent tones of a natural banana.

The court does then basically argue that Kangaroo’s Banana is way too similar to Rasta Imposta’s banana and that there could be other ways to design a banana costume:

Rasta Imposta provides this Court with twenty-one banana costumes available in the marketplace that are easily distinguished from Rasta Imposta?s design, which suggests that the limited number of options requirement necessary for merger to apply is absent. (Arena Decl. Ex. A). The Court has reviewed this submission and notes several unique ways of designing a banana costume.9 The shape and curvature can vary, as can the existence and color of tips to the banana. Bananas can also be designed to appear ripe, overripe, or unripe, ranging in color from yellow, to brown, to green. The shape can be long or more stout, relatively elongated or thin or more plump. The banana may be whole or partially peeled. There can also be the production of vertical lines and the texture and material can differ.

While the court admits that Rasta has a “relatively weak copyright” in its banana costume, it is a valid copyright, and thus Kanagaroo should be barred from continuing to sell its own version.

Anyway, Kangaroo appealed the case, and the 3rd Circuit recently held a hearing where the judges were able to crack some jokes.

?I thought the counsel would wear the costumes,? U.S. Circuit Judge Michael Chagares laughed.

According to Courthouse News, the debate centered around what parts of a banana are copyrightable:

But Schrader argued Wednesday that there is nothing original about Rasta?s banana costume, such as brown spots or perhaps sunglasses, that would make it protectable; it is simply a ripe, yellow banana.

?So a costume of a terribly underripe or an overripe banana is copyrightable?? U.S. Circuit Judge Thomas Hardiman said. ?But one of a normal off-the-shelf banana is not copyrightable??

Schrader says not exactly, but pressed that there are only so many ways a banana can look.

?It was designed to look like a banana in nature,? Schrader said. ?There is no artistic twist.?

Rasta’s lawyer retorted (and, again, this really happened): “There are so many ways to conceive a design of a banana. And they conceived it exactly as ours.”

Anyway, it’s not clear how this case will actually turn out. Thanks to the Star Athletica decision, the Supreme Court has opened up this kind of nonsense as actually worth litigating. I’d still be hard pressed to think that the framers of the Constitution intended copyright law to be used to fight over two similar looking banana costumes, however.

Filed Under: , , , ,
Companies: kangaroo manufacturing, rasta imposta

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 “Today In Bananas Copyright Law: Court Urged To Rule That A Banana Costume Is Not Infringing”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
48 Comments
Bamboo Harvester (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

Cool. Now wait another forty years, and try to remember YOU WERE TOLD ABOUT THIS…

Some 20 year old is going to explain to you why you are wrong about what happened not just 40 years ago, but you actually took part in.

I’ve had more "kids" tell me that Global Cooling wasn’t a "thing" in the late seventies and that the people pushing it were NOT among those who started the Global Warming movement, and "explaining" to me what the Viet Nam war was "really about", then ten years after that was passe all about how war causes PTSD so you have to be careful around veterans, to current day where a hangnail at a formative moment of your psyche can cause PTSD so they need to raid MY retirement funds to get those people "help".

You’ll see similar if you live long enough. And you’ll shake your head in wonderment and start saying stuff about those damned kids and their loud music…

/s

FlatZOut (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

Dude, relax. I’m not into metal or weed or any of that, and I definitely won’t be into it forty or even any years from now.

Just relax. I’m more of an “A State of Trance” music instead of Metal. And I definitely won’t drink alcohol and I don’t even see myself having any form of sex.

So don’t worry.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Independent development...

Copyright to some is simply a tool for monetary extraction, that’s all.

It does not even have to be similar for a claim to be made, for example look at some of those ridiculous automated takedowns. Some of them were supposedly followed up by a real human review … uh huh sure it was.

Anonymous Coward says:

Just think. If it weren’t for copyright law what, indeed, would be the incentive for artistic inventors to make a perfectly ripe banana costume? As soon as someone foolishly put in the backbreaking effort to design such a costume it would be buried in a market full of imitators and lookalikes. We might, as a society, forget who INVENTED the perfectly ripe banana costume. Now THAT would be a tragedy.

Anonymous Coward says:

How many possible costumes are there

Rasta Imposta provides this Court with twenty-one banana costumes available in the marketplace that are easily distinguished from Rasta Imposta’s design

This line stood out to me, because while it says there are different designs, it to me implies that it is a small number. Copyright was originally created for books, and it difficult to count how many possible books there are, and literally impossible to actually create them all. I can understand an argument for copyrighting a finite number of books from an effectively infinite amount of possible books, but the number of possible costumes is a finite resource.

These features include: a) the overall length of the costume, b) the overall shape of the design in terms of curvature, c) the length of the shape both above and below the torso of the wearer, d) the shape, size, and jet black color of both ends, e) the location of the head and arm cutouts which dictate how the costume drapes on and protrudes from a wearer (as opposed to the mere existence of the cutout holes), f) the soft, smooth, almost shiny look and feel of the chosen synthetic fabric, g) the parallel lines which mimic the ridges on a banana in three-dimensional form, and h) the bright shade of a golden yellow and uniform color that appears distinct from the more muted and inconsistent tones of a natural banana.

There are 8 features listed, but for each of them there is a small number meaningfully distinct options of options, and fewer good ones. For example with the length of the costume(a) adding an inch or two will likely not be seen as different from a copyright perspective, while a costume with a banana the height of the wearer and a costume with the banana half their height are different.

In addition, (g) is just a simplest way to make the costume look like a banana, almost all costumes and clothing will have seams so they are used to mimic the ridges. Also (a) and (c) are similar, with (c) being the lengths of both halves, and (a) is the length of them combined.

allengarvin (profile) says:

This is my banana!

This is my banana. There are many like it, but this one is mine. My banana is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life. Without me, my banana is useless. Without my banana, I am useless. I must peel my banana true. I must peel faster than the monkey who is trying to steal my bananas. I must eat it before he eats it.

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...
Loading...