Dispute Between Roberto Escobar And Netflix Over 'Narcos' Gets Weird: Licensing Talks And A Dead Location Scout

from the even-stranger-things dept

Last year we discussed a dispute between Roberto Escobar, brother of the infamous drug kingpin Pablo Escobar and the Medellin cartel's accountant, and Netflix over the latter's hit show Narcos. It was a strange dispute for any number of reasons, ranging from Roberto Escobar's demand for one billion dollars and the rights to alter content in future episodes to the fact that Escobar's demands didn't lay any actual claim to any intellectual property in dispute, all the way up to the fact that Narcos doesn't actually portray Roberto Escobar at all. Much like the silly dispute between Activision and Manuel Noriega over publicity rights, it was pretty much assumed that this nonsense would be done away with more quickly than a federal informant working on the inside of the cartel.

Sadly, however, this still appears to be a thing, and it's getting quite strange. For starters, Escobar's legal team claims that a capitulation of sorts by the show might be in the works. It all starts as you'd expect, with the legal team for Narcos detailing via a letter how silly Escobar's claims are, as well as how plainly false the applications Escobar subsequently made for trademarks on terms and titles from the show were.

Narcos Productions, LLC (NPL) — the company behind the series and its popular video game spinoff Narcos: Cartel Wars — contend that without NPL's "knowledge or consent, on Aug. 20, 2016, Escobar filed use-based applications to register the marks NARCOS and CARTEL WARS with the [U.S. Patent and Trademark Office] covering a range of goods and services." Those services include everything from "downloadable ring tones" and "sunglasses, decorative magnets" to "temporary tattoos, bookmarks and sheet music," according to the trademark application documents included with the letter. The letter calls the claims "fraudulent."

"For example," writes NPL attorney Jill M. Pietrini, "Escobar claims that it has used NARCOS in connection with things like 'operating a website' and 'game services provided online from a computer network' since Jan. 31, 1986. However, the internet had not been developed for widespread consumer use in 1986, nor was the capability to provide audiovisual works nor game services available at that time."

So basically the lawyers for the show are demonstrating how flimsy Escobar's attempts to setup a legal way to extort the show are. Trademark law is quite clear on the rights it affords to those who are the first to use a trademark in commerce and ought to act as a shield to these attempts. Despite that, emails obtained by THR from Escobar's legal team to Escobar himself seem to indicate that Narcos is considering just paying Escobar to go away anyway.

In a subsequent email correspondence obtained by THR and dated Sept. 1, an attorney for Escobar Inc. at Century City-based Browne George Ross LLP informs his client that he and Pietrini had a productive conversation about the claim.

"I floated the idea of paying you for an assignment or license or release related to your pre-exisiting rights in the trademarks in certain categories," Wesley writes. "She seemed to see the logic of exploring those discussions. She is going to speak with her client and get back to me."

While there is no clear commitment to a licensing deal there, the entertainment industry is notorious for paying people like this to go away, so it's not entirely out of the question. Given the clear legal framework here, however, as well as the personalities involved on the other side, it strikes me as fairly ludicrous that the show's producers would want any part of paying a former member of the cartel for no clear legal reason. Escobar's lawyers are making a lot of noise about how if Escobar chooses not to settle for whatever Narcos might be willing to pay him, then they "own the trademarks", which certainly is not remotely true here in the United States.

Adding to how strange all of this is would be the fact that a location scout for the show, Carlos Munoz Portal, was murdered in Mexico in recent weeks while scouting locations for Narcos' fourth season. While the facts surrounding Portal's death remain unknown at the time of this writing, Escobar has been rather cryptic on the topic.

Speaking Monday to The Hollywood Reporter, Escobar's 71-year-old surviving brother, Roberto De Jesus Escobar Gaviria, suggested the show's producers are not cut out for filming in such cartel-infested locales as Mexico and Colombia, adding that they would benefit from the hiring of "hitmen ... as security."

As for whether or not anyone at Escobar Inc., including Gaviria, currently has any knowledge regarding what happened to slain location scout Portal, Gustafsson would only offer, "No comment on that. But Escobar Inc. cooperates with all law enforcement."

It's as likely as not that Escobar is merely playing coy on this topic to add some gravitas to his threats and demands to Narcos and Netflix, but the comments are chill-inducing considering the source. Regardless, the merits of the trademark claims at hand remain fairly clear. Talks of Narcos capitulating or not, it's difficult to imagine a $1 Billion payday for Escobar coming anytime soon.


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Eldakka (profile), 21 Sep 2017 @ 10:54pm

    this nonsense would be done away with more quickly than a federal informant working on the inside of the cartel.

    badum tish

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 21 Sep 2017 @ 11:22pm

    So, wheres all the coverage about fellow Juju Bee ZuckerFucker rigging the election on Trump's behalf?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 21 Sep 2017 @ 11:45pm

    If you're going to do a show on them, why the everloving *fuck* would you send anybody, for any reason, down south of the Rio?

    Goddamn, Hollywood...You're just stupid. No nice way to put it anymore.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Dark Helmet (profile), 22 Sep 2017 @ 6:42am

      Re:

      Hollywood didn't "send" Porter down south of the Rio. My understanding is that he was a Mexico native that Hollywood contracted as a site scout when they filmed in the country....

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 22 Sep 2017 @ 7:45am

        Re: Re:

        Why did they want to shoot there, most movies I've seen were shot nowhere near the place the movie claimed it was.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 22 Sep 2017 @ 7:48am

        Re: Re:

        Why oh why would they feel the need to film on-location in Narco country? Of all the times to be anal about authenticity, this sure as hell isn't one of them.

        My comment about stupidity still stands.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 22 Sep 2017 @ 11:57am

        Re: Re:

        Hollywood didn't "send" Porter down south of the Rio. My understanding is that he was a Mexico native that Hollywood contracted as a site scout when they filmed in the country....

        Implying that they planned, later, to "send anybody, for any reason, down south of the Rio"...

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ninja (profile), 22 Sep 2017 @ 7:08am

    It seems somebody downloaded a bullet in the show.. /dark humor

    disclaimer: I'm not in favor of the murder neither I agree with this copyright idiocy but at the very least you can find some humor in the clusterfuck around this series.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    DannyB (profile), 22 Sep 2017 @ 7:39am

    Shareholder Value

    If I were a decision maker at Netflix, in control of this show, if I even suspected that the location scout's murder was related to the dispute with the show, then I would cancel the show.

    Bu . . . but . . . shareholder value! (eg, you are obligated to do anything / everything possible to increase shareholder value!)

    In this case, I would argue that while this may be a financial hit in the short term, the long term value in this decision is to maintain trust. Trust with the audience, who would mostly probably support, even applaud such a decision. And trust with the current and future people who you want to work with.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Arioch (profile), 22 Sep 2017 @ 6:09pm

    Major Customer

    Duh..
    Let's be fair, several areas of the American "creative industry" are notorious drug abusers
    What we have here is a large consumer market that does not want to upset a major "undercover" sponsor.
    So let's get it clear corporate America....

    You are as corrupt as F**Cxk and we (the rest of the world) all hate you for it.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2017 @ 7:32am

    "several areas of the American "creative industry" are notorious drug abusers"

    Your favorite whipping boy?

    Are major league sports considered creative?
    Interesting, because they sure do abuse drugs.

    What about the pharma industry - are they creative as well?
    They also abuse drugs ... sorta in a different way but it is still abuse.

    Shall I continue?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    GEMont, 23 Sep 2017 @ 9:49am

    The T-Rump Era

    Ah my, t'is a grand time to be a bad-guy, when all the laws of every land are being re-written by your friends.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Oct 2017 @ 6:21am

    Now we know why Netflix threatens "pirates" with death.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Techdirt Logo Gear
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.