I guess we should have seen the handwriting on the wall two years ago when Disney bought Marvel Entertainment. At the time, I said it was a great deal for consumers because it allowed “The House the Mouse Built” to develop new comic properties using an already existing resource, Marvel Comics. What I couldn’t know at the time was that the acquisition would make Disney management lose its freaking mind.
On May 3, 2011, just two days after Osama bin Laden was killed in a raid on the Al Qaeda leader’s Pakistan compound, Disney filed trademark applications to use the name “SEAL Team 6” on everything from entertainment, toys, video games, clothing, footwear — even Christmas ornaments and snow globes. SEAL Team 6, of course, is the name of the U. S. Navy squad that executed the daring mission and eliminated the renowned terrorist.
On 13 May, 2011 the U.S. Navy was forced to file a competing trademark applications of its own in order to retain (and defend) the rights to the name, “SEAL Team 6.” The Navy’s two applications seek trademark status for “SEAL Team” posters and clothing, as well as “Navy SEAL” goods and services, identifying the Navy squad as an organization that “develops and executes military missions involving special operations strategy, doctrine and tactics.”
There were some schools of thought that said in a court battle, Disney would prevail because it filed to trademark the name first. However there are others who said, rightly, that in commerce, trademark use is based on who used it first (priority of use). In that case the U. S. Navy wins hands down because the Navy was using the term ‘SEAL Team 6’ long before Disney heard about them on the news.
Yesterday, Disney withdrew its trademark application, but only because its application had been ridiculed in the press and in the media as tasteless and opportunistic. As many have discovered to their detriment, when Jon Stewart and the “Daily Show” gets hold of you, there is no escape from the mockery. As a company, Disney doesn’t mind peddling fun, but it can’t stand to be mocked. So cheers to Disney for doing the right thing even if it was for the wrong reason.
But if we step away from the legal aspects for a moment, the basic question remains: “Should a private company have the right (and financial benefit that goes with that right) to trademark/copyright the name of a U.S. Government organization or military unit?”
The answer should clearly be “no” because a “yes” answer means the U.S. taxpayer will have to pay royalties to any company that trademarks the name of any Government agency/ department or organization. It would force the Government into the position of having to protect via copyright or trademark the name of every single Government entity doing business as a Government agent to prevent having to pay a licensing fee to a private corporation or citizen in the future. That concept is unsustainable, and frankly, should be unnecessary.
I had hoped the people at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office would reject Disney’s marketing scheme outright and give the U. S. Navy another win by allowing it to keep undisputed ownership of the name of its units. That didn’t happen this time because Disney withdrew its application, but it’s only a matter of time before another company or individual challenges the Government over naming rights. Hmm, I wonder if I can trademark the name First Marine Division.