We have previously discussed the absurd growth of trademark and copyright claims in this country. Now, John Wayne’s descendants have had to go to court to seek the right to continue to use the legendary actor’s nickname, “Duke,” over the objections of Duke University which now claims to own the word “Duke.” The University has objected to a line of alcoholic beverages by the family called “Duke.” They appear to be using the line from the Duke’s character Wil Anderson in The Cowboys (1972) “I wouldn’t make it a habit of calling me that son.”
I must confess a bias as an old Cowboys Western addict. However, in my defense, I have long been a critic of growing copyright and trademark claims over things occurring in public or common phrases or terms. (For a prior column, click here). We have often discussed the abusive expansion of copyright and trademark laws. This includes common phrases, symbols, and images being claimed as private property. (here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here). (For a prior column, click here and here).
It appears that the feud with the university has been going on for years. The school then tried to block the registration of a Duke trademark for the line of alcoholic beverages. The University implausibly argued that a line of drinks named Duke would confuse consumers with the university. (I suppose consumers would think that this was liquid education or that they could drink their way to a degree. Of course, with the infamous Duke Lacrosse case, perhaps Duke thinks alcohol and its institution is some type of signature relationship). The claim is even more excessive when one looks at the label which clearly shows “The Duke” rather than Washington Duke. (Of course, if it were Duke tobacco, that would come closer to the real source of the Duke fortune).
The very notion of owning a noun like “Duke” continues to shock many people as it does me. However, Congress and the Obama Administration has continued to yield blindly to demand of lobbyists for increasing sanctions and criminal prosecutions for copyright and trademark violations.
Duke seems undeterred by taking on the Duke in a trademark shootout. Michael Schoenfeld, the university’s spokesman, said in a statement. “As Mr. Wayne himself said, ‘Words are what men live by … words they say and mean.'” Well, sure, but he also said in True Grit, “Young fella, if you’re looking; for trouble I’ll accommodate ya”
Being a PI, I’m always skeptical of people like this new arrival, Paolo. Never seen this alleged person and all of a sudden he arrives out of nowhere, takes a shot @ me alleging knowledge of 2 years, and then BK within 2 minutes gives him an “Attaboy.” I can abide taking shots from people I know, but anonymous people and then a regular. Come on folks, let’s be real. In the words of The Who, Paolo, “Who the f@ck are you?” BK seems like she needs an enforcer. But, she needs someone tougher than this Paolo troll!!
You know some modern actors that I enjoy are Meryl Streep (she is a chameleon; she just disappears into really different roles), Robert Downey, Jr (he’s a phoenix who rose from the ashes and started caring about the craft), Jim Caviezel, and William Hurt and Mark Strong are really changeable character actors. It’s rare to find actors that portray realistic emotions on screen.
It is true that John Wayne always brought his own style to characters. That was his draw, that these roles matched him. I am not aware of his ever playing a real villain, although he was a bit dissipated in a few of his films, like True Grit. I don’t think his audience would have been satisfied if he played someone really different, like a weak character or a villain. Women had crushes on him, and men wanted to be him. I still remember an I Love Lucy episode where he played himself.
Paolo, A person with insight.
Nick,
“Additionally, you and many show a lack of understanding history in context.”
Yes, you have certainly shown a great understanding of history in your two years here as a frivolous commenter. Always digging with the, “and many,” yet your contributions rarely go beyond your immediate life experiences.
Saucy, IMBD has a better list of “actors”, Top 100. They have the Duke in the middle[47] w/ guys like Alan Arkin, William Holden, etc. That’s consistent w/ my take. The Duke played himself. Great actors can stretch themselves so you don’t see the actor, you see the character. Actually, character actors are some of my favorites, Billy Bob Thornton, Harry Dean Stanton, Sam Rockwell, etc.
bk, It should not come as a shock to you that you weren’t the demographic he was seeking. Additionally, you and many show a lack of understanding history in context. What are your thoughts on Huck Finn?
John Wayne movies extolled violence. He consistently used his fists or his guns to settle any dispute, no matter how inconsequential. His movies were also demeaning to women. The last movie I saw was one where he chased his “love” down the public street, ripped off her dress, and then publicly spanked her. This may be great theater to those who go for that kind of “role model” but it turned my stomach. I walked out of the theater and never again wasted my money on one of his movies. That scene made me realize that that was the John Wayne treatment of women in nearly all of his movies. Tough guy role model…. Blech….
Saucy, You are a tunnel vision person. I loved John Wayne. But, I am a professional objectivist. He was not a great actor, He was a great MOVIE STAR. Great actors often don’t get big box office. The recently deceased Phillip Seymour Hoffmann was a great actor. He was not a movie star. His flicks did average @ best box office receipts. He was an exponentially better actor than The Duke. I loved both The Duke and Hoffmann. So, let me show my objectivity. I loathe Sean Penn. But, Sean Penn who I loathe, is a better actor than John Wayne, who I love.
Your comment of 3:39pm is all over the place, as is often the case in your stream of consciousness ways. I like you, but I also think you’re often out of your league when you discuss certain topics. My liking you will not influence my critiquing you. In acting, although awards have politics involved, you can tell who are the good actors by who gets nominated and win Oscars. The Duke got a pity Oscar for True Grit as he was dying. He was one of the greatest movie stars, not one of the greatest actors. Can’t we both agree we loved his flicks and have a beer?
Imagine the money you could make if you could trademark the word “it.”
Why not; considering…
===============
“This week, the Wall Street Journal reported that Google, which long ago trademarked “Google Glass,” is experiencing some difficulty in the next stage of its IP journey: trademarking the word “glass” itself.
I know, I know—get out your small violin™.
But while it’s tempting to, as many have, make fun of Google’s attempt to trademark a word that has been with us since the 12th century … it’s also worth remembering that Google isn’t alone in its attempts to make all the world a mark. On the contrary: trademarking is a time-honored, and in many ways legally responsible, tradition among the major tech companies.
Here, with that in mind, is an extremely partial list of tech trademarks both attempted and won.
Apple has tried to trademark the word “startup.”
Apple and Amazon have faced off in court over the use of the term “app store.”
Amazon has successfully filed for trademarks for the terms “Prime,” “I want one!,” “of note,” “look inside,” and “Earth’s biggest.”
Facebook has tried to trademark the word “book.”
Facebook has successfully trademarked “F,” “Face,” “FB,” and “Wall.” Oh,
and also “Facepile.”
Instagram has tried to stop other apps from using “Insta,” “Gram,” and “IG.”
Microsoft has trademarked the word “haunt.”
Microsoft has tried to trademark the term “age of mythology” and the words “natural” and “rare.”
Samsung has filed for trademarks on the terms “dark screen” and “finger scanner.”
Skype has trademarked the word “silk.”
Twitter has trademarked the word “tweet.”
Zynga has trademarked the term “with friends”—and has sued other companies over their use of it.
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/04/google-is-trying-to-trademark-the-word-glass-and-its-in-good-company/360198/
A movie about a Duke worshipper:
A certain “Duke” got to spend time in the “pokey” and now has seen some lite (Duke “It Hanging Out Now” Cunningham).
TheSaucyMugwump, thank you for bringing your last comment to my attention. It was indeed in violation of the civility rule and has been deleted.
Saucy, you hammered me? Funny I didn’t feel a thing. 😉
Nick wrote “He was an average actor @ best”
Since I hammered Annie, I will hammer you. Your statement is demonstrably false given that he is #13 on AFI’s list of 25 greatest male screen legends. His style appealed to the vast majority of people who attended movies. And given that his era ended just before the advent of VHS / Betamax videotape machines, let alone DVDs, we can conclude that people voted with their feet (and wallets) to see him. He was a cash cow.
Robert Mitchum, another person who died from smoking, was one of my favorite actors, but I would never make a definitive statement that he was one of the all-time greats (he’s #23 on AFI’s list). And most people today have no idea who Greta Garbo was, but she was #5 on AFI’s list of 25 greatest female screen legends, even though her last movie was released in 1941.
TheSaucyMugwump (@TheSaucyMugwump)
HumpinDog wrote “The Green Berets was a movie that promoted the Vietnam War and smoking. This was late in John Wayne’s career and he should have known that smoking was dangerous”
Warnings were not added to cigarette packs until 1966, but work began on The Green Berets in 1965, filming was completed in 1967, and the movie released in 1968. The movie did promote the Vietnam War, but to say that it promoted smoking is downright ignorant given the standards of the time.
=============================
The same aliens who fostered smoking fostered global warming denial, and still change the diapers of denialists.
Ignorance has its intimate moments.
HumpinDog wrote “The Green Berets was a movie that promoted the Vietnam War and smoking. This was late in John Wayne’s career and he should have known that smoking was dangerous”
Warnings were not added to cigarette packs until 1966, but work began on The Green Berets in 1965, filming was completed in 1967, and the movie released in 1968. The movie did promote the Vietnam War, but to say that it promoted smoking is downright ignorant given the standards of the time.
Boy, the gent who brought Duquesne Beer (“Have a Duke!”) must be trembling. OTOH, he’s a lawyer: http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/10178/1068390-34.stm?cmpid=newspanel4
nick:
The Toe?
http://www.sikids.com/photos/26077/the-nfls-golden-oldies/12
He was an average actor @ best. Just like Robert Redford. One was a Republican movie star, the other is a Dem movie star. There are actors, and there are movie stars.
John Wayne was a John Bircher but publically denounced them and was instrumental in having that society become marginalized. Wayne was anticommunist but was repulsed by their whacky turn in the 60’s.
Saucy, I could’ve written, IMO he wasn’t a better actor than others of his time. Is that better?