Quantcast

MMike

A fowl peckerwood.
Sep 5, 2001
18,222
90
just sittin' here drinkin' scotch
www.speakupforsay.com

Mattel Toy Company and four federal judges have taken seven registered trademark product titles that include the words "SAY" and "AND SAY" away from special needs Super Duper Publications, a company that for over 20 years has made educational speech and language therapy products for children with autism and other communication disorders. www.superduperinc.com
We have a bunch of Super Duper stuff for Emily. They are a small company that make stuff specifically for kids with Autism. And so Mattel go a bug up their ass about the use of the word "Say" in their products, (because of See and Say from 1963).

Anyhoo, to me (and many others) it's a rather frivolous lawsuit, hurting a company that is doing a lot of good for people that need it.

Spread the word.
 

MMike

A fowl peckerwood.
Sep 5, 2001
18,222
90
just sittin' here drinkin' scotch
In the interest of even steveness....an email that Uncle Chris got. I didn't receive it.

But maybe Super Duper misrepresented somewhat....I'm guessing the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Thanks for taking the time to share your concerns about the litigation between Super Duper Publications and Mattel.

We’d like to clarify a few important points with you to help you better understand the situation:

1. First, we want to clarify that Mattel did not sue Super Duper Publications.

2. The case began when Super Duper Publications tried to register trademarks in the toy category. These trademarks are very similar to the famous Mattel SEE ‘N SAY and THE FARMER SAYS registered trademarks that Mattel has used for over 40 years.

3. As just mentioned, Mattel did not sue Super Duper Publications. Super Duper filed suit against Mattel in South Carolina and requested a jury trial to resolve the issue. We had no choice but to protect the continued use of our famous trademarks.

4. During the course of the trial, Mattel offered resolution options outside of the courtroom to Super Duper for consideration, including the opportunity for Super Duper to continue using all of their marks without registering them. Super Duper did not accept any of the options presented to them and chose to proceed with the trial.

5. The jury in South Carolina found that several of Super Duper’s trademarks did, in fact, infringe and dilute Mattel’s trademarks. While the jury’s verdict protects Mattel’s long-standing rights with its famous See ‘N Say trademark, it does not jeopardize Super Duper’s business in any way.

6. Following the jury trial, the United States District Court entered a permanent injunction to stop Super Duper’s use of several names that infringed upon Mattel’s See ‘N Say trademark and ordered the United States Patent and Trademark Office to cancel certain marks that Super Duper had registered or had filed to register.

7. Super Duper appealed the rulings of the District Court to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia. On June 10, 2010, the Fourth Circuit Court affirmed the District Court’s judgment in its entirety.

8. Shortly thereafter, Super Duper filed a petition requesting that all of the judges on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals review the Court’s earlier decision. The Court of Appeals denied this request on July 7, 2010.

We want to again emphasize that Mattel neither wanted nor sought a trial against Super Duper. Super Duper can continue to sell products using names that do not infringe or dilute Mattel’s trademarks.

We hope this information has been helpful.

Thank you again for your concern.

Sincerely,

Mattel, Inc.
Consumer Relations
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,814
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
So can Dirt translate this legalese? Because what I see is:

Thanks for taking the time to share your concerns about the litigation between Super Duper Publications and Mattel.

We’d like to clarify a few important points with you to help you better understand the situation since the truth doesn't fit our corporate spin at all:

1. First, we want to clarify that Mattel did not sue Super Duper Publications. We didn't sue, we just sent them a letter threatening to sue for monumental damages.

2. The case began when Super Duper Publications tried to register trademarks in the toy category. These trademarks are very similar to the famous Mattel SEE ‘N SAY and THE FARMER SAYS registered trademarks that Mattel has used for over 40 years. We're the "Monster" of the child-products world.

3. As just mentioned, Mattel did not sue Super Duper Publications. Super Duper filed suit against Mattel in South Carolina and requested a jury trial to resolve the issue. We had no choice but to protect the continued use of our famous trademarks. After our threatening letter, Super Duper had no choice but to try to defend themselves in a court of law. Filing suit first enabled them to pick the location, as opposed to making them fly up to our area for the court case.

4. During the course of the trial, Mattel offered resolution options outside of the courtroom to Super Duper for consideration, including the opportunity for Super Duper to continue using all of their marks without registering them. Super Duper did not accept any of the options presented to them and chose to proceed with the trial. We offered to "lend" them their own branding back for the paltry fee of only 25% of gross profits. It would be for a good cause...

5. The jury in South Carolina found that several of Super Duper’s trademarks did, in fact, infringe and dilute Mattel’s trademarks. While the jury’s verdict protects Mattel’s long-standing rights with its famous See ‘N Say trademark, it does not jeopardize Super Duper’s business in any way.We hired better lawyers than they did.

6. Following the jury trial, the United States District Court entered a permanent injunction to stop Super Duper’s use of several names that infringed upon Mattel’s See ‘N Say trademark and ordered the United States Patent and Trademark Office to cancel certain marks that Super Duper had registered or had filed to register.YES!! Not only did we keep them from registering the names in question, but we also got the Patent and Trademark Office to reverse their earlier decisions on granting trademarks, so now Super Duper can't even sell products that they'd already gotten trademarks on. SCORE!

7. Super Duper appealed the rulings of the District Court to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia. On June 10, 2010, the Fourth Circuit Court affirmed the District Court’s judgment in its entirety.God our lawyers are fvcking good. Well worth the millions that we pay them.

8. Shortly thereafter, Super Duper filed a petition requesting that all of the judges on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals review the Court’s earlier decision. The Court of Appeals denied this request on July 7, 2010.See previous statement.

We want to again emphasize that Mattel neither wanted nor sought a trial against Super Duper. We just sent them a letter THREATENING a lawsuit. Big difference. I mean, gigantic.
Super Duper can continue to sell products using names that do not infringe or dilute Mattel&#8217;s trademarks.For now... <evil laugh>

We hope this information has been helpful.Don't fvck with us.

Thank you again for your concern. No, seriously. Don't fvck with us.

SincerelyEat sh!t and die,

Mattel, Inc.
Consumer Relations
But it's been a LOOOOOOOONG time and I'm wonder whether my translating skills are a bit rusty....
 

north20

Chimp
Nov 5, 2007
85
0
East Cascades - PNW
Hate mail, in polite fvcking tones, sent.

After reading this I spent a half hour or so talking with a friend who owns a local toy store. Her outrage equaled mine at the very least. The result is that she's in the process of getting Mattel products out of her store. Even contemplating giving most of the Mattel stock to needy kids.

A small gesture in the scheme of things, and in reality it won't hurt my friend's business much as most of her stock is from small boutique type companies. She carries the various Mattel products for add on sales, and for those buyers looking for more conventional toys. However, it's a fairly brisk business and she's making damn sure the reason she's pulling the toys is known :shakefist: