What, Me, Infringing Monopoly®?
Remember my LJopoly/Lulzopoly boards? They were pretty popular. Even LiveJournal founder Brad got a kick out of them. Not everyone is a fan, however.
Hasbro's legal team is hot on my trail and determined to get me to take down my "offending material" or suffer the consequences. Do they have a case? I don't think so, but read their letter for yourself:
Mr. Jason Fortuny
www.rfjason.com
Re: Infringement of MONOPOLY® Property Trading Game Copyrights and Trademarks
Dear Mr. Fortuny:
We are counsel for Hasbro, Inc. ("Hasbro"), the owner of the copyrights and trademarks for the MONOPOLY® property trading game. We recently became aware of your "Lulzopoly" and "LJopoly" games at http://rfjason.livejournal.com/616587.html and on your site at www.rfjason.com, which contain elements and images obviously copied from the MONOPOLY® property trading game. Specifically, the appearance of the game boards, the title deed cards, the distinctive property squares and the game money are obviously copied from the MONOPOLY® game. The "LJopoly" game board also copies the distinctive MONOPOLY® corner squares.
The MONOPOLY® property trading game as a whole, as well as specific elements and characters, such as the property squares, the corner squares and the design of the title deed cards, are the copyrighted property of Hasbro. Hasbro also owns the trademark rights to the numerous elements of the MONOPOLY® property trading game, including the property squares, corner squares and title deed cards, that have achieved source-identifying significance.
Your unauthorized use of the MONOPOLY® game board and game elements constitutes copyright infringement in violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501. Your unauthorized use of the property squares, corner squares and title deed cards also violates the federal trademark laws, including 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114(1) and 1125(a), by creating a likelihood of confusion with respect to Hasbro's authorization or sponsorship of or association with your activities. The unauthorized use of these MONOPOLY® marks is also likely to dilute their distinctive qualities in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c).
We therefore demand that you immediately cease and desist from any further use of the MONOPOLY® property trading game, that you remove the infringing elements and images from your game and from your website, and that you provide us with a written assurance that in the future you will refrain from any further unauthorized use of the elements and characters of the MONOPOLY® property trading game.
Please confirm to me as soon as possible, and in any event within ten days, your agreement to the above. This letter does not purport to be a complete statement of the facts or the law and is without prejudice to Hasbro's legal and equitable rights.
Sincerely yours,
Carin G. Reynolds
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP
1133 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036-6710
tel: 212.336.2104
fax: 212.336.2277
cgreynolds@pbwt.com
Hmm. It's obviously not a DMCA request, which would have been the smart route if I were actually infringing any copyright. I'm more scared of getting sued by Encyclopedia Dramatica since I used several of their visual trademarks in Lulzopoly - still just $20!!!. If you look closely at the language, it reads like an intimidation note rather than anything legally enforceable.
And we all know how I respond to intimidation.
Related Links
[ threats, opoly published on 2008-02-07 | Permalink (2,496) | ]
5 Comments
Though it might seem like it's just an "intimidation letter" (which I suppose is the very purpose of a cease and desist letter) it absolutely is "legally enforceable" in that it will be admissible in a potential suit against you for copyright infringement. One of the reasons cease and desist letters are sent (particular w/ regards to alleged copyright infringements) is to be able to assert that the copyright owner (Hasbro) vigorously defended their copyright, which they will need to show for their case. So although you might read the letter to be meaningless, because it doesn't cite a court date where they want you to show up, it certainly is not. In addition, they're providing you with a ten day period in which to respond. Of course, a lack of response and failure to "cease and desist" shows you are willfully infringing on their copyright, because you were given notice of their rights of ownership to it and proceeded to ignore their warning and continue to infringe.
The other purpose of a cease and desist letter is, of course, to avoid litigation by letting you know you are in the wrong and getting it taken care out outside of court. You can obviously take this as a legal standoff, and continue infringing, waiting for them to file suit. But they've sold a couple more "Opoly" sets than you, and thusly have access to superior attorneys and superior stacks of cash with which to pay them. Damages for copyright infringement and potentially having attorneys fees assessed against you aren't very cheap. They will ask for far more than your profits from the sets sold.
And as to the other poster citing Hasbro's initial alleged theft of the idea . . . that was litigated and obviously decided in Hasbro's favor a few decades ago; it is no defense to future infringement by others. Although if you feel your idea was more original, you can always sue Hasbro and claim the copyright yourself. Best of luck...
This blog comment or its author is in no way associated with Hasbro, Inc, or any of its affiliates or associates. Also, this blog comment is in no way, shape, or form to be interpreted to constitute legal advice. If you have a serious legal problem J. Niplos suggest that you consult an attorney. J. Niplos does not provide legal advice. The comment offered by J. Niplos is not a substitute for the advice of an attorney. Fuck off.
Let the lulz begin!
J. Nipples, Internet Attourney For Hire to the rescue!
But seriously. Send them a cease and desist letter right back for harassing you about a parody. Parody is protected.
By the way, does it strike anyone else as highly amusing that they are defending a monopoly on Monopoly?
Why aren't they suing the TV show Reaper for the "Get out of Hell Free" card they had on one episode?



This is semi-ironic, of course, because it's pretty well documented that Parker Bros. stole Monopoly to begin with.