You know you are a nerd when you are avidly googling the name of the author of a series of erotic novels all of which feature the word “cocky” in their titles because of the interesting legal issues the “Cockygate scandal” has brought up.
Dale L Roberts vlogs about self-publishing. In this video published on May 7th he explains that Faleena Hopkins, the author in question, wrote a slew of “Cease and Desist” letters to other indie romance authors on Amazon using the word “cocky” in their titles. Amazon, with typical cowardice, removed these other authors’ books as soon as Hopkins asked them to. Worse yet, Faleena Hopkins’ letter to the other authors included the phrase “My attorney at Morris Yorn Entertainment Law has advised me that if I sue you I will win all the moneys you have earned on this title plus lawyer fees will be paid by you as well.” I suspect that Morris Yorn Entertainment Law are not entirely happy with this summary of their advice.
I came across this story via the fantasy/SF author Chris Fox. His nine minute video dated May 11th explains well why this incident should and did arouse the anger of the community of authors who self-publish on Kindle and similar platforms – but he also spares a thought for Hopkins herself. In the four days since the earlier video, the situation had changed dramatically – and the trouble with internet shaming is that even when some punishment is deserved, there is no off switch.
Many years ago, but well within the existence of the bloggosphere, I formed the personal policy of judging interest in a posting on the title and first paragraph. This for the obvious reason that otherwise, on balance, one’s life is taken up with the less than worthwhile.
This posting of Natalie’s has failed that test.
Given her established good reputation with me, I do hope I can find the enthusiasm to return for reconsideration – later.
Best regards
Long ago, my then employer asked me to acquire software patents (for some work I did for them) as part of their defensive patenting strategy. (As Porton Down scientists study biological weapons only because of the UK’s intent only ever to defend against them, so I acquired my patents only because I was confident my employer would only use them defensively: if anyone sued them for supposed software patent infringement, they’d look through their holdings for a patent the suer was as-claimably infringing and thus defend themselves.)
The experience gave me a low opinion of the ability of the office to judge key issues of definition, newness, etc. But I am still astonished the trademark was granted.
I’m sure it’s filled with “love” (in one sense of that word at least). I would describe as ‘hopeful’ her belief she can claim the earnings of anyone else using her trademarked title word. As for ‘respect to all’, it seems fellow authors are omitted.
She probably attended my alma mater: The University of South Carolina (THE REAL USC). Go Cocks!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3lgt3dmSDs
You can trademark pretty much anything you want; they’ll be happy to take your money. However, that and five bucks will get you a mocha latte at Starbucks when it comes to the defensability of said trademark.
This. Exactly.
Most of our trouble in the US with patent trolls and trademark fights stem from the inability of the office that issues each – the US Patent and Trademark Office – to make reasoned and reasonable decisions.
The law involved seems fairly clear in each individual case, but requires some subjective interpretation. I suspect the USPTO has simply decided to review whether the proper forms have been submitted and properly filled out without making in-depth reviews of each application, and then letting the contestants fight it out in the marketplace and the courts.
Which isn’t working all that well.
I agree with Nigel here. I have no idea what this is about and am not intrigued enough to find out.
Well, this has promise of working itself into a fascinating discussion of the impossibilities of properly administering trademark and patent application law (in the US, at least), in that we expect our lowly application clerks to work out solutions to issues such as “source identification function” that go on to baffle our most learned judges, but if you make your book-reading decisions based on cover art, well, I admire your certainty.
😉
What’s that? “Fascinating” is in the eye of the beholder? Humph.
Fucking Hell! I could be in trouble…
If anyone suggests that I re-title my novel with anything other than “Rebellion”, they will be reminded of Arkell v Pressdram.
@LongRider
You may have to do that. I think I have used ‘ion’ in several of my titles already, and shall be instructing my legal department accordingly. May I cordially suggest dropping just that portion of the title, or perhaps changing it to “Jacobean Disobedience”, as I already also use ‘Rebel’ in other media titles.
Someone once told me — and I accept this may not be accurate — that a well-known software company tried to patent the word “Windows” but failed as it seemed difficult to stop people saying “your windows are dirty, get them cleaned”
On the other hand, I heard that a large breakfast cereal company once stopped a competitor using the name ‘Bisk-a-wheat’ so in my usual way, when shopping at my local supermarket I always use the banned name in the cereals aisle.
Nigel Sedgwick and NickM, a copyright troll tried to legally prevent other authors from using the word “cocky” in their book titles.
It would have been very bad news for authors if she had succeeded in setting the precedent that individual words in book titles could be trademarked in this way.
Yeah, I got it now.
Thanks.
Actually (this might be somewhat apocryphal) but about 20-ish years ago didn’t Mattel try and copyright part of the EM spectrum – “Barbie Pink”?
NickM, according to Mental Floss that story about Mattel and Barbie Pink is true. Though it does seem as if their ownership of that exact shade of pink does not extend to every application:
Also,
not to nitpickto nitpick obsessively, pink, not being a pure colour, is not part of the electromagnetic spectrum.Without going into the basic issue of Intellectual Property I think there can be general agreement that patents and copyrights are being pushed to silly (and harmful) levels in same cases and areas.
As for Amazon and other Corporate Cowards – awful behaviour, as usual.
The trademark was issued in 2018? Then Han Solo has precedence by about 40 years. The article title IS “Don’t get cocky, kid”.