Bagdasarian Productions - IPAssure SM Company Trademarks the First Letter of the Alphabet and Will Sue Anyone Who Uses It Woodbridge, Connecticut

 Ross Bagdasarian (aka "David Seville,") the creator of the Chipmunks to whom you refer, died in 1972.  His son, Ross Jr., took over the Chipmunk business around 1980, beginning with the LP "Chipmunk Punk," and all subsequent recordings, TV shows and movies featuring the Chipmunk characters.

He has billed himself for some time now simply as "Ross Bagdasarian," which may be grammatically correct but has caused some identity confusion, especially on line.  When he re-records one of his father's songs, the composer's credit is listed as "Ross Bagdasarian, Sr."

You might say, "don't blame the father for the sins of the sun."

 

This sounds like fraud. If anyone has suffered damages due to those fraudulent letters, I can see a major lawsuit here against them.

California's Civil Code 3294(3) defines fraud as an intentional misrepresentation, deceit, or concealment of a material fact known to the defendant with the intention on the part of the defendant of thereby depriving a person of property or legal rights or otherwise causing injury.

California's Civil Code 1572 further defines fraud as 1. The suggestion, as a fact, of that which is not true, by one who does not believe it to be true; 2. The positive assertion, in a manner not warranted by the information of the person making it, of that which is not true, though he believes it to be true; 3. The suppression of that which is true, by one having knowledge or belief of the fact; 4. A promise made without any intention of performing it; or, 5. Any other act fitted to deceive.

Also, if they are getting any income from those letters they are mailing out, there may also be a claim under a RICO. One of the prerequisites identified under a RICO claim is that they are engaging in mail fraud.

Here is some law you can review to establish the claim against them: law

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
Current Section 1962. Prohibited activities

(1) devising a scheme to defraud another by means of a material misrepresentation, (2) having the intent to defraud, and (3) used U.S. mail service to implement its fraud.

The Plaintiff need not prove the RICO cause of action at the Complaint level; but only properly plead it in the Complaint. See Haroco vs. Am. Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 747 F.2d 384, 404 (reversing a dismissal for failure to state a claim because there are no grounds for demanding that a civil RICO plaintiff essentially plead evidence and prove the case in the complaint), aff'd on other grounds, 473 U.S. 606 (1985). NOW vs. Scheidler, 510 U.S. 249, 256, 127 L. Ed. 2d 99, 114 S. Ct. 798 (1994); Lujan vs. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 561, 119 L. Ed. 2d 351, 112 S. Ct. 2130 (1992). To demonstrate RICO standing, a plaintiff must allege that it suffered an injury to its business or property, 18 U.S.C. 1964(c), as a proximate result of the alleged racketeering activity, Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection Corp., 503 U.S. 258 (1992). (Newcal Industries, Inc. vs. Ikon Office Solutions. CV-04-02776 (9th Cir. 2008). In other words, RICO standing requires compensable injury and proximate cause.); Mendoza, et al vs V. Zirkle Fruit Co., 301 F. 3d 1163 (9th Cir. 2002).

Sebastian International, Inc. vs. Vincenzo Russolillo, 128 F.Supp.2d 630 (C.D.Cal. 2001). However, in addition to wire and mail fraud, Plaintiff has alleged Defendants have engaged in other predicate criminal acts. Thus, Plaintiff's RICO claims could proceed, even if the Court were to find the wire and mail fraud allegations were not sufficiently pled.

As a corporation, the Defendant is considered to be an enterprise pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1961(4). Odom v. Microsoft Corp., 486 F.3d 541 (9th Cir. 2007).

I don't think that trademark will stand once someone contests it in a real court of law. The Patent and Trademark office is a joke. It's run by non attorneys who continuously make mistakes.

I would write to that attorney and tell him to go ahead and sue me if he thinks he can win. I would then move to "invalidate" the trademark by proving that the letter "a" has been used many times after 1962 and Bagdasarian Productions did nothing to stop it.

Furthermore, the "a" can be used if people won't get confused with the company/product using it.

John,

I looked up the trademark application on the government website listed in the original posting. You obviously did not.

Here are the details for application number 77415283:

Literal element: A

Mark statement: The mark consists of standard characters, without claim to any particular font, style, size, or color.

Description of goods and services:
CLOTHING FOR MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN - NAMELY, SHIRTS, T-SHIRTS, SWEATSHIRTS, JOGGING SUITS, TROUSERS, PANTS, SHORTS, TANK TOPS, RAINWEAR, CLOTH BABY BIBS, SKIRTS, BLOUSES, DRESSES, SUSPENDERS, SWEATERS, JACKETS, COATS, RAINCOATS, SNOW SUITS, TIES, ROBES, HATS, CAPS, SUNVISORS, BELTS, SCARVES, SLEEPWEAR, PAJAMAS, LINGERIE, UNDERWEAR, BOOTS, SHOES, SNEAKERS, SANDALS, BOOTIES, SLIPPER SOCKS, SWIMWEAR AND MASQUERADE AND HALLOWEEN COSTUMES AND MASKS SOLD IN CONNECTION THEREWITH.

John, if you think this about Chipmunk merchandising, perhaps you could point out where in the trademark application that is stated. And then tell us who in 2008 gives a rat's a*s about Alvin and the Chipmunks?

John,

I looked up the trademark application on the government website listed in the original posting. You obviously did not.

Here are the details for application number 77415283:

Literal element: A

Mark statement: The mark consists of standard characters, without claim to any particular font, style, size, or color.

Description of goods and services:
CLOTHING FOR MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN - NAMELY, SHIRTS, T-SHIRTS, SWEATSHIRTS, JOGGING SUITS, TROUSERS, PANTS, SHORTS, TANK TOPS, RAINWEAR, CLOTH BABY BIBS, SKIRTS, BLOUSES, DRESSES, SUSPENDERS, SWEATERS, JACKETS, COATS, RAINCOATS, SNOW SUITS, TIES, ROBES, HATS, CAPS, SUNVISORS, BELTS, SCARVES, SLEEPWEAR, PAJAMAS, LINGERIE, UNDERWEAR, BOOTS, SHOES, SNEAKERS, SANDALS, BOOTIES, SLIPPER SOCKS, SWIMWEAR AND MASQUERADE AND HALLOWEEN COSTUMES AND MASKS SOLD IN CONNECTION THEREWITH.

John, if you think this about Chipmunk merchandising, perhaps you could point out where in the trademark application that is stated. And then tell us who in 2008 gives a rat's a*s about Alvin and the Chipmunks?

John,

I looked up the trademark application on the government website listed in the original posting. You obviously did not.

Here are the details for application number 77415283:

Literal element: A

Mark statement: The mark consists of standard characters, without claim to any particular font, style, size, or color.

Description of goods and services:
CLOTHING FOR MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN - NAMELY, SHIRTS, T-SHIRTS, SWEATSHIRTS, JOGGING SUITS, TROUSERS, PANTS, SHORTS, TANK TOPS, RAINWEAR, CLOTH BABY BIBS, SKIRTS, BLOUSES, DRESSES, SUSPENDERS, SWEATERS, JACKETS, COATS, RAINCOATS, SNOW SUITS, TIES, ROBES, HATS, CAPS, SUNVISORS, BELTS, SCARVES, SLEEPWEAR, PAJAMAS, LINGERIE, UNDERWEAR, BOOTS, SHOES, SNEAKERS, SANDALS, BOOTIES, SLIPPER SOCKS, SWIMWEAR AND MASQUERADE AND HALLOWEEN COSTUMES AND MASKS SOLD IN CONNECTION THEREWITH.

John, if you think this about Chipmunk merchandising, perhaps you could point out where in the trademark application that is stated. And then tell us who in 2008 gives a rat's a*s about Alvin and the Chipmunks?

Robert,

I went to the The United States Patent and Trademark Office website and looked up what Bagdasarian has registered. He has, in fact, obtained a trademark for the letter "A" in any size, color, or font on virtually any piece of clothing regardless of its color. His application makes no reference whatsoever to Alvin and/or the Chipmunks.

From the trademark application it is not clear whether the letter "A" must stand alone or whether his trademark also includes words that contain the letter "A". If I wanted to sell a tee shirt that said "CATS," I might have to settle for just "C" because Bagdasarian has trademarked A, T, and S.

Personally, I doubt that Bagdasarian's trademark application will withstand a court challenge and I cannot figure out what they have to gain from going after an online retailer like the OP. They are not trying to shake the guy down for money; they are insisting that he quit selling shirts with the letter "A" on them. It makes no sense.

Ross Bagdasarian was the guy who recorded the original Alvin and the Chipmunks record back around 1958. He was also the piano player featured in the Jimmy Stewart classic "Rear Window."

I'm no attorney, but the trademark claim seems to be overly broad, especially for the letter A. Is he going to demand that agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms remove the first two letters from those tee shirts that say now say "ATF?" I can see them swooping in now with a great big "F" on their shirts.

A notice addressed to "Whom it may concern" sent by email indicates that this attorney has not spent much time on research. He does not know your name or your mailing address. To keep it that way, be careful filling any orders for clothing with the letters, A, T, and S shipped to Connecticut.

You stated:
"It is important to underline that "Bagdasarian" did not register a logo but instead registered any instance of the first letter of the alphabet regardless of font, color, size, etc"

However, if you took 2 seconds to read the letter that is NOT what they are wanting you to do. As a wild guess, from the letter they wrote it appears you are trying to infringe on Alvin and the Chipmunks.

"Specifically, any clothing with the letter A Design must be removed as my client owns the exclusive rights to the use of this type of letter A Design, regardless of color, which you are offering for sale. In addition, any clothing with a letter T design on green colored clothing must be removed, and any letter S design on blue clothing must be removed, as you are also trading off the good will of my clients Theodore and Simon characters."

They did NOT say regardless of font, color,size..etc. They stated specifically "This type of letter A design" so it is one specific design and only on clothing.

Intellectual Property infringement is a matter they can take action against you for. While it may not seem fair, if they have the trademarks you need to remove the items as soon as possible. If you want to fight it, you probably won't win, but could fight them without having the items up there.

And NO I do not work for or have any relationship with either of these companies.