Trader Joe's Threatens Man Over Parody 'Traitor Joe' Political T-Shirt

from the parody-to-a-tee dept

The last time we found niche grocery chain Trader Joe’s playing intellectual property bully, it was over one enterprising Canadian man who drove across the border, bought a bunch of good stuff from Trader Joe’s, and then resold it at his Canadian store called “Pirate Joe’s”. While that whole setup is entertaining, Trader Joe’s sued for trademark infringement in the United States, which made zero sense. The store was in Canada, not the States, reselling purchased items is not trademark infringement, and Trader Joe’s was free to open up Canadian stores if it chose.

Fast forward to the present and Trader Joe’s is trying to stretch trademark law yet again, this time to go after one man’s website that is selling parody t-shirts with a picture of Joe Biden and the moniker “Traitor Joe”, all mocked up to look like the store logo. Trader Joe’s sent a threat letter to the man, Dan McCall, who was represented by friend of the site Paul Alan Levy.

I recently had the pleasure of representing Dan McCall again — author of such wicked parodies as NSA – the Only Part of Government That Actually Listens (we got to sue the NSA for a declaratory judgment of noninfringement); Ready for Oligarchy (over which we came with hours of filing suit against Hillary Clinton’s exploratory committee); and Bernie Is My Comrade (Sanders’ committee had the smarts to retract quickly). Last week, I sent a response to a demand letter sent on behalf of Trader Joe’s from a BigLaw attorney lawyer who, considering his claim to be a “seasoned intellectual property litigator,” really should have known better than to subject his client to the Streisand Effect.

You can see the image in question below.

I’ve included Levy’s response embedded below so that you can read it in full. Now, if McCall sounds at all familiar to you, it’s because he’s made a habit out of annoying large institutions by creating parody logos of their branding. Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, the NSA, and DHS have all come calling for him at some point. This is part of the context of Levy’s note that competent counsel really should know better than to send this threat letter: McCall and Levy have been through this before and they’ll get through it again.

As to the merits of supposed trademark infringement, well, the response letter does a fairly thorough takedown of any such arguments. Levy starts off by pointing out to Trader Joe’s that literally nobody is going to think it endorsed or produced this t-shirt. In fact, the company’s own threat letter notes how this puts the company in a bad light, so why would it also think the public would think the shirt came from Trader Joe’s?

But the real trump card in all of this is that the t-shirt is protected speech as parody.

Trademark law aside, McCall’s use of the image to comment on the President of the United States, while playing on the name of a leading grocery store chain, is speech squarely protected by the First Amendment. Consequently, any application of trademark law to quash such uses would be highly suspect. Although McCall’s products are sold, their contents are noncommercial speech, which qualifies for full First Amendment protection.

There’s a bit more in there, including an odd copyright claim over some of the imagery and the fact that Trader Joe’s invoked the DMCA against McCall even though his company, Liberty Maniacs, is not an interactive website allowing user input, but that’s more icing on the cake type stuff. What is made clear in all of this is that Trader Joe’s has a legal team that is making quite spurious threats that would be highly likely to be defeated in court.

Filed Under: , , , , ,
Companies: trader joe's

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Trader Joe's Threatens Man Over Parody 'Traitor Joe' Political T-Shirt”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
21 Comments
That One Guysays:

The sad thing is that I imagine more often than not legal thuggery of this sort works simply because the target either can’t afford a lawyer or more likely can’t afford to fight back, as even if they win they’re still going to be out a hefty amount of money. It doesn’t do you any good to be vindicated in court if the process leaves you bankrupt, something you can be sure is very well understood and exploited by those that would weaponize the legal system like this.

settsusays:

Predictable

My understanding of these predictable lawsuits are that, regardless of what might be actually permitted (or not) under copyright law, in practice, corporations will pursue these actions so as to demonstrate their willingness to do so, thus:
1) Discouraging others from taking the risk of using their IP, even if fair use
2) Drawing a line that gives them the appearance of distancing themselves from a thorny political stance without actually taking one one officially

That Anonymous Cowardsays:

Re:

And of course we can’t possibly change course now.
It would be wrong to demand that a case have actual merit before a lawyer puts his name on it & if he does then he should be punished for failing to do his job.

The lawyers job isn’t to make the client happy, the lawyers job should be to keep the client from making a flaming ass of themselves in a court of law on the record with a case that is a non-starter.

Imagine a world where Mr. Levy could just forward a copy of this insane rambling demand pretending to be a legal document to the state bar where biglaw douche is & the bar actually do something to the douche.

The lesson humanity has failed to learn from time & time again is that if you let them get away with it enough (even with good intentions) eventually they will shoot every dog on sight & every dark skinned driver who twitches the wrong way will end up dead because we always defer to them.

Davidsays:

Re: Re:

I actually find neither very funny albeit for somewhat different reasons. Name-calling cheapens the political discourse, and we have had more than enough of that already.

But then funny and legal are different things, even though there is an increasing and surprisingly effective tendency to employ absurd legal filings as performative entertainment for fund raising purposes.

Scary Devil Monasterysays:

Re: Re: Re:

"Name-calling cheapens the political discourse, and we have had more than enough of that already."

It’s not as if we knew Trump had been on his fiscal last legs before russian money started flowing through all of his enterprises – right before this "self-funded man" began a presidential campaign largely funded by shady russian oligarchs and loans guaranteed by the russian state bank.

It’s not as if Trump in his stint as president decided to abandon a US middle-east presence and influence the nation had spent over twenty years building up, handing the kurds, Syria and thus every on-ground asset to Putin in a walk-over.

It’s not as if he showed up to every meeting with his NATO allies in malice and contempt while whenever Putin was around you’d think he was on Putin’s PR staff, the way he was singing praises.

It’s not as if he went the distance trying to overturn his own government on his way out, short of actually marching in front rather than shouting incitement from the rear.

No, we can’t call him a "traitor" because the US has a very specific and narrow definition of that term. But we can certainly state that Russia has never had a better US president than Trump, ever.

PaulTsays:

Re: Predictable

It could be both. They could be taking a political stance where they want to distance themselves from a certain political ideal without coming straight out and doing so. It could also be a lawyer who is perfectly happy to take on attacks on fair use if they can bill for the hours. Those are not mutually exclusive possibilities.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Report this ad??|??Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...
Older Stuff
12:25 Australian Privacy Commissioner Says 7-Eleven Broke Privacy Laws By Scanning Customers' Faces At Survey Kiosks (6)
10:50 Missouri Governor Doubles Down On 'View Source' Hacking Claim; PAC Now Fundraising Over This Bizarrely Stupid Claim (45)
10:45 Daily Deal: The All-in-One Microsoft, Cybersecurity, And Python Exam Prep Training Bundle (0)
09:43 Want To Understand Why U.S. Broadband Sucks? Look At Frontier Communications In Wisconsin, West Virginia (8)
05:36 Massachusetts College Decides Criticizing The Chinese Government Is Hate Speech, Suspends Conservative Student Group (71)
19:57 Le Tigre Sues Barry Mann To Stop Copyright Threats Over Song, Lights Barry Mann On Fire As Well (21)
16:07 Court Says City Of Baltimore's 'Heckler's Veto' Of An Anti-Catholic Rally Violates The First Amendment (15)
13:37 Two Years Later, Judge Finally Realizes That A CDN Provider Is Not Liable For Copyright Infringement On Websites (21)
12:19 Chicago Court Gets Its Prior Restraint On, Tells Police Union Head To STFU About City's Vaccine Mandate (158)
10:55 Verizon 'Visible' Wireless Accounts Hacked, Exploited To Buy New iPhones (8)
10:50 Daily Deal: The MacOS 11 Course (0)
07:55 Suing Social Media Sites Over Acts Of Terrorism Continues To Be A Losing Bet, As 11th Circuit Dumps Another Flawed Lawsuit (11)
02:51 Trump Announces His Own Social Network, 'Truth Social,' Which Says It Can Kick Off Users For Any Reason (And Already Is) (100)
19:51 Facebook AI Moderation Continues To Suck Because Moderation At Scale Is Impossible (26)
16:12 Content Moderation Case Studies: Snapchat Disables GIPHY Integration After Racist 'Sticker' Is Discovered (2018) (11)
13:54 Arlo Makes Live Customer Service A Luxury Option (8)
12:05 Delta Proudly Announces Its Participation In The DHS's Expanded Biometric Collection Program (5)
11:03 LinkedIn (Mostly) Exits China, Citing Escalating Demands For Censorship (14)
10:57 Daily Deal: The Python, Git, And YAML Bundle (0)
09:37 British Telecom Wants Netflix To Pay A Tax Simply Because Squid Game Is Popular (32)
06:41 Report: Client-Side Scanning Is An Insecure Nightmare Just Waiting To Be Exploited By Governments (35)
20:38 MLB In Talks To Offer Streaming For All Teams' Home Games In-Market Even Without A Cable Subscription (10)
15:55 Appeals Court Says Couple's Lawsuit Over Bogus Vehicle Forfeiture Can Continue (15)
13:30 Techdirt Podcast Episode 301: Scarcity, Abundance & NFTs (0)
12:03 Hollywood Is Betting On Filtering Mandates, But Working Copyright Algorithms Simply Don't Exist (66)
10:45 Introducing The Techdirt Insider Discord (4)
10:40 Daily Deal: The Dynamic 2021 DevOps Training Bundle (0)
09:29 Criminalizing Teens' Google Searches Is Just How The UK's Anti-Cybercrime Programs Roll (19)
06:29 Canon Sued For Disabling Printer Scanners When Devices Run Out Of Ink (41)
20:51 Copyright Law Discriminating Against The Blind Finally Struck Down By Court In South Africa (7)
More arrow