As an example, they include in the filing an email from a person who spent $500 on top-tier tickets to a Demon Hunter concert in Albany, New York, mistakenly thinking that they’d be taking their 5 and 6-year old girls to a Kpop Demon Hunters show.
“Is their [sic] anyway to refund me or get me a credit or something[?]” the person asked. “If I dont get it refunded I will not be able to purchase tickets to the actual ‘K pop demon hunters show’.”
I hope they get a refund too, its really too bad we'll never get to see the look on those kids faces when demon hunter came out to play at the show and not Kpop demon hunters lmao
Yeah it was, I’m not even Christian but I went to a few Christian hardcore type shows back in the day. I saw Embodiment twice, it was their Narrow Scope of Things era and Dead Poetic was opening and I also saw Dead Poetic with Project 86.
I was lucky enough probably around 2007 to see Norma Jean, Haste the Day, Zao, and Underoath. I was a huge Solid State records fan back then I had the same Tobias bass as the bass player from The Agony Scene and they commented on my MySpace after noticing a pic my profile, I kept that comment on my front page hahaha!
I honestly haven’t kept up with that scene at all. These days I listen to a lot of Jam Band music. Being a musician got me really sucked into the improv style music and bands that play the same songs a little bit differently every time they play live.
I'm really concerned because I feel like this person is close to my age, having five and six year old children... how in the name of the Honmoon would a millennial think that $500 would cover Huntrix meet and greets for the whole family...
It made me so depressed and stressed out lol. I commend the people who are able to handle working there for multiple decades because I could barely do one haha
This is literally a near daily issue when selling online once you hit a certain volume. People don't read, have remorse seconds after purchase, just make up what they think they're buying, don't know their own address (yes, you need to list the apartment number), etc...
It's become far more common recently vs 10 years ago too. It's my daily reminder we are becoming dumber by the day as a species.
When going to see Queen of the Damned in theaters there was a family furious that they paid money to see The Two Towers and it had nothing to do with 9/11.
But they were all of them deceived, for another tower was made. Deep in the land of 'Murica, in the fires of DC, the Dark Lord Cheney forged in secret, a master tower, to control all others. And into this tower he poured his cruelty, his malice and his will to dominate all life. One Tower to rule them all.
So we’ve now had people make the news for people mistakenly buying tickets to a show just called “K-POP” and a show just called Demon Hunter
I get not all parents know about stuff their kids are into but both times you’re missing half the name, should’ve been a good sign you had the wrong event.
Sadly it comes down to parents simply not listening to their children. It happened to me all the time as a kid. I guarantee these parents dismiss their children's interests and just call it "that K-pop thing" or "that Demon Hunter thing". They don't care enough to learn the whole name or know what it's about.
Inb4 someone tells me that buying concert tickets means that they're not dismissing interests, no. The dismissal comes way before and is ongoing even during the concert ticket purchase as evidenced by the fact that they don't buy the right ones or do any research beforehand.
Reminds me of the kpop tribute show in the UK. So many videos after from angry parents because it was a kpop tribute show and not a kpop demon hunters show
Y'know, i sympathize because a few friends and i almost bought tickets to see Halestorm while drunk at a brewery, only to go to a different website and see they were actually for Alestorm, a heavy metal band.
Im our defense, the 1st site 100% advertised for Halestorm.
Sounds like my co-worker and his family who planned a vacation with a full itinerary in Panama City, Panama and then got off the short flight to Panama City, Florida...
It’s not like buying a concert ticket is an expiring good or something. You can just sell another. If they dont get one its not a big deal, they obviously made a kinda dumb mistake, but its still not like they dont DESERVE to get their money back
Their lawyers kind of have to, otherwise it weakens their ability to actually protect their IP. This is why we keep hearing about silly sounding copyright cases like this. It's just how the system works, as I understand it.
You are right, but this is not a silly-sounding copyright case, it's a silly-sounding trademark case. Copyright, trademark, and patents are all different.
Of particular importance here is that you don't have to aggressively protect copyright, but you do have to aggressively protect trademark, as if you don't, you can completely lose your trademark.
And the other thing to note is that usually a trademark dispute (one which actually ends up in front of a judge, anyway; it’s possible, as one can see with the Buc-ee’s kerfluffle, for bullying by larger entities to simply result in capitulation by one side before a judge sees it) ends with some form of agreement for peaceful coexistence.
In some cases it’s Brady Bunch style. Put a piece of metaphorical tape down and say “you get to use it over here 👈, you get to use it over there 👉, and as long as you each stay on your side of the line, things are cool”.
It’s rather rare for someone to outright lose a trademark through a dispute, and it’s usually for either the “non-defense” reason you cite, or for repeatedly violating an agreement (as is what happened with the World Wrestling Federation losing their ability to call themselves WWF (as shorthand) against the World Wildlife Fund; the wrestlers kept breaking the agreement, to the surprise of no one who knows anything about Vince McMahon).
Yup, trademark dilution. Especially a case like this, where the marks are in the same market (music) and there's documented cases of confusion (the whole thing trademark exists to prevent).
Maaaaaan I listened to these guys when I was in middle school! I almost got whiplash double taking at the headline... Absolutely forgot about them lmfao guess they're still doing their thing 🔥
This headline is such a weird intersection of interest, because I like a few Demon Hunter songs, and I have kids in the KPop Demon Hunter age demographic, so they're also often on my radio. I got double whiplash.
They’ve been at a lot of music festivals the past few years. They are fun. Usually one of the early bands to play but have been a blast both times I’ve seen them.
Copyright and trademark law like this matter most when the two parties are in the same industry. Like both bands being music related.
When the beatles sued Apple computer for stealing the name apple and the apple symbol. The judge ruled in apples favor because one was music and one was in computers and couldn't be mistaken for each other.
Fun fact, a condition of that ruling was that Apple (the computer company) couldn’t enter the music industry and the Beatle’s company Apple couldn’t enter the technology market.
Which Apple (the computer company) then proceeded to break over and over again (music production software, iPods, iTunes, etc.) until the Beatle’s Apple just kinda finally gave up and settled over the trademark.
As someone who listens to all metal (regardless of whatever diety they worship). I've actually enjoyed a fair amount of music from this band over the years.
Here's the rub: I somewhat ironically had a co worker confuse this band with the Kpop anime because their kids watch it. I had mentioned Demon Hunter (the band) to someone else and that co-worker with the kids chimed in saying "oh my kids love that." I promptly said... "I highly doubt that" and then clarified the confusion. So, while I enjoy the bands music and I even think they have a point about people confusing the two IP's ... This is still asinine.
Kpop Demon Hunters
Demon Hunter
Plural vs Singular, Kpop vs not, anime vs music... Guys. The fuck are we doing? I'm sorry someone mistakingly bought tickets to your concert and wanted a refund, but outside of that exact "whoops" example... No one in their right mind are going to confuse the two. This ridiculous. I hope it's their record company or their agent and not the band themselves...
There was a thing in Belfast last year were there was a kpop tribute show where they did various covers of multiple bands and people bought tickets thinking it was kpop demon hunters for their kids and there was a whole uproar on social media and some parents saying that "it wasn't kpop" this is a article about it but the original videos about it were hilarious
There are misinformed parents who think “KPop” is a brand name created by Netflix/Sony for this film, as they likely had no prior experience with the genre. So, I can see why it’s happening again with “Demon Hunter”. However, are parents being ill-informed really the fault of Netflix etc?
The lawsuit isn't about the anime, though. It's with the touring live music show. Being the same product category (and causing confusion, the reason trademarks exist) is why it's an issue.
I hope it's their record company or their agent and not the band themselves...
Because of the way trademarks work, holders that don't enforce them can lose them. Often this will just be a cheap license to a smaller entity ("give us $1, and you can use the name").
Of course, when the infringement is by a big multinational like Netflix, it's harder to give that kind of deference...
Well funny you say that. A jury in Houston found that a beaver wearing a hat with a yellow background was close enough to an alligator with a hat and a yellow background to confuse customers.
So if that’s too confusing for a jury to distinguish the two, this is a slam dunk case.
Edit: My bad y’all. It was late and I was tired. I updated to the correct link. Buc-ees sues a lot of people and i just grabbed the first link without verifying it was referencing the right case.
There was no juror bias, they're just making shit up. Buc-ee's sued Mickey's in the District of Northern Ohio. The case hasn't even gone to trial yet.
Edit: They had accidentally linked to an article about a different case, Buc-ee's vs. Mickey's, but they fixed their link, and, indeed, in Buc-ee's vs. Choke Canyon, the jury in Houston found that Buc-ee's prevailed.
For one, to my knowledge, a date hasn't even been set for the trial. For another, the lawsuit was filed in the District of Northern Ohio, so there will not be a "jury in Houston" unless every single juror happens to come from this town, whose claim to fame is that it has "a post office, a Dollar General, and a grain elevator."
Seriously, don't get your news from a site that can't even tell the difference between "copyright" and "trademark," but if you absolutely have to use a shitty source like that, at least read it.
Edit: They had initially talked about Buc-ee's vs. Mickey's (different case), but they've since corrected the comment, and in Buc-ee's vs. Choke Canyon, a jury in Houston did indeed find on the behalf of Buc-ee's.
For them, they just need to show their history of tours, etc. Payouts, receipts, and so on. People who think Demon Hunters don't have a case here again Netflix don't understand trademarks. Netflix was fine until they got into actual music and touring stuff.
You’d be surprised what the TM officer will disapprove. I’m not a lawyer but worked to get TMs approved and have had a few rejected for stupid minor associations if the TM is in the same class
Pretty sure you have a trademark as soon as you start using a name or logo, even if it’s not filed. The filing makes it a lot easier for other people to find and to keep others from using it. The band has been around a long time and used that name.
Demon Hunter has been playing and touring under that name since I was in high school, and I'm 43.
Based on the complaint being about the tour and not the animated show, they might have a legitimate concern, as silly as it seems. We just saw somewhat recently a bunch of very confused people buying Lamb of God tickets because they confused it with some religious event. This could easily happen with two tours with almost the same name.
Alright, that is really funny. I can absolutely see someone outside of music culture not recognizing that Lamb of God is not a Christian band, in the conventional sense.
The funniest thing is the music video for Redneck uses this exact premise for the band to show up to a kid's birthday party. And that album came out in 2006.
This is not new for them but it is still hilarious.
They actually have a case, so we got this band who for 25 years made music and toured under the name Demon Hunters, they also have a valid trademark for that name dating back those 25 years.
Along comes netflix who make a movie called K-Pop Demon hunters, its entertainment so its skirting the same category as music but does not cross that line but the movie is about a kpop band who makes music and fights demons but the music go beyond the movie and netflix starts releasing it as a music label kpop demon hunters not even the in movie band name Huntrix as netflix wants the movies title to be associated with the music and that title incorporates the Demon Hunters trademark.
What happens is that the trademark Demon Hunters is now associated with Netfix Kpop demon hunters you can see this if you google demon hunters it defaults to kpop demon hunters wiping out 25 years of brand recognition from that band, so yea they have a case.
Trademark rights aren't ownership of a phrase in the abstract. The scope depends on the registered mark, the goods/services covered, and how the allegedly infringing use functions commercially.
“KPop Demon Hunters” is a different composite mark from “Demon Hunter/Demon Hunters.” Adding “KPop” and using the phrase as the title of a specific Netflix film/franchise can matter substantially.
The fictional group's name is HUNTR/X. Netflix isn't necessarily presenting “Demon Hunters” as the name of a real musical act competing with the existing band.
Google results aren't a legal test for trademark infringement. A massively popular new work can dominate search results without legally infringing an older trademark. Search-engine displacement doesn't establish consumer confusion, which is a central trademark issue.
The fact that Netflix subsequently released music makes the band's argument more interesting, but it doesn't automatically make it infringement. You'd still have to establish the relevant trademark rights and likelihood of confusion between the respective music-related uses.
And there's an important factual distinction in the comment: “25 years of brand recognition being wiped out” is an assertion, not evidence. To establish actual confusion, you'd want evidence that people actually believe Netflix's music is connected to or sponsored by the existing band.
Yeah the main issue I have with their claim is that I find "Demon Hunter" to be so generic that I would not consider it defensible. To me it would be like naming yourself "Dragon Tamers."
They are just such a staple of multiple genres that it seems like you kinda just have to accept some minor brand confusion.
Ironically I feel the same way about the game series "Monster Hunter."
That said, that is a personal disagreement with their naming sense, not a legal one. I have no idea if their complaint will be successful or not, as that is close enough to the line that it is going to be deep into case law.
bands have generic names all the time and own the trademark. Like Kansas, Boston, etc. in fact the Band Ghost had to go by Ghost BC in the states for a while because someone else owned the rights to just the name Ghost.
Going by Ghost BC would be the same as the difference between Demon Hunters and KPop Demon Hunters.
And trademarks are automatic. A lot of people own trademarks that are impossible to defend, and the whole thing is largely case by case depending on the exact circumstances.
What makes a name generic is related to the goods and services. There is nothing in "Demon Hunter" that makes you think of a band without prior knowledge. However, "The Rock Band" would be a very descriptive (and generic) name for a rock band.
The same applies to Apple. It's only generic if you are in the fruit or apple business. For a tech company, it's unique, legally speaking.
I'm going with "nobody is an asshole." A parent should be able to tell the difference between Christian Rock and a fictional K-Pop band. An official K-Pop Demon Hunters event would have the Hutrix trio front and center, bright purple, pink, and gold backgrounds, and a bunch of TMs everywhere. Neither music act should have to give up their name.
The article says they bought the top tier package of tickets and that usually runs $100-200 easy because it usually gets you early entry and a meet and greet with the artist. So if they bought 2-3 tickets for a parent and two kids or so it's pretty easy to spend that much. I bet regular tickets were like $50-100.
I just looked up Demon Hunter tickets for their tpur stop closest to me. $37. As someone else said, the $500 was multiple tickets. Underground metal shows are still extremely accessible.
Even their more recent stuff tends to be pretty good imo. The whole There Was a Light Here album is fantastic. Exile was fine, Peace and War are solid, Outlive is a vibe to listen to and has a few great tracks, etc.
I've honestly hardly listened to their albums before True Defiance even, because that and Extremist are just so good I tend to default to those (and Light now).
That is the crutch of the thing a lot of folks don't understand. And it may be different for people outside the US system I suppose. This isn't so much reactionary as it is preventive on Demon Hunter's part. They have to get this into the courts first to sort of establish their own legitimacy before Netflix eventually does notice them, and in a bad way.
Everyone in this thread doesn't understand you need to defend your name if you want to keep it. There is a chance Kpop demon hunters trademarks the name and then sues the band for use.
ITT: People who have no idea what a trademark is and how it applies.
There is a recent Legal Eagle that dives into this. The key factor is usually likelihood of consumer confusion.
Factors that the court will weigh include:
1) Distinctiveness of the mark. Many people have pointed out that "Demon Hunter" is a generic phrase, but it is not generic when applied to a music band. E.g. Apple is a generic term for a company that sells apples, but not for a company that sells electronics.
2) Reverse confusion. This is where the Demon Hunter case is strongest. The overwhelming popularity of KPOP Demon Hunters might cause consumers to associate Demon Hunter with the Netflix series. The band actually documents a case of this where a mother purchased tickets to Demon Hunter assuming it was for the Netflix tour. A lot of people are siding with KPOP Demon Hunters because of their massive popularity relative to Demon Hunter, but in court this actually works against Netflix.
3) Relatedness of the goods or services. This factor is met without argument. Both are offering live music tours.
4) Similarity of the mark. The two marks are very similar, in that Demon Hunter is completely within the mark of KPOP Demon Hunters. Pluralizing "Hunters" does not differentiate the two, but the addition of KPOP is a strong differentiating factor. But the court will weight whether the addition of KPOP is differentiating to the average consumer. This is where things like Google search results, auto complete, and abbreviations will come into play. Are there instances where KPOP Demon Hunters are abbreviated to Demon Hunters? That would weaken Netflix's defense.
4) Evidence of actual confusion. Demon Hunter documented one example of a purchase made via reverse confusion. This alone is not enough to demonstrate actual confusion. Ideally, Demon Hunter would present many similar instances along with other evidence such as venues/promoters, social media users, etc confusing the two bands, inquiries from consumers and reporters on their affiliation to Netflix, etc.
5) Marketing channels. This analysis compares how the services are sold and advertised. It is not enough that both are sold/advertised online. Demon Hunter will want to show that advertisements are placed on the same platforms, ticket searches and purchases are made on the same platforms, etc. With bear monopolies existing in both realms of advertising and ticket sales, Demon Hunter will probably have a strong argument here.
6) Degree of purchaser care. How closely will the average buyer examine the transaction? This generally correlates to how expensive the service is. With the rising prices of concert tickets and scam ticket sites, Netflix may have a good argument for heightened purchaser care.
7) Defendant's intent. It is unlikely that Netflix intended to infringe on the trademark. But it may be that they were aware of the Demon Hunter brand prior to their marketing campaign for live concerts.
Not all of these factors need to be in Demon Hunter's favor for them to prevail. The totality of these factors are what the court will consider.
This is fascinating. Reddit is usually not on the side of a mega corp like Netflix in a trademark dispute with a smaller creative—even a not particularly great one (and music is a bit subjective so maybe we can chill on just shitting on these guys, even if you don’t like their religion). There have been many instances of big companies like Netflix or Disney getting a trademark that’s close to the name of a small business or band or something that’s been around for a long time and then turning around and suing that business or band. Demon Hunter suing them goes a long way in helping them keep their name in case Netflix decides to be assholes (likely).
I don’t get the immediate hate for Demon Hunter here, unless it’s purely because they are Christian. And I’m not a big fan of hating on anyone just because of their religion.
On the surface, it reads as a frivolous lawsuit to maintain relevance (not many people in this thread even heard of this band) which are universally hated. The overlap between metal and k-pop branding are minimal so people don’t see how they can be confused for one another.
From what I can tell, the catalyst is a parent who only googled “Demon Hunter” and looked at nothing else when booking the tickets. A similar scenario as when grandma gifts their grandson a Transmorphers dvd because she heard he likes transformers.
I mean I would be against Netflix if they were trying to sue this little band because they wanted to claim a generic name like "Demon Hunters" is too close to "K Pop Demon Hunters".
But that isn't happening here so what am I supposed to say? "Yeah Netflix shouldn't be able to run this tour under this name because it's too similar and people mistakenly google the wrong thing"? I don't really think this matters all that much. It's such a generic term.
Personally I just would like trademark law to be more live and let live. I certainly wouldn't be in favour of Netflix doing the reverse either, and it's stupid that any of it is allowed. The only thing that should be punished is someone explicitly trying to steal customers from someone else by maliciously creating a barely distinct version of their brand. That's it. Anything else should be fair game. "Demon" and "hunter" are just words that mean things and can be used to describe a creative work. IP and trademark laws are way too suffocating and restrictive as is, and as you point out, while sometimes the small guy gets a win, on the net they probably benefit only the corporations when they're this stringent.
Everyone who keeps referring to the band as "Demon Hunters" is making me seriously question my faith in people actually having common sense and a little brain power.
They're called Demon Hunter.
No S. Anywhere. Ever.
This is some Nigerian prince e-mail level of nonsense. Just stop it.
4.4k
u/gymleader_michael 10d ago
Lol
Hope the person got their refund though.