Emerson drops product placement case against NBC

Hero · 02-23-2007, 01:12 PM

For a settlement, of course...

The scoop:

Quote:

Emerson Drops Product Placement Case Against NBC
by David Goetzl, Friday, Feb 23, 2007 8:33 AM ET

A LAWSUIT ALLEGING THAT NBC engaged in unauthorized and unflattering product placement in the hit show "HEROES" has been settled out-of-court. NBC Universal reached an agreement in which the Emerson Electric Co. would drop the case charging the network with "causing irreparable injury" to its InSinkErator waste-disposal brand.

Terms of the deal were not available, although Emerson last week dropped the charges in a filing with a Missouri court.

In the suit filed in October, Emerson said NBC did not have its permission to use the clearly visible InSinkErator brand in the show, and sought compensation for a slew of resulting damages.

Emerson declined comment. NBC did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but last fall reportedly said it did not feel it was liable. Attorneys that represented both sides also declined comment.

Back in October, Emerson was so enraged--or perhaps interested in seeking a favorable settlement--that it even declined to drop the charges after NBC reportedly agreed to edit the scene in the "HEROES" episode, in which a character sticks her hand in a kitchen-sink InSinkErator and pulls it out mangled and bloodied.

Among Emerson's charges about the Sept. 25 series premiere were trademark infringement and dilution, and unfair competition for misrepresenting and sullying the InSinkErator brand.

Had it gone to trial and Emerson won, the case could have set a precedent regarding a network's rights in how it depicts branded products in its creative work.

However, Mark McKenna, a trademark law expert at St. Louis University School of Law, last fall wrote in an email: "The case is very unlikely to succeed against NBC."

"There is precedent for the notion that certain uses of another party's trademark in an unflattering light can be deemed tarnishment or disparagement," he wrote. "I am not aware, however, of any case finding a use of a branded product in a creative work to violate trademark rights."...

Mathsorcerer · 02-23-2007, 02:05 PM

I have news for Emerson: when a show is a hit, you want your product featured in the show. The folks at Nissan are laughing all the way to the bank--thier Versa automobiles can be in a gunfight and not get a scratch!

Ikin · 02-23-2007, 06:51 PM

Does it really even matter? I, and I'm sure most other people, didn't even notice it was an InSinkErator!

Leah · 02-23-2007, 08:53 PM

Having done trademark litigation for a number of years, I actually think that infringement may have been found. I would've liked to see the papers on this. I am not sure that this would've fallen under the Fair Use exception. And, you have to "protect" your trademark in order to keep your rights under it.

But - from a practical perspective - I completely agree Mathy and Ikin, I didn't notice that it was an InSinkErator either!

The_Heroic_Loser · 02-23-2007, 08:54 PM

If anyone actually did notice the brand of garbage disposal it was, then they're looking at the wrong things during episodes.

Mathsorcerer · 02-24-2007, 01:17 AM

I did notice it was in In-Sink-Erator (pardon my spelling, I'm a little dizzy right now), but they could have encouraged the product placement--at least they didn't use a competitor's brand and they weren't really doing damage to the brand name.

Super Ordinary Guy · 02-24-2007, 05:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mathsorcerer

I have news for Emerson: when a show is a hit, you want your product featured in the show. The folks at Nissan are laughing all the way to the bank--thier Versa automobiles can be in a gunfight and not get a scratch!

Ya know, I really don't get Emerson's beef. I actually think they were going to sue no matter what. I mean, if Claire stuck in her hand and it DIDN'T get torn up, couldn't they have sued saying; "HEROES has tarnished our name, saying that our garbage disposal is defective in it's show." The garbage disposal did it's job, it tore up something, would it have better if it wasn't able to tear up something? I really don't think so. The show would have saved itself a lot of trouble if they had just covered up the name with leftover spinach or something.

randomfactor · 02-26-2007, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Super Ordinary Guy

Ya know, I really don't get Emerson's beef. I actually think they were going to sue no matter what. I mean, if Claire stuck in her hand and it DIDN'T get torn up, couldn't they have sued saying; "HEROES has tarnished our name, saying that our garbage disposal is defective in it's show." The garbage disposal did it's job, it tore up something, would it have better if it wasn't able to tear up something? I really don't think so. The show would have saved itself a lot of trouble if they had just covered up the name with leftover spinach or something.

Exactly. A garbage disposal chews things up, that is it's one & only function. That's like the element of fire hiring lawyers & suing Heroes/NBC for the trainwreck scene b/c someone was burned & it claims the scene tarnished its image.

Spøkelse · 02-26-2007, 04:57 PM

What garbage disposal wouldn't give that effect? Seriously. I mean if it was any other company, the same effects would come. And if it didn't hurt her they would sue saying "You're portraying our products as ineffective." Garbage disposals chew things up and their problem makes no sense. I'm glad its been dropped. They wouldn't have won anyway and I think they knew that.