Trademark Issues

Is the HOLLYWOOD Sign trademarked?

The Hollywood Sign itself is NOT trademarked.

The word Hollywood, in an all cap typeface with a staggered alignment is trademarked in a few (but not most) trademark classes. The typeface was cleverly designed to mimic the Sign, so that the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce could scam people into believing the Sign itself is trademarked.

The Chamber has never tested its claim in federal court that it's registered word-mark spelling "hollywood", in a sign-mimicking typeface, additionally confers reverse rights to the publicly-owned, actual sign structure it was intended to copy.

Experts believe this claim would fail to hold up under judicial scrutiny... which may explain one reason why the Chamber has never sued a filmmaker or content creator for infringement. (www.pacer.gov)

The Hollywood Chamber of Commerce often threatens legal action, but it never carries out the treats. Previously the CA attorney general Dan Lungren, accused the Chamber of racketeering.

Images of the HOLLYWOOD Sign itself can be used in any and all commercial and non-commercial uses. But typeface or illustrations of it might not.... so just use accurate images of the sign.

Facts to Consider....

According to the US Patent and Trademark office, The Hollywood Chamber of Commerce does not own trademark rights for the commercial use of the Hollywood Sign look-a-like font in any of the following classes of goods and services (*www.uspto.gov);

(So anyone can use the Hollywood Sign (and typeface facsimiles) for commercial activities in the following classes of goods and services... among others.)

- Class 09: Recorded or downloadable media or software (e.g., video games)

- Class 38: Telecommunication services (e.g., broadcasting, streaming)

- Class 41: Entertainment, multimedia production, and sports (e.g., films, TV shows, music videos, production sets)

- Class 03: Cosmetics (e.g., makeup, skincare, haircare, and perfumes like Gucci Flora).

- Class 06: Metal Goods (e.g., metal signs, metal structures)

Note: The Chamber owns commercial rights to a 'Hollywood Sign' like word-mark in limited classes, mostly for souvenir type products, such as Class 25 (e.g., T-shirts) & Class 14 (e.g., Jewelry) & Class 16 (e.g., Postcards). Contact the Chamber if you want to use the typeface of the Sign, rather than an image of the sign for these classes.

Examples/FAQ:

1) The Hollywood Sign will be visible (for a little or a lot, close -up or far away) in my dramatic feature film, do I need to license the Sign? - No, you DO NOT need to license. (ref.; LA Times & John Martial School of Law Journal)

2) I will imprint the word "hollywood", in staggered-typeface capital letters, on T-Shits, that I plan to sell along Hollywood Blvd., do I need to license the Sign? - Yes, you DO need to license. Contact the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce for any more information.

3) What about the Walk of Fame? That's a good question. Search both the USPTO and PACER websites. The few registered images consist of both the star and a movie-camera symbol inside it. What about Mic symbols? LP Record symbols? Registrations with those symbols were not found. Each symbol inside a star combination requires its own registration, and in each class. Look for something thats available. Alternatively, consider making your own distinct symbol inside the exact Walk of Fame style star. It's no problem.
‍
4) The Chamber told me how strong its trademark rights are. Should I be concerned? No, you should not.

5) The Chamber claims a 1991 Agreement indicates the City and State recognize a trademark is that true? No, thats a misleading statement. In fact, the State has no registration of the Hollywood Sign as a mark (by anyone), and the City has no authority to recognize trademarks as such. These claims are meaningless.

6) Has the Chamber ever tried to register a trademark of the actual Hollywood Sign? Yes, in 2004. The Chamber ran from its application and abandoned it after 1) Columbia Pictures Industries, 2) Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, 3) CBS Broadcasting Inc, 4) Universal City Studios LLP, & 5)Paramount Pictures Corporation, all simply requested one month to profile reasons for opposition.

The Hollywood Chamber of Commerce has confirmed the accuracy of the above facts. And yet, they will

The 1992 "Settlement Agreement" ;

As part of the 1992 "Settlement Agreement" In CA & LA, vs. the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce -an Indictment of the Chambers's "unfair business practices"; Both the State and City only agree 'not to take the Chamber to trademark court'. The agreement does not acknowledgment a trademark, ownership or rights... as one would expect an organization that engages in "unfair business practices" to falsely claim.

What did the LA times Say?

Expertise

By Susan E. Seager and Sachli Balazadeh-NayeriApril 26, 2020 3 AM PT

The Hollywood sign is a beloved Southern California landmark. Built in 1923 and donated to the City of Los Angeles in 1944, it sits on public land atop Mt. Lee in Griffith Park.

The sign truly belongs to the public. And yet, in a sleight of hand, the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce insists that it owns trademark rights to the sign’s “likeness” and therefore can charge for the use of that image.

For years, lawyers for the chamber have been threatening to sue over the use of the Hollywood sign in a variety of projects, from a student film and UCLA law school recruitment brochure to an advertising campaign and tourist photo. British YouTuber Tom Scott mocked the chamber’s trademark bullying by bleeping out the word “Hollywood Sign” and pixelating the sign as if it were some X-rated porn star in his video about the sign.

The chamber, which has had control of licensing trademarks for the sign since at least 1992, claims it has “certain trademark rights for usage of the Sign or its likeness for commercial purposes.” But what most people don’t realize is that the chamber tried and failed to register trademarks on the Hollywood sign with two applications to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in 2004.

The trademark office rejected the applications because you can’t get trademark protection for the the name of a place. The Hollywood sign may be a landmark, but it is also the name of a place. Trademarks are only granted for geographic names in association with specific products and services. The only way that the chamber could have won a trademark for the Hollywood sign is if it had showed that the public widely associated the sign with a specific product. That’s what the owners of Arrowhead Water or California Pizza Kitchen did.

Before the chamber could appeal the trademark office’s rejection, the big Hollywood studios — Paramount Pictures, CBS Broadcasting, 20th Century Fox, Columbia Pictures and Universal City Studios — went ballistic because the chamber’s applications sought a trademark for the sign as a stage prop. The studios feared that the chamber would demand licensing fees to show the sign in movies and TV shows, according to studio sources. After the studios filed papers with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office seeking more time to file comments, the chamber abandoned its applications.

The chamber, however, was not dissuaded from pushing its right to trademark the word “Hollywood.” It sought and obtained federal trademarks for the word, using the sign’s blocky all-caps, staggered lettering.

This time, the chamber followed the requirements for applying for a trademark for a geographical location. It argued that the word “HOLLYWOOD” had become known to the public as the brand name for candy, food, jewelry, clothing, athletic apparel, paper, “licensing of intellectual property,” and “advertising services” after five years of continuous use in the marketplace. The trademark office granted these dubious trademarks.

Those registrations do not apply to an image of the sign itself. But that hasn’t stopped the chamber from demanding that filmmakers, television producers and other artists pay licensing fees to show the sign in their works. There is no need to pay. As one scholar explained, these creative works don’t violate trademark laws when they simply show the Hollywood sign to signify that “the scene took place in Hollywood.” That’s called descriptive fair use.

There’s also the First Amendment. The constitutional right to free expression gives the creators of films, television shows, video games, and YouTube videos the right to show the Hollywood sign for artistic reasons or realism without paying a dime. But even when people are within their legal rights to use the image, they pony up when they get a cease-and-desist letter from the chamber demanding money because it’s cheaper than a lawsuit.

Many courts have reaffirmed a First Amendment protection for expressive works. The most recent decision came down on March 31 from a federal judge in New York. The judge dismissed a trademark lawsuit brought by the maker of Humvees against Activision, the publisher of the “Call of Duty” video games. He ruled that Activision has a First Amendment right to show the trademarked Humvees, which provide a dose of “realism” in depicting contemporary warfare.

The Hollywood sign is a historical, geographical and cultural touchstone for Los Angeles. It’s not just a billboard for Hollywood. It’s an icon that has come to represent dreams made here in California. You shouldn’t have to pay a licensing fee for that.

Susan E. Seager is a staff attorney at the UC Irvine Law School Intellectual Property, Arts, and Technology Clinic and Sachli Balazadeh-Nayeri is a law student working in the clinic.and recommendations.

Licensing the Hollywood Sign

Licensing is NEVER required to FILM the Sign.