The Hobbit in battle with Hollywood (From Daily Echo)

sherinsul wrote:
how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

sherinsul wrote:
how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

RBurns17 wrote:

sherinsul wrote:
how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s.

When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien.

The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy....

Seriously people....

nedscrumpo wrote:
change the name to THE HOB BIT

CEH393 wrote:

Chipster wrote:

RBurns17 wrote:

sherinsul wrote: how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

Seriously, get out more and get a ****ing life you pompous tool!

Well put Chipster, what a complete fool this man is! I wonder how long it took him to find out all of his info on google and wiki?

bigfella777 wrote:
Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

ToastyTea wrote:

CEH393 wrote:

Chipster wrote:

RBurns17 wrote:

sherinsul wrote: how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

Seriously, get out more and get a ****ing life you pompous tool!

Well put Chipster, what a complete fool this man is! I wonder how long it took him to find out all of his info on google and wiki?

How is he a fool, he's right. When this story came about I did think I can't imagine they have bought the rights off the Tolkien estate to be able to name the pub 'The Hobbit' (even if it was 20yrs ago).
They are more then within their right to make the pub rename (however harsh it maybe), I'm surprised it hasn't come about sooner actually.

YankeeDoodle wrote:
They should see how the Hungry Hobbit sandwich shop in Birmingham got to keep its name when faced with the same legal team. LOL, its across the way from The Shire greenbelt if you want to find it.

TheTruthIknow wrote:

YankeeDoodle wrote:
They should see how the Hungry Hobbit sandwich shop in Birmingham got to keep its name when faced with the same legal team. LOL, its across the way from The Shire greenbelt if you want to find it.

They were just up the road from where JRR Tolkien grew up....and they weren't selling themed drinks, t-shirts etc

abees wrote:
Don't worry Echo, you're only FOUR days behind on this one:

http://sotontab.co.u

k/news/2012/03/09/ho

bbit-under-siege-fro

m-tolkiens-orc-lawye

rs/

Icklelady wrote:
This is just greed.

The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years.

Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around?

Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

allsaintsnocurves wrote:
There's a pub in the Philippenes in Manila called 'The Hobbit'...and was even named specifically after the book and even has midgets working in there as bar staff! Maybe the Hobbit in Southampton should get in touch with them and fight it together. I'm sure there are others.

southy wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob
byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

aberis wrote:

Icklelady wrote:
This is just greed.

The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years.

Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around?

Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name.

The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

Shoong wrote:

southy wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob

byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign.
I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

southy wrote:

Shoong wrote:

southy wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob


byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign.
I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted.
So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.

SpiderMeringue wrote:

bigfella777 wrote:
Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.

southy wrote:

Shoong wrote:

southy wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob


byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign.
I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted.
So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.

AM wrote:
It may interest the Landlady of The Hobbit to know that the term hobbit was first mentioned in a list of supernatural beings by the folklorist Michael Aislabie Denham in 1895. I quote "nixies, jinny-burnt-tails,du

dmen,hell-hounds,dop

ple-gangers,bogglebo

es,bogies,redmen,por

tunes,grants and hobbits...'
J.R.R. Tolkien most probably took the word hobbit from this list and therefore it is a possibility that the term does not belong to the estate of J.R.R. Tolkien especially as Tolkien was born in 1892 and would only have been 3 years old when the list was published.
Stand your ground the Americans are having far too much say in Great Britain.

Shoong wrote:

southy wrote:

Shoong wrote:

southy wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob



byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign.
I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted.
So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.

It's THE Hobbit.

As in the title of a book they used.

It's nothing to do with 'Old English', they've been ripping off the title of a book. End of!

The Music Man wrote:

southy wrote:

Shoong wrote:

southy wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob



byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign.
I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted.
So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.

The fact remains that The Hobbit have been using characters/names from the book to make money by selling merch/drinks.

rightway wrote:
All theme pubs should be demolished.
Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe.
The only sign on the door should be;
NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS)
NO CHILDREN
NO DOGS
NO MOBILE PHONES

mack chinnon wrote:

rightway wrote: All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

Turn it into a Hooters.

mack chinnon wrote:

rightway wrote:
All theme pubs should be demolished.
Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe.
The only sign on the door should be;
NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS)
NO CHILDREN
NO DOGS
NO MOBILE PHONES

Turn it into a Hooters.

rightway wrote:
All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

rightway wrote:
All theme pubs should be demolished.
Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe.
The only sign on the door should be;
NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS)
NO CHILDREN
NO DOGS
NO MOBILE PHONES

southy wrote:
To have copy rights over a word, you need to invent a word, it takes a lot more than just use a part of word or add on to word or cut a word and add on, it has to have whole total new meaning also, to have copy rights over letter you need to invent a design of the letters, can not use any that as all ready been used.

southy wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob
byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

Pixiienot wrote:

rightway wrote:
All theme pubs should be demolished.
Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe.
The only sign on the door should be;
NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS)
NO CHILDREN
NO DOGS
NO MOBILE PHONES

What an obnoxious human being, Get back in your boxers and watch some more Jeremy Kyle.

Paramjit Bahia wrote:

southy wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob

byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

I am no lawyer but Southy seems to have a very valid point
.
Sending threatening notices is part of so called American way of life. They also think they can bully the world into submission, and our governments seem to roll over for them as if nation that was once British colony is now its master
.
This mind set should stop. People should get behind this small business in Southampton, because if properly exercised people power could win over arrogance and mega wealth
.
Why our political class, which is often in gung ho mode for bullying weak nations always fails to stand up to USA’s government and its big companies?
.
Big businesses do not like bad publicity, it hurts their profits. So a well organised campaign by supporters of underdog pub in Southampton against powerful American enterprise, if organise properly, could eventually find a reasonable solution.

voiceinthecrowd wrote:

southy wrote:
To have copy rights over a word, you need to invent a word, it takes a lot more than just use a part of word or add on to word or cut a word and add on, it has to have whole total new meaning also, to have copy rights over letter you need to invent a design of the letters, can not use any that as all ready been used.

You are missing the point you can copyright a name such as Hobbit if you intend to make it a film title.
I wonder if the Pub registered the name with say Companies House.
Most businesses don't I understand
It cost the company making the film millions and obviously they want to protect their theme so to speak.
Not all films make it and money is lost.
If you want films you need to think

stuartjebbitt wrote:
as if the takings from a pub is seriously going to threaten a multi-million dollar film franchise! There's such a thing as live and let live and being magnanimous enough not to have to crush the little guy. I suspect Tolkein himself would be in the side of the little guy against the behemoth of corporate greed

AM wrote:
So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other.
The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it.
I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

Shoong wrote:

AM wrote:
So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other.
The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it.
I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question.

It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

allsaintsnocurves wrote:
There's a pub in the Philippenes in Manila called 'The Hobbit'...and was even named specifically after the book and even has midgets working in there as bar staff! Maybe the Hobbit in Southampton should get in touch with them and fight it together. I'm sure there are others.

Chas O'Bursledon wrote:

Shoong wrote:

AM wrote:
So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other.
The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it.
I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question.

It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
How about renaming it 'Old Hobbit' or "Hobbit of Soton" or “English Hobbit” “Local Hobbit” etc, could that be the way around the problem? For short local people still be calling it Hobbit.
.
Was there not a case over Lotus 7 few years ago, when they challenged some small firm making a similar sports car? Some legal expert on here may shed some light

Chas O'Bursledon wrote:

Shoong wrote:

AM wrote:
So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other.
The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it.
I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question.

It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
How about renaming it 'Old Hobbit' or "Hobbit of Soton" or “English Hobbit” “Local Hobbit” etc, could that be the way around the problem? For short local people still be calling it Hobbit.
.
Was there not a case over Lotus 7 few years ago, when they challenged some small firm making a similar sports car? Some legal expert on here may shed some light

bigfella777 wrote:

SpiderMeringue wrote:

bigfella777 wrote:
Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.

Its about class and neither you or this establishment have any.

clausentum wrote:

bigfella777 wrote:

SpiderMeringue wrote:

bigfella777 wrote:
Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.

Its about class and neither you or this establishment have any.

You are such a bore,I can imagine you sitting there in your flannel trousers and tweed jacket straining your old eyes to look at the interweb with a cup of cold tea.

Pixiienot wrote:

clausentum wrote:

bigfella777 wrote:

SpiderMeringue wrote:

bigfella777 wrote:
Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.

Its about class and neither you or this establishment have any.

You are such a bore,I can imagine you sitting there in your flannel trousers and tweed jacket straining your old eyes to look at the interweb with a cup of cold tea.

A stereotypical statement from a person who is trying to argue about people being different.. A tad hypocritical.

ssnaked23 wrote:
As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.

aberis wrote:

ssnaked23 wrote:
As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.

The other issue with a trademark is usage. The pub being called "The Hobbit" in shouldn't be an issue; as it has already be said, Hobbit is an 'olde' English word which has been in existence for centuries. The issue arises over the usage of the word. The fact the pub is using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch (namely drinks), would be deemed as a breach of this trademark.

An example of this is Dyno-rod claiming Trademark to the day-glo orange used for their vans and company logo. This means that although other companies can use this colour for their vans and logo, if the company operates within the same business market i.e. plumbing; they would be in breach of the trademark.

if the pub was to stop using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch, there should not be any need for the pub to change it's name; as the name was in use prior to the trademark applications in 2002 and 2011.

southy wrote:

Chas O'Bursledon wrote:

Shoong wrote:

AM wrote:
So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other.
The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it.
I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question.

It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

Thers all ready been a a court battle over a word, and that was Kelloggs cornflakes, and the other being the engineering firm I think, the ruling was Kelloggs as in Cornflakes could not own the word, but could own the design of the lettering, so the case went against Kelloggs Cornflakes and had to pay up.

southy wrote:

aberis wrote:

ssnaked23 wrote:
As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.

The other issue with a trademark is usage. The pub being called "The Hobbit" in shouldn't be an issue; as it has already be said, Hobbit is an 'olde' English word which has been in existence for centuries. The issue arises over the usage of the word. The fact the pub is using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch (namely drinks), would be deemed as a breach of this trademark.

An example of this is Dyno-rod claiming Trademark to the day-glo orange used for their vans and company logo. This means that although other companies can use this colour for their vans and logo, if the company operates within the same business market i.e. plumbing; they would be in breach of the trademark.

if the pub was to stop using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch, there should not be any need for the pub to change it's name; as the name was in use prior to the trademark applications in 2002 and 2011.

Then you hit the problem of Tolkien him self, he used real names and real places. like calling a drink Gandalf would not be breeching copy right laws or trade marks because "Gandalf" is a surname and mythitcal being (Norse Orgin).

nedscrumpo wrote:
Perhaps the licensee should change her name by deed poll to MRS HOBBIT.

aberis wrote:

southy wrote:

Chas O'Bursledon wrote:

Shoong wrote:

AM wrote:
So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other.
The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it.
I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question.

It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

Thers all ready been a a court battle over a word, and that was Kelloggs cornflakes, and the other being the engineering firm I think, the ruling was Kelloggs as in Cornflakes could not own the word, but could own the design of the lettering, so the case went against Kelloggs Cornflakes and had to pay up.

I think you'll find that Kelloggs own the trademark in food products. Trademarks operate in two ways:

1. You can trademark the design and style of a word for use as a company name, product or service.

2. You can trademark or word for use within a specific field.

Either use of a trademark also comes down to context of the usage.

E.g. The was a very long running legal dispute between Apple Corps and Apple Computers over the use of Apple (and using an apple for the logo). The short of it is that the first dispute was resolved by a court ruling that because Apple Corps (a music publisher) was the first registered trademark, Apple computers did not have the re-brand provided they remained in the computer electronic industry. The second dispute came about with the release of the iPod, or more importantly iTunes; which due to iTunes being used for the sale (publishing) of music was in breach of the Apple Corps trademark. This was upheld in court with a substantial payout to Apple Corps in order to continue operating in the music publishing industry.

voiceinthecrowd wrote:

mack chinnon wrote:

rightway wrote:
All theme pubs should be demolished.
Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe.
The only sign on the door should be;
NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS)
NO CHILDREN
NO DOGS
NO MOBILE PHONES

Turn it into a Hooters.

Get a life. I can only assume you want all pubs to be heavy drinking places where people can get smashed and then the police have to foot the bill cleaning the streets at night of drunks.
There is nothing wrong with theme nights but I think the point is missed the PUB sells memorablia for a PROFIT. Thats why no doubt they came to the attention of the Yanks.

aberis wrote:

southy wrote:

aberis wrote:

ssnaked23 wrote:
As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.

The other issue with a trademark is usage. The pub being called "The Hobbit" in shouldn't be an issue; as it has already be said, Hobbit is an 'olde' English word which has been in existence for centuries. The issue arises over the usage of the word. The fact the pub is using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch (namely drinks), would be deemed as a breach of this trademark.

An example of this is Dyno-rod claiming Trademark to the day-glo orange used for their vans and company logo. This means that although other companies can use this colour for their vans and logo, if the company operates within the same business market i.e. plumbing; they would be in breach of the trademark.

if the pub was to stop using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch, there should not be any need for the pub to change it's name; as the name was in use prior to the trademark applications in 2002 and 2011.

Then you hit the problem of Tolkien him self, he used real names and real places. like calling a drink Gandalf would not be breeching copy right laws or trade marks because "Gandalf" is a surname and mythitcal being (Norse Orgin).

Correct but using the imagery of Tolkien's "Gandalf" to represent and advertise the drink would ...

RBurns17 wrote:

sherinsul wrote:
how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s.

When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien.

The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy....

Seriously people....

RBurns17 wrote:

sherinsul wrote:
how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s.

When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien.

The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy....

Seriously people....

City Saint wrote:

RBurns17 wrote:

sherinsul wrote:
how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s.

When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien.

The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy....

Seriously people....

You misunderstand the nature of "harm" in copyright infringement. The Hollywood company will be expected to demonstrate how the existence of The Hobbit has harmed or will harm its copyright, which was established only afteer the pub was named. In order for the courts to issue a finding on behalf of the Hollywood company it will have to establish harm, and in thus case it won't be able to. Trust me, I've seen a fair few copyright bust-ups.

Pixiienot wrote:
This is becoming pretty repetitive..

NAME OF PUB = OK

RIPPING OFF LOTR PHOTOS,NAMES ECT = NOT OK

we get it ZZZzzz.

voiceinthecrowd wrote:

mack chinnon wrote:

rightway wrote: All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

Turn it into a Hooters.

Get a life. I can only assume you want all pubs to be heavy drinking places where people can get smashed and then the police have to foot the bill cleaning the streets at night of drunks. There is nothing wrong with theme nights but I think the point is missed the PUB sells memorablia for a PROFIT. Thats why no doubt they came to the attention of the Yanks.

waggers5 wrote:
This is a pub we're talking about here. It's not a movie, a stage production, or merchandise of any kind. The film studio's rights surely don't cover this.

southy wrote:

voiceinthecrowd wrote:

southy wrote:
To have copy rights over a word, you need to invent a word, it takes a lot more than just use a part of word or add on to word or cut a word and add on, it has to have whole total new meaning also, to have copy rights over letter you need to invent a design of the letters, can not use any that as all ready been used.

You are missing the point you can copyright a name such as Hobbit if you intend to make it a film title.
I wonder if the Pub registered the name with say Companies House.
Most businesses don't I understand
It cost the company making the film millions and obviously they want to protect their theme so to speak.
Not all films make it and money is lost.
If you want films you need to think

No you can not you can only copy right the Design of the word if its a totally new design.
Kelloggs is a prefect example, the word not copy right but the design is.
And the film used a design in letters that has all ready been used before copy right laws came into being.

southy wrote:

aberis wrote:

Icklelady wrote: This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
How about renaming it 'Old Hobbit' or "Hobbit of Soton" or “English Hobbit” “Local Hobbit” etc, could that be the way around the problem? For short local people still be calling it Hobbit.
.
Was there not a case over Lotus 7 few years ago, when they challenged some small firm making a similar sports car? Some legal expert on here may shed some light

100%HANTSBOY wrote:
Who told Hollywood about a small student pub in Portswood?
I smell a publicity stunt here!!

Cookiecutter wrote:
I can understand the reasoning behind this little problem, but as i see it, it comes down to use was first. Was the movie first or was the pub first to name. If it is the pub then the brewery own the name Hobbit. If its the film then give it back to them who care what the name is. No-one will want to see the film after that so who gets hurt the movie company.
My name was given to me over 70 years ago and since then i have found dozens of people using the exact same name all over the world.

mr.southampton wrote:
If it was just a case of the name then I would have more sympathy with the Hobbit, after all it's been the Hobbit for as long as anyone can remember, but with the product names, fonts and images they've clearly crossed a line.

southy wrote:

aberis wrote:

southy wrote:

Chas O'Bursledon wrote:

Shoong wrote:

AM wrote:
So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other.
The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it.
I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question.

It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

Thers all ready been a a court battle over a word, and that was Kelloggs cornflakes, and the other being the engineering firm I think, the ruling was Kelloggs as in Cornflakes could not own the word, but could own the design of the lettering, so the case went against Kelloggs Cornflakes and had to pay up.

I think you'll find that Kelloggs own the trademark in food products. Trademarks operate in two ways:

1. You can trademark the design and style of a word for use as a company name, product or service.

2. You can trademark or word for use within a specific field.

Either use of a trademark also comes down to context of the usage.

E.g. The was a very long running legal dispute between Apple Corps and Apple Computers over the use of Apple (and using an apple for the logo). The short of it is that the first dispute was resolved by a court ruling that because Apple Corps (a music publisher) was the first registered trademark, Apple computers did not have the re-brand provided they remained in the computer electronic industry. The second dispute came about with the release of the iPod, or more importantly iTunes; which due to iTunes being used for the sale (publishing) of music was in breach of the Apple Corps trademark. This was upheld in court with a substantial payout to Apple Corps in order to continue operating in the music publishing industry.

They own the design of Kelloggs brand name, the Kelloggs word can be use even if you producing cornflakes, but they can not copy brand trade name design.
Another example is Lotus 7 two firms producing sports cars with the same name, ruling was both can exciss as there trade band name was different with there own unique way of doing Lotus 7

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:

aberis wrote:

Icklelady wrote: This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.

That was the Hobler

Georgem wrote:

100%HANTSBOY wrote:
Who told Hollywood about a small student pub in Portswood?
I smell a publicity stunt here!!

It's not. The guy's done this before. Google "hungry hobbit cafe", for starters.

Beer Monster wrote:
It's certainly more to do with the promotional side - Hobbits pub in Hythe has various LotR memorabilia inside, but draws the line at promos, so has been left untarnished

voiceinthecrowd wrote:
As a writer if any one used any name I created and produced memorabelia with that on I would quite happily sue.
However I would not object to a Pub say using the name and coming to an agreement if approached.
There should always be compromise.
We must learn to talk this world needs to realise that.

aberis wrote:

Georgem wrote:

100%HANTSBOY wrote:
Who told Hollywood about a small student pub in Portswood?
I smell a publicity stunt here!!

It's not. The guy's done this before. Google "hungry hobbit cafe", for starters.

Some kind sole on the news report for it on either the Birmingham post or Daily Mail's report on it back in November, very kindly mentioned the existence on this lovely pub ...

and believe me, the lawyers dealing with it would have been monitoring all the news reports about the Hungry Hobbit ...

Sotonians_lets_pull_
together wrote:
There are others, eg

A restaurant in California:
http://hobbitrestaur

ant.com/page.aspx?pg

id=2

The Hobbit Hotel in Sowerby Bridge
http://www.hobbithot

el.co.uk/

The Hobbit Bistro in Quebec..
http://www.hobbitbis

tro.com/

Hobbit Restaurant in Rivendell, Ocean City, Maryland

The Hobbit Cafe in Houston
http://www.myhobbitc

afe.com/

Grill de Hobbit in Belgium

El Viejo Hobbit, Villa Gesell

Hobbit House, Manila

Hobbit, Darmstadt

The Hobbit, Teignmouth

Cafe Le Hobbit, Quebec City

Hobbit American Grill, Tallahassee

Hobbit Hoagies Westwood, Pensacola

Hobbit House, Vancouver

Rivendell Restaurant and Gardens San Marcos, Texas


It only takes five minutes to do a web search, you can be sure the copyright owners will be doing so.

Sotonians_lets_pull_
together wrote:
There are others, eg

A restaurant in California:
http://hobbitrestaur

ant.com/page.aspx?pg

id=2

The Hobbit Hotel in Sowerby Bridge
http://www.hobbithot

el.co.uk/

The Hobbit Bistro in Quebec..
http://www.hobbitbis

tro.com/

Hobbit Restaurant in Rivendell, Ocean City, Maryland

The Hobbit Cafe in Houston
http://www.myhobbitc

afe.com/

Grill de Hobbit in Belgium

El Viejo Hobbit, Villa Gesell

Hobbit House, Manila

Hobbit, Darmstadt

The Hobbit, Teignmouth

Cafe Le Hobbit, Quebec City

Hobbit American Grill, Tallahassee

Hobbit Hoagies Westwood, Pensacola

Hobbit House, Vancouver

Rivendell Restaurant and Gardens San Marcos, Texas


It only takes five minutes to do a web search, you can be sure the copyright owners will be doing so.

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:

aberis wrote:

Icklelady wrote: This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.

That was the Hobler

Thats the one forest, I can remember that pub being that name before they change it.
Hobler is another form of Hobbit from the medieval times

Crazywolf wrote:
They should just change their name. to something like.. Hollywood Greed

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:

aberis wrote:

Icklelady wrote: This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.

That was the Hobler

Thats the one forest, I can remember that pub being that name before they change it.
Hobler is another form of Hobbit from the medieval times

The Hobler is still called The Hobler and when Pip Stevens bought it as The New Inn he chose a name associated with horses. A Hobler is an old name for someone who looked after horses according to Pip who I assume would have cleared it with you first rather than risk making a mistake.

Sotonians_lets_pull_
together wrote:
The only source known today that makes reference to hobbits in any sort of historical context is the Denham Tracts by Michael Aislabie Denham. More specifically, it appears in the Denham Tracts, edited by James Hardy, (London: Folklore Society, 1895), vol. 2, the second part of a two-volume set compiled from Denham's publications between 1846 and 1859.

The text contains a long list of sprites and bogies, based on an older list, the Discovery of Witchcraft, dated 1584, with many additions and a few repetitions. The term hobbit is listed in the context of

boggleboes, bogies, redmen, portunes, grants, hobbits, hobgoblins, brown-men, cowies, dunnies

In the December 2003 Oxford English Dictionary newsletter, in the "Words of Choice" section, the following appears:

4. hobbit — J. R. R. Tolkien modestly claimed not to have coined this word, although the Supplement to the OED credited him with the invention of it in the absence of further evidence. It seems, however, that Tolkien was right to be cautious. It has since turned up in one of those 19th-century folklore journals, in a list of long-forgotten words for fairy-folk or little people. It seems likely that Tolkien, with his interest in folklore, read this and subconsciously registered the name, reviving it many years later in his most famous character.

http://en.wikipedia.

org/wiki/Hobbit_%28w

ord%29

voiceinthecrowd wrote:
The Question really comes down to WHY DID PUB CHOOSE THAT NAME AND SELL T SHIRTS ETC
Surely the answer is there
PROFIT
Not that I am blaming them for trying, but what did they expect would happen.

If you let one get away with it then its a FREE FOR ALL and the hard work and cash sunk into film, book, art etc is lost.

Just imagine say you found at the end of the week you had a deduction in your wages you would go mad.

sherinsul wrote:
how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous