AMC Defeats Liberty Tax Service Over Supposed Depiction In ‘Better Call Saul’
A little over a year ago, Liberty Tax Service filed a trademark and defamation lawsuit against AMC. At issue was the depiction of a shady tax prep company run by con-men in the final season of the hit show Better Call Saul. In the show, the name of the tax prep company is Sweet Liberty Tax", run out of a trailer in the middle of the desert, with branding that included the use of the Statue of Liberty. Liberty Tax likewise uses Lady Liberty, typically by employing people to stand outside of its storefronts in costume, waving around signs to get people to come in for tax services. Liberty Tax claimed the show ripped off its name and branding, while also claiming that the negative connotation of the fictional tax company would either confuse the public into thinking that the real life company was itself shady, or that the company had some association with the depiction in the show.
We were frankly shocked at the similarities between not only the name but the logo, the imagery; what we call the trade dress, frankly," said Liberty Tax Service's representing attorney Peter Siachos, partner with Gordon & Rees.
The federal lawsuit filed in New York claims Better Call Saul ripped off the trademarked name, look, and an inflatable Statue of Liberty that many Americans associate with Liberty Tax Service simply by adding the word sweet" in front of the name. They chose liberty, they chose the patriotic imagery, they chose the Statue of Liberty, and Liberty Tax has a trademark that gives it an exclusive use of the Statue of Liberty icon connecting with tax preparation services," said Siachos.
The suit was questionable, in other words. The public knew they were watching a fictional show about fictional people and fictional companies. Confusion of association was never really a thing. Add to all of that the fact that the First Amendment protects the kind of artistic speech that the show was engaged in and you had all the hallmarks of a lawsuit destined for dismissal.
And that is exactly what has now happened. A Manhattan court has granted AMC's motion to dismiss the suit, noting over the course of 30 pages that Liberty Tax Services failed to offer any real evidence that there was or could be confusion between the fictional depiction of a differently named company and the real life tax prep corporation.
U.S. District Judge Paul Gardephe in Manhattan ruled in favor of AMC Networks(AMCX.O)and Sony Pictures Television(6758.T)over the depiction of Sweet Liberty Tax Services" in an April 2022 episode. Gardephe said Liberty Tax offered no particularly compelling" allegations that viewers would be confused into thinking Sweet Liberty was one of its more than 2,500 offices.
The court's decision, embedded below, takes the claims through the Rogers test. Seeing the court's analysis on each prong is useful, but you can get a taste of how the court is viewing Liberty Tax's claims by looking at the final prong, in which the company claims AMC's use will have a negative impact on the public's perception of the quality of the real life company's service. After pointing out that the products" each company is making in this case aren't in the same marketplace at all, the court then moves on to Liberty Tax's complaint that AMC is causing the public to link Liberty Tax's Trademarks and Trade Dress to inferior quality services and/or portray Liberty Tax's marks and services in an unwholesome or unsavory context." From the court document:
Plaintiff has not pled facts suggesting that viewers of the Show will not understand that Sweet Liberty Tax Services" is a fictional business operated by fictional characters in a work of fiction.
And because this is an artistic work we're talking about, the First Amendment applies with hefty weight.
So the case is dismissed. Liberty Tax has made some noises about looking to appeal the ruling, but it really should only do so at this point if it can find actual examples of confusion in the public to buttress its argument. After all, the episodes in question aired over a year ago. Were there to be any legitimacy to Liberty Tax's concerns, surely they would have shown up in real world examples by now.