Company Threatens To Sue Cyclist For Trademark Over ‘Near Miss’ YouTube Video
It's no secret that there are mountains of examples of companies and individuals attempting to use intellectual property laws merely to silence critics and disappear information from the internet. While I'm sure this sort of thing must somtimes work, it's also quite common for these would-be censorial folks to be introduced to the Streisand Effect instead, finding that the attempt to suppress negative information instead gains it far more attention than it would have had on its own.
Well, allow me to introduce you to a company called Cornices Centre in the UK. Cornices Centre makes some really beautiful plaster-based interior products such as moldings and decoratives. And, on at least one occasion, one of its drivers nearly ran over a cyclist that happened to be wearing a helmet camera.
The road.cc reader who told us about the incident initially uploaded the video to their YouTube channel (Chapona Bicyclette(link is external)) and forwarded a copy to Cornices Centre, the company whosevandriver close passed him on Chelsea Embankment in November.
Once the company had a chance to review the video, you would have imagined that a simple apology would have been in order. Or maybe some kind of disciplinary action against the driver. Or, hey, maybe just silence. You know, ignore the pesky cyclist and hope he just goes away.
Instead, Cornices Centre decided to try to pretend trademark laws disallow the uploading of a video in a public space merely because its logo appears on the truck.
But, rather than an apology and some form of disciplinary action against their driver", the road.cc reader instead received a lengthy email from a company director claiming that unauthorised use" of their CORNICES CENTRE(R)' trademark was confusing our customers, negatively impacting our brand reputation, and potentially harming our sales and the exclusivity of our trademark", something the company wanted addressed with prompt removal of its name from thevideo content and descriptions".
If unaddressed or refused, the email seen by road.cc continued, the company said it would beprepared to take legal action if necessary" and would seek legal redress and claim any related expenses, including lost sales".
The speed with which the company would lose any such legal action over trademark in this instance would rival one of its reckless drivers. There is nothing about trademark law in the UK that would somehow make any of this trademark infringement. And it's quite likely the company knows that. What I'm sure it was hoping was that the threat of legal action would spook the cyclist and cause them to take the video down off of YouTube.
The company was mistaken.
The company could have quite easily apologised and confirmed some form of disciplinary action against their driver," the road.cc reader explained. But instead decided to threaten me with legal action for using their trademark without permission.
This gives me the impression that they didn't think their driver did anything wrong. Despite the video showing the van passing me within easy reach.Whilst they were concerned about brand damageof a YouTube video with 400 views at the time, it's now had 40,000 views in the past 24 hours, since word of the trademark infringement'got out. One might allege this has backfired.
I'm considering legal action against Cornices Centrenow, with proceeds going to a cycling charity. I don't want their money, but I would like an apology, both for the diabolical driving and their unfounded legal threats.
And that isn't the only Streisand vector by which this story is getting much more attention than its initial 400 views. Legal commentators are doing their own videos and posts on the subject, including this one. What was a couple of hundred views of an incident has instead turned into thousands and thousands of views, as well as potential legal action against the company from the cyclist.
It's probably time to get that apology out post-haste, Cornices Centre!