Kassbaum v. Steppenwolf Productions, Inc.
236 F.3d 487 (2000)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A contract relinquishing rights to a trademarked name does not prohibit an individual from making truthful historical references to their past affiliation with the trademark holder, nor does such a reference violate the Lanham Act, provided it does not create a likelihood of consumer confusion.
Facts:
- In 1968, Nicholas Kassbaum joined the rock band 'Steppenwolf' as a bass player and became a co-equal partner.
- Kassbaum toured and recorded with Steppenwolf until 1971, when he was excluded from the band by John Kay.
- After a series of disputes over the use of the band's name, Kassbaum signed a contract in 1980 ('the 1980 contract') with Steppenwolf Productions, Inc. (SPI) and Steppenwolf, Inc. (SI).
- The 1980 contract stated that Kassbaum would 'waive, relinquish and release any and all of their individual or collective rights in the name 'STEPPENWOLF'' for a payment of $3,000.
- From 1980 to 1996, Kassbaum performed under a different name but referred to his historical association with Steppenwolf without objection.
- Beginning in 1996, Kassbaum performed with a new group, World Classic Rockers, and promoted himself using phrases like 'NICK ST. NICHOLAS former member of Steppenwolf.'
- In response, SPI and SI sent Kassbaum cease and desist letters, asserting that these references violated the 1980 contract and federal trademark law.
Procedural Posture:
- Kassbaum filed a complaint in federal district court seeking a declaratory judgment that he was entitled to make historical references to Steppenwolf.
- SPI and SI filed a counterclaim for breach of contract, trademark infringement, and unfair competition.
- SPI and SI moved for summary judgment on Kassbaum’s complaint and on their counterclaim for breach of contract.
- The district court granted summary judgment for SPI and SI, dismissed Kassbaum’s complaint, and issued a permanent injunction prohibiting Kassbaum from using the Steppenwolf name in promotional materials.
- Kassbaum, as the appellant, appealed the district court's decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a contract relinquishing all rights to a band's name, or the Lanham Act, prohibit a former member from truthfully identifying themselves in promotional materials as a 'former member' of that band?
Opinions:
Majority - Gould, J.
No. Neither the contract nor the Lanham Act bars a former band member from truthfully referring to his prior affiliation, so long as it does not cause a likelihood of confusion. The 1980 contract, when read in the context of the parties' long-standing dispute, concerned the transfer of the right to use 'Steppenwolf' as a trade name for a performing group, not the right to provide accurate historical information. The broad language of the contract does not extend to an absurd result, such as barring Kassbaum from stating his factual history. Similarly, Kassbaum's use of phrases like 'Formerly of Steppenwolf' does not violate the Lanham Act because it is not likely to cause consumer confusion. The qualifying language ('Formerly of,' 'Original Member of') and the overall context of the promotional materials, which prominently feature the new band's name (World Classic Rockers), make it clear that the new band is not Steppenwolf, thereby preventing any deceit of the public.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the boundary between trademark protection and the right of an individual to truthfully state their professional history, a concept related to nominative fair use. It establishes that a broad contractual waiver of rights in a trade name does not automatically extinguish the right to make accurate historical references. The ruling provides important protection for former members of groups or employees of companies, allowing them to use a trademarked name to describe their own past experience, provided the use is truthful and not likely to cause consumer confusion about source or sponsorship.
Unlock the full brief for Kassbaum v. Steppenwolf Productions, Inc.