LAist: Californication Sued by The Red Hot Chili Peppers

mike_thoms

Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:09:38 -0800

I'm from Illinois and even I've heard the word Californication, growing up, before RHCP's shitty album came out. Also, wasn't Tom Petty trying to sue RHCP because he said Californication sounded like Mary Jane's Last Dance?

ben bang

Sat, 24 Nov 2007 10:30:14 -0800

The Chili Peppers peaked something like 16 years ago. What a bunch of lame wannabe rockstar bullshit. Furthermore, if they didn't come up with the word then where the fuck do they get off? http://benbang.blogspot.com/2007/11/nobody-weird-like-flea.html

Raina

Tue, 20 Nov 2007 12:06:01 -0800

This situation illustrates the major difference between copyright and trademark law. The reason you can't copyright a word is that there has to be "a modicum of originality" in the creation of the copyrighted item (BTW, this is the same reason why you can't copyright the phonebook.) The Chili's aren't arguing that they were original in creating the name Californication or that this is a copyright issue. Instead they are claiming that Californication is a brand associated with their business. This is a whole different thing and doesn't have to be orginal or novel at all (eg. "Joe's auto park" is a trademark.) The test is whether a consumer would be confused that the Chilis are associated with the errant use of the mark. The Chili's have spent a lot of time and effort building the value of their mark and this "goodwill" is being used by some other guys without their permission. And yes, they have to protect their brand or they might not be able to go after others for using it. Nice dig on the "signature" song crap. Personally, I am a huge fan of early RHCP stuff -freaky styley is my favorite and everything including and after "one hot minute" is pretty lame in comparison. But, to the rest of the lame world, Californication is the way they know the Chilis - and the attorney wrote that probably without the Chilis even seeing it before it was filed.

Andy Sternberg

Tue, 20 Nov 2007 07:41:48 -0800

You can't copyright a title. One of the greatest albums of the '80s is the Replacements' Let it Be. Led Zeppelin was probably not the first and certainly not the last band to title a song "Rock and Roll." I don't mean to be harsh, but to say "californication" is integral to a brand -- not to mention the career of a band -- seems a pretentious and ridiculous notion. Speaking of Duchovny, however did X let those cats get away with calling a long-running series X Files? I kid, of course.

mrbill7

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 23:27:48 -0800

This suit sounds pretty weak. My impression as well is that you can't copyright a title, so they're using a little creative lawyering and trying to approach this with other legal theories. However, no one has mentioned that even as a song title, this is hardly original with the RHCPs. A full 15 years earlier, the J. Geils Band did a song titled Californicatin' on their album You're Getting Even While I'm Getting Odd. If the Peppers can sue Showtime over this, the J. Geils Band ought to sue the Peppers. The Peppers' album may have sold more than Geils, but it'd be hard to maintain with a straight face that either the album or the Peppers became household words as a result.

Tony Pierce

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 20:26:48 -0800

from what i understand, sometimes you are forced to impose litigation in situations like this because if you dont that opens you up for more people to rip you off in even more egregious ways and they can use the "but hey you guys didnt do shit about Showtime, so why are you messing with us?" even though i like the older material better myself, i can see why theyre suing the show - since its so damn blatant.

grendel20

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 20:01:36 -0800

Raina no no, i'm not arguing to the merits of the case. What i'm suggesting is that RHCP are acting un-rockstar like by filing a suit. When I began reading the quote that started with “Californication is the signature CD, video" I was prepping for the name of the lawyer to follow the quote. It was Anthony Kiedis. Sure, a reasonable person in the shoes of a viewer might get the two mixed up.... but going to litigation? I really do hate the RHCP. I hardly ever listen to KROQ since they play them almost hourly. I saw them on a bus advert today, with the phrase 'We are KROQ'. Hence why I listen to 103.1.

Andy Sternberg

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:21:24 -0800

Kiedis: "Californication is the signature CD, video and song of the band’s career." Excuse me while I burn my vinyl Mother's Milks and stomp on my cassettes of Freaky Styley and Uplift Mofo Party Planner. Bitches.

Raina

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:54:39 -0800

That origin of the name californication should not make much of a difference in a trademark and unfair competition lawsuit. If it were a copyright issue, then the origin would make more difference. Although, I am sure that Showtime's lawyers will try throwing it against the wall. Btw, thx for the nod to nerdom.

bobzilla77

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:53:25 -0800

Will be interesting to see how this plays out. I was under the impression you could not copyright a title, and I guess that's not really the complaint. The question is, does the popularity of the work with that title give them an implied right to the term at the exclusion of everybody else? The big question: Will Slayer also be suing because Duchovny's character stole all his book titles from them? (His old books have the titles God Hates Us All, Seasons In The Abyss and South of Heaven). I would NOT want Slayer pissed off at me! Hell awaits, Mulder.

Tony Pierce

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:40:15 -0800

although i can see how the completion of the 5 would encourage more tourism from No Cal to Oregon, i cant see how that would lead to a massive influx of Californians moving there as much as say - the low price of real estate in OR compared to CA

tahda

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:31:54 -0800

I remebered seeing this a few weeks ago before the case and I couldn't help but wonder if this will have any effect or come up at all... Californication is a portmanteau word derived from bumper stickers frequently seen on cars in the state of Oregon during the late 1970s and early 1980s. The stickers said "Don't Californicate Oregon" in reference to the ongoing massive influx into Oregon of people from California. This shift was brought about largely by the completion of Interstate 5 in 1964. Prior to that time, the main route into Oregon from California was via the twisty, two-lane Oregon Highway 99. Towns like Medford, Eugene and Portland have tripled or more in size since 1964, and this population shift has been added to by the massive movement of legal and illegal immigrants mainly into the West Coast states from south of the border. The word is a blend of California and fornication, and is usually intended to convey an obscene alternate meaning.

Elise Thompson

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:26:30 -0800

Yes, we are kind of nerds ourselves. Now, if only the Scottish could sue Anthony Kiedis over the kilt thing.

Tony Pierce

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:31:06 -0800

since its the information age, nerdy info - especially if its relevant to the post - is more than welcome. no need to apologize.

Raina

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:50:24 -0800

I also thought the Chili Peppers were involved when I first saw the advertisements for the show. grendel20 - you should really read the complaint before mouthing off. Apparently one of the characters from the show was also lifted out of a RHCP song. Everyone else, it isn't up on the court website yet, but you will be able to check status and upcoming hearings on the court website by entering in the case number (BC380894) here: http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/civilCaseSummary/index.asp?CaseType=Civil Ok, that last info was a little nerdy...

grendel20

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:04:11 -0800

That's so rockstar of them. I hate RHCP so much.