Fox News anchor Harris Faulkner sues Hasbro over hamster toy

[Sunlei]

Source: BBC

A Fox News anchor is suing a US toy company, Hasbro, for more than $5m (£3.3m) over a toy hamster that she says resembles her and shares her name.

Harris Faulkner said the company's portrayal of her as a plastic hamster "was demeaning and insulting".

She filed a legal case saying the toy resembled her traditional professional appearance, including complexion, eye shape and eye make-up design.

The toy is part of the company's popular Littlest Pet Shop collection.


Read more: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34133723

---

[tomm2thumbs]

1. does she shove nuts in her cheeks and sleep in wood shavings?

like the rest of the FoxNews team?

bwahahahahaha

[Vincardog]

2. No one appearing on Faux has any right to complain "demeaning and insulting" is what they do.

[JI7]

3. wtf

[bucolic_frolic]

4. Toss that Suit

Tens upon tens of millions of people use similar eye makeup,
are medium complected, and a person's name is rarely a copyright.

Plus, I don't see any white chin area on the anchor,nor shaved sides
of the head, nor protruding ears on the top rear of her head.

Oh, and see the blue eyes on the toy? Does the anchor have blue eyes?

[EEO]

5. Just further evidence of a mental health epidemic at Fox "News."

[BlueJazz]

6. Sweet Jesus! It's like a dopple-ganger. I..I can hardly tell them apart. One is a cheap-ass ...

...piece of plastic and the other one is a cheap-ass piece of plastic.

[passiveporcupine]

30. LOL

[icymist]

7. Oh yeah, the doll looks just like her

with the little bird landing on her single tuft of hair

WTF!

[Sunlei]

8. I feel bad for Mrs. Faulkner, she's more beautiful then the toy and she seems to have a personal

problem about her image. "was demeaning and insulting". She doesn't look at all like the toy.

She's worked 10 years at fox, maybe they want to get rid of her? and she is under work related stress over her appearance?

[passiveporcupine]

33. Maybe Fox has her convinced

that she is not pretty because she is not white.

[frylock]

9. Can you caption the picture? I can't tell which is which.

[Lizzie Poppet]

10. Oh, totally looks just like her.

A blue-eyed, ginger-haired plastic animal toy with rather white "skin" looks just like a brown-eyed, dark-haired, attractive African-American woman.

[Downwinder]

11. I don't think there is any resemblance.

The hamster is cute.

[BumRushDaShow]

12. Definitely the "WTF is she smoking?" story of the day

[complain jane]

13. I thought for sure this was going to be from The Onion.

[uppityperson]

14. Aside from the name, I fail to see the similarity.

almond eyes-round eyes
brown eyes-blue eyes
medium longish dark brown hair-a reddish forelock
brown lower face-white lower face
no discernable ears-big ears
earrings-none
tan nose-pink nose

OK. They both have eyelashes, but so do most people and toys. But seriously, wtf.

[navarth]

15. The fact that she works for fox 'news' tells me

she's a fucking hamster. Case closed.

[Daemonaquila]

16. Just when someone has done the ultimate jump-the-shark...

someone else has to top their performance.

Wow. So, they both have eyelashes? I fail to see anything else in common.

[djg21]

17. It's a viable claim that she should win.

I don't get it. It seems absurd for Hasbro to call the toy the "Harris Faulkner Hamster." Faulkner is going to win this one. This seems a pretty obvious violation of Faulkner's right to publicity, not to mention unfair trade under the Lanham Act. For information about various state laws pertaining to the right of publicity, you might want to look at http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/using-name-or-likeness-another (Follow the link to State Laws). $5,000,000 seems like a reach, but there certainly is a viable claim here.

[greiner3]

26. My first reaction to your post was WTF?

But after going reading the text at the link I came to the paragraph;

1. Use of a Protected Attribute: The plaintiff must show that the defendant used an aspect of his or her identity that is protected by the law. This ordinarily means a plaintiff's name or likeness, but the law protects certain other personal attributes as well.

A quick search on one of those people search engines brought up;

Harris Faulkner, 78
Steubenville, OH

And I'm sure there are many more around the country.

I disagree with your premise, if you are serious, as only the Fox media type's likeness is transferred to the toy and she's not the only person with that name.

IMHO

[djg21]

34. Whether or not Hasbro named the toy after . . .

Fox News' Harris Faulkner presents a "question of fact," and the presence of a question of fact after discovery is closed means a trial.

Do you really think that the "Harris Faulkner" name used by Hasbro was fanciful or arbitrary? Can you with a straight face tell me that some Hasbro employee who never had seen or heard of Ms. Faulkner just came up with the name and design of the toy out of thin air? Or that the toy was named after a random 78-yr old woman from Steubenville, OH? I'm sorry, but no fair-minded jury ever could buy such an absurd story.

This case will settle and Faulkner will be paid. If it doesn't settle, it will be tried and Faulkner will win.

Put your politics aside and look at the facts objectively. If the toy bore a striking resemblance to Rachel Maddow and was named the "Rachel Maddow Gerbil," would you not be taking a different position? How about if the Rachel Maddow Gerbil Toy was manufactured and sold by a company owned by Rupert Murdoch, or the Koch Brothers, or Donald Trump. If these were the facts, you would likely be here expressing your outrage. Sauce for the goose . . . .

[Angry Dragon]

18. is Fox afraid that their audience will now think they are the TOY CHANNEL??

[El Supremo]

19. ...

[gregcrawford]

20. I know!

Let's name a syndrome after her! Harris Faulkner Syndrome is characterized by taking offense at everything everyone says or does that ISN'T fawning, sycophantic praise for her.

Fer crissakes, that beige, blue-eyed creature with a ginger forelock doesn't even look like a damned hamster, let alone a Pox Newscaster. Just goes to show, beauty is only skin deep. She's gorgeous, but her personality is apparently something else altogether.

And if her name isn't copyrighted, I don't think she has a snowball's chance in hell of getting a nickel out of Hasbro.

[bigdarryl]

21. I'm finding some of the comments on this post kind of disturbing talking about this sister

OK she's a FOX NEWS anchor but that doesn't mean she should be the subject of nasty comments on DU.She's a mother and a wife http://www.modernmom.com/c192b2ae-3b3e-11e3-be8a-bc764e04a41e.html

[840high]

24. So?

[notadmblnd]

31. we don't tiptoe around Brian Kilmead, Elizabeth Hasselbeck or Steve Deucy

Nor do we tiptoe around Bill O'rielly or Sean Hannity. Are you saying we should refrain from the usual ridicule of a faux news spokes person simply because she is a POC?

[LiberalElite]

22. If she wins, I hope she uses the money for therapy eom

[valerief]

23. I can't imagine why this toy would offend her in any way, shape, or form.

And it doesn't look like her. Not one bit. I guess if you don't start off crazy at Fox News, you end up that way anyway.

[djg21]

35. Because . . .

under the law of most states including NY and NJ, if someone is going to commercialize and profit from your name and likeness, they should have to obtain your consent in advance, and you should have the choice of granting permission for free, or for a reasonable licensing fee. I'm referring to you valerieF. And the law should be blind to one's real or presumed political beliefs. So what if Faulkner works for Fox News?

[valerief]

40. It may be her name. Lots of people have the same name. It is NOT her likeness.

Sorry. You have a fail.

[djg21]

41. Don't talk!

I'm curious, where did you get your law degree and how many trade regulation cases have you litigated?

I had a law school professor many years ago -- my unfair trade practices professor in fact -- who used the Socratic method. If he thought a student was trying to bullshit, he would castigate the student: "if you're just gonna talk out of your ass, DON'T TALK... It makes you sound like an idiot!"

This proved to be sage wisdom.

You simply cannot consider the totality of the look of the toy and the use of Faulkner's name and then credibly state that the toy wasn't designed in her likeness and wasnt named after her. This is a violation of Faulkner's right to publicity. The fact that some others may share her name is irrelevant.

Hasbro made a bad business judgement, and will end up paying Faulkner a reasonable licensing fee for the right to use her name and likeness. Hasbro should have negotiated a license in the first place.

It's no big deal and happens not infrequently. My guess is a settlement will be reached in the upcoming weeks, before any depositions get taken.

[valerief]

42. Faulkner is NOT a hamster!!! No matter how much you want her to be, she isn't. nt

[truthisfreedom]

25. She has two strong points. Harris Faulkner is actually

The name of the toy, and they both have great big beautiful eyes. I'd sue too.

[tularetom]

27. She ought to be happy, if it wasn't for Hasbro, I'd have no idea who the fuck Harris Faulkner was

And I'll bet thats true for millions of other Americans.

No publicity is bad publicity, she needs to learn that.

[NYCButterfinger]

28. She's a beautiful woman, but it's crazy to sue Hasbro over this issue.

We'll have to wait and see what happens.

[notadmblnd]

29. I'm not seeing it

not complexion, not eye shape nor makeup. The woman does not have blue eyes nor a reddish brown mo-hawk hairdo. The only thing I can think of that they may have in common is- they're both plastic

[SCVDem]

32. The toy

looks good in the morning and doesn't require enough make-up to qualify for Face Off.

CNN's original mission was to NOT have this style of newsreader.

It was nice while it lasted.

[PosterChild]

36. It's all about the money . .

.. all of the "demeaning and insulting" b.s. is just legal icing to help justify the monetary award. She is some sort of celebrity and celebrities get paid for endorsements, the use of their image, and the like. Her agent is probably encouraging this if she isn't. And since it's a comercial product and hasbro is making money off her name, she probably has a case.

[Warpy]

37. She's not suing because of the way the toy looks

She's suing because Hasbro put her name on it.

However, unless she can prove her name is copyrighted and exists nowhere else, she's not going to win anything except maybe an out of court, token make-it-go-away settlement.

Suing in this case is beyond dumb, IMO.

[djg21]

39. This has nothing to do with copyright law.

You generally cannot copyright a name. And Faulkner does not have to prove that her name is not also being used by someone else. This is pure, uninformed nonsense. I take it you've never tried a case like this?

The clams asserted by Ms. Faulkner are for violating her right to publicity, and for falsely suggesting an endorsement in violation of the Lanham Act. If you had actually read the Complaint before offering your opinion, you could have seen that this isn't a copyright suit.

Hasbro had no business using Faulkner's name and likeness for commercial purposes without first obtaining her authorization. This case is a slam dunk, and we've probably heard the last of it because Hasbro will quickly pay a settlement rather than incur the costs of litigation and expose it's management to depositions and discovery.

[sakabatou]

38. What the...?