– PHOTO COURTESY OF WIKIPEDIA COMMONS
By Megan Spicer
Politics and a popular party game are the ingredients for a business dispute that’s now in federal court in Connecticut.
The lawsuit was filed by SCS Direct, a Trumbull-based consumer products company that markets a card game called Humanity Hates Trump. It’s a spinoff of a popular game called Cards Against Humanity, which is marketed by a Chicago company known simply as CAH.
CAH had complained to SCS Direct of trade dress violations, in part because the cards in both games looked similar. Specific-ally, CAH noted that the new SCS Direct game also featured black and white cards. But before the Chicago company could bring any litigation, the Trumbull-based company filed an
unfair trade practices lawsuit, claiming that CAH is actively working to ensure Humanity Hates Trump is unsuccessful.
Cards Against Humanity was launched by eight friends from a Chicago-area high school in 2010. Money was raised through the crowd-funding website Kickstarter. The product is billed as the “game for horrible people” and has been described as satirical, irreverent and off-color.
The idea is for players to complete fill-in-the-blank statements. A black card is turned up that offers a prompt such as “Next on ESPN2, the World Series of _______.” The other players then choose an answer from an array of white cards they have been dealt, all of which contain a phrase, noun or action, such as “pterodactyl eggs” or “a horrifying laser hair removal accident.” One person then chooses the white card that they feel best completes the statement on the black prompt card.
If the game sounds familiar, it’s because Cards Against Humanity is itself a take-off on the popular children’s game Apples to Apples. In fact, there have been a number of other spinoffs, something that SCS Direct points out in its claim.
Like Cards Against Human-ity, SCS Direct went the Kick-starter route in creating Human-ity Hates Trump earlier this year. SCS Direct said in its lawsuit that it was trying to “gauge market appeal and to help promote the game.” In the Trump game, one of the prompt cards reads “Make ____(s) Great Again,” with
some choices for white cards reading “A huuuge wall that the Mexicans will pay for” or “What’s her face.”
The game, according to the creators, is intended to poke fun at the 2016 presidential election. It also offers expansion packs for more cards, including one pack called Humanity Hates Hillary, Too.
In March and April, according to the lawsuit, Humanity Hates Trump started to gain financial support and media attention, and CAH made multiple demands that the upstart game be changed. SCS Direct removed its tag line — “Cards Against Everybody” — and changed the type face on the cards at the request of CAH. However, CAH also demanded changes to the color of the cards, which the Trumbull company was unwilling to do. According to the lawsuit, CAH “has no trademark or trade dress registrations with respect to its playing cards.”
SCS Direct argued that there are a multitude of playing card games not only with black and white cards, but also with similar game titles like “Carbs of the Huge Manatee,” “Guards Against Insanity,” “Cats Abiding Horribly,” and “Crabs Adjust Humidity.” Those games also follow a similar premise as Cards Against Humanity.
‘Unscrupulous Conduct’
SCS Direct is seeking “an order declaring that CAH’s alleged trade dress rights with respect to the color and other characteristics of its playing cards lacks the requisite legal requirements to be protectable and to be enforceable, and that SCS Direct is not infringing CAH’s alleged trade dress rights,” according to the federal lawsuit filed April 29.
Ari Hoffman of Cohen and Wolf in Bridgeport, who is representing SCS Direct, could not immediately be reached for comment. The Trumbull-based company’s product line includes toys, home goods and personal care products. It was in the news recently for filing its own trade dress suit against a California seller of a type of make-it-yourself bracelets. The Trumbull company markets a similar product.
In the party game case, SCS Direct says its Kickstarter campaign wound up receiving more than seven times the amount it initially sought to raise. Still, SCS Direct alleges that CAH has actively worked to thwart support for Humanity Hates Trump. “To avoid becoming entangled in an intellectual property dispute, Kickstarter removed Humanity Hates Trump from public view on its website and suspended fund-raising activities as a result of CAH’s notice alleging infringing material,” according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit claims CAH tortuously interfered with SCS Direct’s business and that backers of the game have withdrawn their pledges based on CAH’s infringement claims. “As a result of CAH’s interference, SCS Direct has suffered losses,” the lawsuit said.
The suit also claims CAH violated the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act as the company’s actions “offend public policy, constitute immoral, un-ethical, oppressive and unscrup-ulous conduct, and cause substantial injury to SCS Direct.” The complaint was also sent to the Connecticut Attorney Gen-eral and Commissioner of Con-sumer Protection.
CAH has reportedly threatened further legal action if SCS Direct does not change its card colors. A request for comment from Cards Against Humanity was not returned and no attorney has been listed yet in the federal court file for the case.
Read more: http://www.law.-com/sites/articles/2016/05/04/party-game-makers-take-legal-dispute-over-card-color-to-conn-court/#ixzz47nwrIxPk.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
http://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
