Sexual Pursuit Game Infringed Trivial Pursuit Trade-mark, Federal Court Finds



SEXUALPURSUITGAMEINFRINGEDTRIVIALPURSUITTRADE-MARK,FEDERAL
COURTFINDS

by
BarryGamache
LEGERROBICRICHARD,Lawyers
ROBIC,Patent&TrademarkAgents
CentreCDPCapital
1001Square-Victoria-BlocE–8
thFloor
Montreal,Quebec,CanadaH2Z2B7
Tel.:(514)9876242-Fax:(514)8457874
www.robic.ca-info@robic.com

ArecentdecisionhandeddownbytheTrialDivisionoftheFederalCourtof
CanadaconcludedthatthemanufacturerofagamecalledSEXUALPURSUIT
infringedthewell-knowntrade-markTRIVIALPURSUITbydirectingpublic
attentiontotheSEXUALPURSUITgame,inawaythatwouldlikelycreate
confusionbetweenbothsetsofgames.(HornAbbotLtd.etal-vs-Brian
Thurstonetal,T-32-85,September25,1997,Reed,J.).Thisdecisionisinteresting
inthatitdealswithatraderridingonthecoattailsofanotherinorderto
benefitfromthelatter’sreputation.
TheoriginalideaforthegameTRIVIALPURSUITresultedfromtheingenuityof
fourindividualswhoincorporatedHornAbbotLtd.in1980.Afteratest
marketingofthegamein1981,salesstartedin1982and,by1984itcouldbe
saidthatthegamehadbecomeaphenomenalsuccess,millionsofcopies
havingbeensoldinCanadaandintheU.S.Thisnoteworthystoryinthemid-
1980’swascoveredbysuchmagazinesasMacLean’s,Time,ReadersDigest
andtheTorontoStar.
Inearly1984,BrianThurstonalongwithTomHayes,havingplayedTRIVIAL
PURSUIT,thoughtupasimilargametheycalledSEXUALPURSUIT,whose
contentincludedquestionsandanswersrelatingtoissuesofasexualnature.
InordertomarkettheSEXUALPURSUITgame,originalartworkwascreatedfor
theboardgame;anhexagonalpatternontheboardwasusedasopposed
totheroundoneinTRIVIALPURSUIT;inlieuofthe”roll-again”spacesfoundon
theTRIVIALPURSUITboards,Thurstondevisedacategoryofquestionshe
calledE-zoneorerogenouszonequestions(forwhichtherewerenocorrect
answersprintedoncardsthataccompaniedthegame).Similaritieshowever
existed:Thurstonusedanidenticalnumberofspacesoneachofthesix
spokesthatconnectedthecentreoftheboardtothecornersofthehexagon
(likethespokesontheTRIVIALPURSUITboard).Finally,thetrade-markSEXUAL
PURSUITwasusedontheboxinwhichthegamewaspackaged,inaplace



similartowheretheTRIVIALPURSUITnamewasfoundontheplaintiff’sbox.
Finally,theboxeswerebothalmostidenticalinshapeandsize.
DefendantThurstonstarteddistributinghisSEXUALPURSUITgameinlate1984
andHornAbbotLtd.initiateditsactiononJanuary4,1985.Aninterlocutory
injunctionwasgrantedagainstThurstononFebruary6,1985,restraininghim
alongwithco-defendantHayesfrommanufacturing,distributingorsellinga
gameinassociationwiththetrade-markSEXUALPURSUITuntilfinalresolutionof
theactionattrial.Initsaction,HornAbbotLtd.requestedapermanent
injunctionrestrainingdefendantsfrommanufacturing,distributingorselling
gamesinassociationwiththetrade-markSEXUALPURSUIT,orinassociation
withanyothertrade-markconfusingwithHornAbbot’sregisteredTRIVIAL
PURSUITtrade-mark,anorderallowingforthedestructionofallcopiesofthe
SEXUALPURSUITgame,anawardofdamagesandcostsoftheaction.
Inherdecision,MadamJusticeReedindicatedthatshedidnotbelievethat
defendantThurstonintendedtoinfringeplaintiff’sIPrightsbutthathewas
obviouslyawarethatwhathehaddesignedwasaboardgamepackaged
andpresentedinafashionsimilartotheTRIVIALPURSUITgame;hejusthoped
thatthetwogamesweresufficientlydifferentsothathewouldnotbethe
subjectofasuccessfulinfringementaction.However,MadamJusticeReed
remindedthepartiesthatthesimilaritiesbetweenthegameswasnottheissue
intheactionbutrathertheuseofthetrade-markSEXUALPURSUIT.The
similarities(ordissimilarities)betweenthegamescouldonlybeseeninthe
contextoftheuseofthetrade-markSEXUALPURSUIT.
Theplaintiff’strade-markTRIVIALPURSUITwasregisteredandusedforaboard
gameandequipmenttherefore.Wasthereconfusionbetweenthetrade-
marksTRIVIALPURSUITandSEXUALPURSUIT?MadamJusticeReedfoundthat
bothtrade-marksinassociationwithaboardgamewereinherently
distinctive.However,thetrade-markTRIVIALPURSUIThadbecomewell-known
whenthedefendantstartedsellinghisSEXUALPURSUITgame.Duetothe
interlocutoryinjunctionwhichwasgrantedinearly1985,thegameSEXUAL
PURSUITneverachievedanykindofnotoriety.Asforthedegreeof
resemblancebetweenthetrade-marks,MadamJusticeReedobservedthat
thetwomarksbothconsistedoftwowords,thesecondofwhichwere
identicalwhilethefirstbothendedwiththeletters”AL”.
HornAbbotLtd.reliedonsub-section7(b)ofCanada’sTrade-MarksAct(R.S.C.
1985,c.T-13)inordertoobtainafindingofinfringement.Sub-section7(b)was
describedinAsbjornHorgardA/Sv.Gibbs/NortacIndustriesLtd.(1987),14
C.P.R.(3d)314bytheFederalCourtofAppealas”astatutorystatementofthe
commonlawactionofpassing-off,whichconsistedofamisrepresentationto
theeffectthatone’sgoodsorservicesaresomeoneelse’sorsponsoredbyor



associatedwiththatotherperson.Itiseffectivelya”piggybacking”by
misrepresentation.”.
MadamJusticeReedconcludedthattheevidencebeforehersupporteda
findingthattheuseofthenameSEXUALPURSUITdidraiseanassociationwith
theplaintiff’sTRIVIALPURSUITgame,anassociationthatwouldleadaperson
tothinkthatthetwogamescamefromthesamesource.Consequently,the
courtfoundthatthedefendanthadinfringedtheplaintiff’strade-markand
directedpublicattentiontoitsgameinawaythatwouldlikelycreate
confusionbetweenbothparties’games;defendant’strade-markandget-up
wasusedtorideonthegoodwillandcommercialsuccessenjoyedbyTRIVIAL
PURSUIT.
Inhisdefence,Thurstonarguedthatplaintiff’sgamewasnotallthatoriginalas
ithadborrowedelements;thecourtdismissedthislineofreasoningstating
thattheoriginalityofthegamepersaywasnotanissueinthistrade-mark
case.Thurstonfurtherarguedthatthetrade-markTRIVIALPURSUITwas
descriptiveandthereforenotavalidtrade-mark;hereagain,thecourt
rejectedthisdefencestatingthatbecausethegameisatriviagamedoes
notmakethetrade-markTRIVIALPURSUITdescriptiveofagameinasmuchas
thatexpressionwasneverusedtodescribeagame.Finally,defendant
arguedthattherewasnoconfusionbetweenthetrade-marksTRIVIALPURSUIT
andSEXUALPURSUIT;heretoo,thecourtdismissedthisargumentstatingthat
thegames,persay,werenotconfusingbutratherconfusionwascreated
whenconsumersthoughtthatbothgameshadthesameoriginandsame
source.
MadamJusticeReedconsequentlygrantedapermanentinjunctioninfavour
oftheplaintiffbutconcludedthattherewasinsufficientevidencetosupport
afindingfordamagessincethedefendant’sgamewasonthemarketfora
veryshortperiodoftime.Anorderwasalsoissuedpermittingthedestruction
ofalltheremainingcopiesoftheSEXUALPURSUITgame.
Thisrecentdecisionisthelatestillustrationofthedangersforanytraderwho
wishesto”piggy-back”onsomeoneelse’sreputation.Whensuchsituation
occurs,itisnotsufficientforadefendanttoshowthattheparties’waresare
notconfusingbuthemustratherestablishthatconsumerswillnotconclude
thatbothoriginatefromasinglesourcebecauseofthetrade-marksatissue.
Publishedat(1997)11W.I.P.R.365-366.
LEGERROBICRICHARD,1997.





ROBIC,ungrouped’avocatsetd’agentsdebrevetsetdemarquesdecommercevoué
depuis1892àlaprotectionetàlavalorisationdelapropriétéintellectuelledanstousles
domaines:brevets,dessinsindustrielsetmodèlesutilitaires;marquesdecommerce,marques
decertificationetappellationsd’origine;droitsd’auteur,propriétélittéraireetartistique,droits
voisinsetdel’artisteinterprète;informatique,logicielsetcircuitsintégrés;biotechnologies,
pharmaceutiquesetobtentionsvégétales;secretsdecommerce,know-howet
concurrence;licences,franchisesettransfertsdetechnologies;commerceélectronique,
distributionetdroitdesaffaires;marquage,publicitéetétiquetage;poursuite,litigeet
arbitrage;vérificationdiligenteetaudit;etce,tantauCanadaqu’ailleursdanslemonde.La
maîtrisedesintangibles.
ROBIC,agroupoflawyersandofpatentandtrademarkagentsdedicatedsince1892tothe
protectionandthevalorizationofallfieldsofintellectualproperty:patents,industrialdesigns
andutilitypatents;trademarks,certificationmarksandindicationsoforigin;copyrightand
entertainmentlaw,artistsandperformers,neighbouringrights;computer,softwareand
integratedcircuits;biotechnologies,pharmaceuticalsandplantbreeders;tradesecrets,
know-how,competitionandanti-trust;licensing,franchisingandtechnologytransfers;e-
commerce,distributionandbusinesslaw;marketing,publicityandlabelling;prosecution
litigationandarbitration;duediligence;inCanadaandthroughouttheworld.Ideaslive
here.
COPYRIGHTER
IDEASLIVEHERE
ILATOUTDEMÊMEFALLUL’INVENTER!
LAMAÎTRISEDESINTANGIBLES
LEGERROBICRICHARD
NOSFENÊTRESGRANDESOUVERTESSURLEMONDEDESAFFAIRES
PATENTER
R
ROBIC
ROBIC+DROIT+AFFAIRES+SCIENCES+ARTS
ROBIC++++
ROBIC+LAW+BUSINESS+SCIENCE+ART
THETRADEMARKERGROUP
TRADEMARKER
VOSIDÉESÀLAPORTÉEDUMONDE,DESAFFAIRESÀLAGRANDEURDELAPLANÈTE
YOURBUSINESSISTHEWORLDOFIDEAS;OURBUSINESSBRINGSYOURIDEASTOTHEWORLD