Suit alleged 'fat guy comic' was a specific brand of humor belonging to comedian

Legend

Whether he was destroying coffee tables with his sheer heft, having a strip-off with Patrick Swayze, or soaring red-faced and angry above the SNL studio audience on a flying cable rig, comedian and actor Chris Farley left a big impression on the culture before his sad passing in 1997.

Recently, the company that manages Farley's estate and property rights, Make Him Smile Inc. (MHS), filed suit against Trek Bicycle Corp., one of the world's largest bike companies, for exploiting Farley's larger-than-life persona. "Farley spent his entire career building, then capitalizing on, his unique brand of 'fat guy' humor," the complaint states. "The name 'Farley' is ... linked and associated with his persona and his identity as a fat comic actor."

Sounds Personal

It was precisely that "fat guy" image that MHS claims Trek CEO John Burke had in mind when he created the company's "Fat Bikes," oversized cycles with a wider chassis and fat tires designed "to explore more places in more seasons ... from dunes to drifts and snow to sand."

Burke lives in Maple Bluff, Wisconsin, the town where Farley was born and raised, and, according to the complaint, Burke and Farley's family were socially acquainted. This familiarity, it claims, led Burke and other Trek executives to brand the Fat Bikes with the name "Farley," "a clever, memorable and loud advertising and branding 'hook' to help launch and promote ... its various Fat Bike products," including multiple bicycle models and attendant accessories. The suit also accused Trek of duping third-party sales and marketing companies into believing it had the right to utilize the Farley intellectual property.

The Takeaway

MHS filed the suit in September 2017, seeking damages and an injunction against the company, alleging misappropriation under California common law, false endorsement under the Lanham Act, violation of the California civil code, and unfair business practices under the California business and professional code.

On June 1, 2018, the case was removed from the Central District of California, landing in the Western District of Wisconsin, the stomping grounds of both parties. But court watchers who were settling in for a hometown wrestling match were disappointed when, only days later, the case was settled under an as-of-yet-undisclosed agreement.

Companies should be mindful when associating themselves or their products or services, even subtly, with celebrities. While paying homage to a respected hometown hero may on its face seem innocent, even admirable, it is likely to imply a false endorsement and constitute a misappropriation of persona for commercial advantage. Indeed, celebrities and their estates carefully foster and exploit, or elect not to exploit, celebrity name, likeness and persona as personal brands. Bask in the light of a celebrity, without consent, and risk being burned.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.