Tabberone's Hall of Shame - Just Born & Marshmallow Peeps

Home | Site Index | Disclaimer | Email Me!

Just Born &
Marshmallow Peeps
Hall Of Shame Member
Added March 31, 2007

What are Peeps? "A confectionary made in a shape of a chick and commonly referred to as a 'Peep' in the marketplace" according to the trademark application of Just Born for the name PEEPS.
Can you guess which of these valid Trademarked names belongs to Just Born?

Sonic Branding Solutions abandoned
Trilibis, Inc Affordable Computer Solutions Fun Peeps, Inc

Would you believe none of these PEEPS shown belong to Just Born?

My Peeps belongs to Sonic Branding Solutions
Peep One belongs to Infra Metal Establishment
Peeps Puffs was abandoned by Just Born in 2007
Peeps Nation belongs to Sonic Branding Solutions
Peeps belongs to Affordable Computer Solutions
Fun Peeps belongs to Fun Peeps, Inc

Just Born does own a trademark on the word PEEPS but so does Affordable Computer Solutions. The trademark for peeps (picture shown at left) is just for candy and was granted in 1998. So, what's the problem here, you ask? Just Born, using the picture on the left, claims the manufacturer of some baby clothing, using the image on the right, and call the clothing Precious Peeps Crib Set is infringing upon the PEEPS trademark. HUH?

Are you confused? Well, we are. A search of the trademark database yields 37 "live" trademarks that use the word PEEP or PEEPS. Some of those are shown above. Since the trademark for Just Born applies to candy only (see their trademarks) we don't understand where they get off claiming they own the rights to the word when applied to baby accessories.
The party in question was selling a crib set made with embroidered chicks. She named it Precious Peeps Crib Set because where she comes from, chicks are called peeps. She renamed the crib set after receiving a cease and desist letter from some whack jobs at a company called Continental Enterprises who claim to represent Just Born.
Did you see anything in the crib set listing that would remotely lead you to believe it was in any way conected with PEEPS the candy? How about any of the other PEEPS trademarks shown above? Any confusion?
First contact from Continental Enterprises was by the usual jargon C&D letter November 15, 2006. William M. Mansfield, head wacko at Continental Enterprises, claimed that the crib set listing
...bears marks or designs that are either identical to or clear imitations or derivations of the PEEPS® IP.
What? What are you smoking there, Billy Boy? Do you need new glasses? Identical? Imitations? Where? Just to be sure we're on the same page, let's put them all side-by-side. On the left is the drawing submitted to the trademark off. In the middle is a label from PEEPS. On the right is the chicks embroidered design. O.K., Billy Boy. Show us the "idential" or "imitation"! You can't you jerk weed! And, the image being used on Marshmallow Peeps doesn't look a thing like the image trademarked? How can you claim infringement on something not registered?

Billy Boy goes on to say that the sale of merchandise bearing designs confusingly similar...without a license is illegal." Again, show us the "idential" or "imitation" or "confusingly similar"! It exists only in your pea-brained legal mind; pea-brained because this cease and desist letter has no substance. Them he defames her by saying "...infringers such as your company".
He goes on then with the usual threatening tripe about willful infringement, damages, injunctions, etc.
So, what happens? She is scared and changes the name of the crib set and contacts Billy Boy. On December 27, 2007, William M. Mansfield of Continental Enterprises (out of Indianapolis, Indiana) sends her a letter demanding $5,750.00 "to redress the damage done to its (Just Born's) trademarks through your unauthorized actions"
This is followed by the threat of legal action is she doesn't comply within a certain time frame.

Sometime in 2007, Billy Boy, not getting the cooperation he wanted, turned the matter over to Darlene R. Seymour of Continental Enterprises, who appears to be Billy Boy's grinder monkey equivalent. Darlene (may we call you Dotty?) was responding to a lawyer's letter on behalf of the crib set manufacturer. Dotty claimed that "there are criminal laws in place to cover actions similar to those of committed...". Yes there are, but they are for willing infringers and major infringers, which this woman plainly is not, you yo-yo.

Dotty? Can you and Billy Boy say extortion? Try it slowly. Taking this woman to court is a threat of harm if she doesn't comply with your demands. Hmmm. Threat of harm for financial gain. That's extortion. Why do we believe you are involved in extortion? Because there is absolutely no basis for the $5,750.00 demand. She told you she made, maybe, $700.00 in sales. That's not profit, that's sales, and the court (if it ever went that far) would only award profits. Just Born has to prove damages, and based upon the evidence presented above, that isn't going to happen. We think Billy Boy pulled that dollar figure out of his ass.
Shame on you, Just Born. Twice over. First for claiming the crib set was infringing, which plainly is not. Second for hiring a sleaze-ball outfit like Continental Enterprises and their General Counsel William M. Mansfiled (and Assistant General Counsel Darlene R. Seymour) who are, in our never-to-be-humble opinion, common extortionists with law degrees.

Rebuttals
In an effort to provide a balanced view, we make the following offer to anyone who feels they have been wrongly accused on this web site.
If you, or your company, have been referenced on these pages, and you would like the chance to post a rebuttal, we will post your rebuttal (provided it is in good taste) so others can read it. The rebuttal must be submitted in a format that can easily be converted into HTML. We reserve the right to alter the rebuttal to make it more readable. However, we will not alter the content (unless there is offensive material to be removed). We also reserve the right to comment on any rebuttal received. Emails protesting the content of this web site may be treated as rebuttals by us at our discretion.
We made this offer a very long time ago and as of September 2008, only AnimieHot.com, in our Hall Of Shame, and Charlotte Perman (Sevenarts in our Hall Of Shame) have chosen to submit a formal rebuttal.