It's About a Not So Sweet Battle Wages Over a Term of Endearment

Downloadable PDF Press Release

Seattle, WA (February 23, 2006) Why are millions of dollars at stake over a common term of endearment, a fragrant flower, or a teeny green vegetable? The words “Sweet Pea” are at the heart of the latest David-vs-Goliath Internet legal battle. At risk are millions of dollars and the future of dozens -- perhaps thousands -- of individuals and small businesses.

Armed with the results of a simple Google search, a Miami attorney has launched a $16 million lawsuit against 52 of the tiniest businesses on the Internet. The attorney’s tools: an intimidating two-inch thick lawsuit, a short timeline to respond in a distant forum, and a threat of a multi-million dollar judgment. The attorney’s techniques: pick only the smallest defendants who can’t afford to litigate a highly questionable lawsuit. The attorney’s goal: to obtain a $5,000 contingency payoff from each defendant and collect $260,000.

In January of 2006, attorney Alexander E. Barthet of Miami, Florida on behalf of his clothing company client Sweet Pea Limited, Inc. went to Federal District Court in Florida and filed a complaint claiming that 52 companies or individuals located throughout the United States were violating their trademark. The clothing company’s lawsuit contends that using the commonly used words “Sweet Pea” in any form -- not just their stylized version -- on any article of clothing is in violation of their trademark rights and therefore they are entitled to millions of dollars in damages. Most of the defendants are creating original designs using the words “Sweet Pea” graphically on T-shirts and children’s clothing.

Small Firms Intentionally Targeted
Notably missing from the list are any large defendants. All the companies being sued are one-person businesses. For example, Nordstrom (Stock Symbol: JWN) sells both the Sweet Pea Limited line of clothing as well as the products of one of the defendants. In addition, CafePress (www.cafepress.com) a major Internet retailer, provides an automated service that allows its clients to create and sell products on the internet including most of the defendants' products. By not first issuing a cease and desist order, the attorney’s real intentions were made perfectly clear when a $5,000 one-time payment was demanded from each defendant.

Intellectual Property Lawsuits are a Growing Concern
Questionable intellectual property lawsuits using the Internet as a tool to find possible defendants are the coming thing in what is often referred to as “litigation extortion.” Like some of the ADA lawsuits of years past, this technique is becoming a common way to demand money from innocent and vulnerable people. By claiming questionable trademark rights to very common words, a number of attorneys around the country are seeking out-of-court settlements from innocent defendants who don’t have the knowledge or financial resources to defend themselves in a court of law. As these types of lawsuits become more common, they are attracting high levels of concern from organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).

About the Defendants
The 52 defendants consist mostly of one person home-based businesses that offer T-shirts, children’s or baby clothing featuring various original designs that include the words “Sweet Pea” in some form. While a few manufacture their designs on clothing in small quantities, most offer their designs on products at the popular online merchant CafePress where the items are produced on a made-to-order basis. Most of the defendants have sold very few items. A number of them have not sold anything at all bearing the contested term of endearment.

A suit of this scope and size has been a shock to all the defendants. The ability to either fight it or pay off the plaintiff’s attorney is beyond the means of most of them.

For the rest of the story see the PDF Press Release