Hasbro files trademarks for Maximal and Predacon faction insignias. Also: Extensive faction insignia trademark history.

Nevermore

Well-known member
Citizen
So these were recently filed by Hasbro.
Maximal insignia.png
Predacon insignia.png

Obviously, those are for the upcoming "Rise of the Beasts" film.

Which has led a lot of people to speculate whether this means they could have simply used those insignias before and then sued Hasbro for trademark infringement.

Obviously, that's not how this works, but it made me curious.

Some people have also suggested that it might be possible that Kenner, rather than Hasbro, had originally registered the insignias.

So I started researching the full history of Hasbro's trademarks for Transformers faction insigias.

You're welcome.


Preface: IANAL (I am not a lawyer). I'm sure a lawyer will be able to answer this much better, but I'd like to start with "it's complicated". As someone said a long time ago, when it comes to trademark law, there is no simple "A plus B equals C, all the time".

Kenner as a company apparently only ever applied for 90 trademarks with the USPTO for "toys", none of which are image marks. That's in part due to the fact that during the time Kenner was a separate company from Hasbro, trademarks were of less relevance than they are today. (For example, Tonka's GoBots line featured toys named "Blaster", "Rumble" and "Warpath" that were available concurrently with Hasbro's Transformers toys of those same names, while Tomy's US division had registered the name "Scrapper" in the "toys" category in 1985, the same year Hasbro released the Constructicons, decades before Tomy merged with Takara, and as far as I'm aware, none of those caused any trademark disputes between those companies, though a lawyer with in-depth knowledge of US trademark history may correct me on this.)

Also, Kenner was purchased by Tonka in 1987, and Tonka itself was subsequently purchased by Hasbro in 1991, so it would have made zero sense for Kenner rather than Hasbro to trademark anything Transformers-related. By the time Beast Wars came out, "Kenner" was merely one of Hasbro's many brands in a legal sense. Yes, Kenner's old Cincinatti offices still existed until they were closed down in 2000, but the company was all "Hasbro", not "Kenner". The original 1995 trademark registration for "Beast Wars" was filed by Hasbro, not Kenner, for starters.

So that's that.


Next, I've actually done the work and researched all the image marks registered by Hasbro with the USPTO.
Insignia trademarks.png

Simply put, each time an insignia is significantly changed ("significantly" might mean something different to Hasbro that it would mean for you and me), Hasbro files a new trademark application. I would assume that just having one of these insignias registered is sufficient for trademark protection for all minor variations, but sometimes Hasbro just wants to make extra sure.

However, it would appear that Hasbro didn't actually register faction insignias as trademarks at all prior to 2002. Why? Might be in part due to a changing culture regarding trademarks, as I elaborated on above. As a matter of fact, none of the original 1996-2000 Beast Wars toys featured any trademark claims for the faction insignias on their packaging, and neither did any of the G1 figures. These are all the insignia trademarks I could find with the USPTO:


Trademark claims started to appear behind Autobot and Decepticon insignias in 2002, the same year Hasbro filed for a registration with the USPTO. The first few waves of Armada figures featured ™ claims behind the faction insignias on their packaging, but none behind the faction insignias on the stats cards. By the time the "Unicron Battles" subline imprint began, the registrations had been successful, and the ™ claims behind the faction insignias on the packaging were replaced by ® claims (although some of the stats cards still featured ™ claims instead.) Meanwhile, Series I and II of the Commemorative Series reissues didn't feature any separate trademark claims for the faction insignias at all, only ® claims for the "Transformers" title (which the faction insignias were incorporated into, like they had been back in the 1980s) and the faction names "Autobot" and "Decepticon" (each of which were preceded by the respective faction insignia). Beginning with Series III, the faction insignias preceding the faction names were followed by ™ claims, which were then replaced by ® claims beginning with Series V. (If you see a Commemorative Series Ultra Magnus or Powermaster Optimus Prime with an ® claim behind the faction insigna on the packaging, that's a 2012 Asian market re-release of the reissue, which also lacks the "Commemorative Series" moniker.)


So does this mean you could have just used the Autobot, Decepticon, Maximal and Predacon insignias before that? Probably not.

Why?

Because you do not need to register a trademark with the USPTO in order to defend it. It just tips the balance in your favor. Significantly so.

Simply put, in order to claim a trademark, all you need to do is use it and slap a ™ behind it. That's how Hasbro has been doing it with the Maximal faction insignia for the Beast Wars 10th Anniversary reissues, Titanium Series Optimus Primal, 2008 Universe Deluxe Class Cheetor and the Robot Heroes figures, Thrilling 30 Rattrap and Rhinox, the Platinum Edition "Year of the Monkey" Optimus Primal figure and Power of the Primes Optimal Optimus. (For the Beast Wars 10th Anniversary line, Hasbro had apparently fogotten that they had the Predacon faction insignia - but not the Maximal faction insignia! - registered as a trademark ever since 2002, as 10th Anniversary Megatron, Waspinator and "Predacon Tarantulus" all featured ™ instead of ® claims behind their faction insignias on their packaging. Hasbro then remembered again for 2008 Universe Deluxe Class Dinobot and the Robot Heroes figures, which featured ® claims behind the Predacon faction insignias but only ™ claims after the Maximal faction insignias. By the time Thrilling 30 Waspinator was released, the registration had already expired, so he featured a ™ claim behind the Predacon faction insignia on his packaging again. Also, for some reason, Titanium Series Beast Wars Megatron featured a Decepticon faction insignia on his packaging rather than a Predacon one, even though Optimus Primal from the same assortment featured a Maximal insignia on his packaging.)

The difference between an unregistered ™ trademark and a registered ® trademark is the burden of proof in a trademark dispute. With an unregistered ™ trademark, you need to prove that your use of the mark precedes the opposing party's use, and that you have been using it consistently ever since. With a registered ® trademark, your evidence is already on record with the USPTO, and thus the opposing party has a considerably higher risk of losing the case against you.


Postscript 1: For any modern figures in "worldwide" packaging that was first introduced in 2019 (featuring texts in English, French, German, Spanish and Portuguese), which includes the Walmart exclusive "Vintage Beast Wars" reissues, Hasbro has abandoned ™ and ® claims altogether because they have never been featured on European packaging anyways, and those symbols either have no legal power whatsoever in most markets outside the United States, or Hasbro simply hasn't registered all names and symbols in all markets, and thus doesn't want to falsely claim a trademark (or worse, a trademark registration) in all international markets indiscriminately.


Postscript 2: There's an old myth among Transformers fans which claims that the Generation 2 Autobot and Decepticon insignias were originally created by Hasbro UK, whose license for using the original faction insignias owned by Hasbro US had expired. Since I've already written up a refutal for this claim for TFWiki three years ago, which I had to update with some of my recent discoveres as outlined above anyways, I will simply paste the whole thing here:

The first half is maybe true, the second half certainly isn't. While the new Autobot and Decepticon faction insignias were popularized by the Generation 2 line, said line didn't start in Europe until 1994, a year later than in the US. Instead, the Transformers brand had continued in Europe even after its cancellation in the United States in 1990, and new European-"exclusive" figures were still being released in 1993, many of which were later re-released in rebranded Generation 2 packaging in Europe in 1994, while some of them were also made available (including some color, name and faction changes) under the Generation 2 line in the United States in 1993. It was those designed-for-Europe 1993 pre-Generation 2 figures that had first featured the new Autobot and Decepticon insignias on their packaging, and a popular myth claims that they had become a necessity for the European market due to Hasbro UK and Hasbro US being legally considered distinct entities under international law, and Hasbro UK alternatively didn't want to continue paying their parent company the fee for being allowed to use these symbols, or the license for using them had expired.

The holes in this theory are legion: First of all, Hasbro US didn't actually register the original Autobot and Decepticon insignias as trademarks with the United States Patent and Trademark Office until 2002. That was also the same year when those insgnias were first claimed as trademarks on the toys' packaging. How, then, could Hasbro US, assuming it was indeed a distinct legal entity, enforce those insignias as trademarks by 1993, let alone internationally? Why exactly would the UK Patent Office be enforcing the trademarks of a (supposedly) foreign company that didn't do business in the UK? In fact, why would anyone be enforcing trademark claims against Hasbro UK on behalf of Hasbro US? And why would this only affect the faction insignias? Wouldn't the names "Transformers", "Autobot" and "Decepticon" be equally subject to those alleged licensing fees?

A much more likely explanation is that the faction insignias were changed for the same reason the "Transformers" title logo was changed to a new version (both in the US and Europe) in 1989, along with a major redesign of the toys' packaging, and why there had been another change to the packaging design and "Transformers" title logo for the European releases in 1992: To "refresh" the overall presentation of the brand, making everyhing look "new" and different for marketing reasons. Now whether the new insignias were originally created by Hasbro US for the Generation 2 line and were simply applied to the European 1993 toys first for the sake of consistency, or whether they had indeed been created by Hasbro UK and Hasbro US just liked them so much they decided to adopt them for the Generation 2 line, is up for debate.
 
Last edited:

Nevermore

Well-known member
Citizen
Aaaaaand after I typed all of that, I just had another realization which requires a whole new section.

More reasons why Hasbro didn't bother trademarking insignias prior to 2002: They were most likely sufficiently protected by copyright already.

This is where it's important to understand the difference between copyrights and trademarks, two vaguely related concepts that are frequently confused: The faction insignias might be one of those cases where both can apply at the same time! Yes, it's possible to create something that is subject to copyright protection, and then use that very same thing as a trademark and have that trademark registered as well!

For those who still do not understand the difference: Copyrights protect original expressions of ideas. The more original, the more elaborate the creative process is, the stronger the copyright protection is as well. The plot of a movie, the backstory of a character, a piece of art, the specific design of a character, all of those can be protected by copyright (provided they are not derivative, i.e. based on someone else's work, or outright copyright infringements, i.e. direct copies of someone else's work). There's a required minimum threshold of originality for a new work to qualify for copyright protection - basically, if it's too basic, too generic or too obvious, it cannot be copyrighted. This is why the name "Transformers" cannot be protected by copyright - it's neither new (it's simply a technical term), nor is it elaborate enough. The name can be registered as a trademark, though.

Meanwhile, trademarks are used to identify goods and services. The idea is that the name of a company or a product tells you what to expect based on that brand's reputation. You hear "McDonald's", you think "fast food", not "home improvement tools". At the same time, they are supposed to represent the owner. You hear "Transformers", you think "Hasbro", not "Mattel".

A good example is the DC character Shazam (formerly known as "Captain Marvel"). Originally published by Fawcett Publications, the character was at the center of a legal dispute between National Comics Publications (now DC Comics) and Fawcett, with DC arguing that Fawcett's Captain Marvel character was too similar to their character of Superman, and thus infringing on their copyright. The dispute eventually resulted in Fawcett filing for bankruptcy, with DC obtaining the rights to the Captain Marvel character. However, by that point, Marvel Comics had created their own character named "Captain Marvel" (the Kree also known as "Mar-Vell"), and thus DC couldn't publish stories featuring their newly-acquired character under the name "Captain Marvel". They could still call him "Captain Marvel" within the pages of the stories themselves, but they could not advertise those stories under that name, and thus instead used the title "The Power of Shazam!" Since this continually caused confusion among both comic book fans and the general public, DC eventually renamed the character into "Shazam" altogether.


So this leads us to the faction insignias. If you were to create a Venn diagram in which one circle represents things that can be (and are) proected by copyright, and the other one represents this that can be (and are) trademarked, the faction insignias might very well fall into that area where the two circles intersect. Based on my layman's understanding of copyrights, the faction insignias should meet the mimimum threshold of originality required to qualify for copyright protection, and since Hasbro has successfully registered them as trademarks in 2002, they certainly also meet that criteria.

So in conclusion: Even if we were to assume that Hasbro had no trademark protection for the faction insignias prior to slapping ™ claims behind them (or before successfully registering them), that still wouldn't mean that anyone could just use them, since there's a good chance they'd still be protected by copyright either way. And unlike trademarks, which require consistent use in commerce to keep the protection alive, copyright protection doesn't easily expire for decades.


And this leads us back to this ever-changing cultural attitude towards trademarks. Back in the 1980s, trademarks simply weren't as big of a thing as they were 20 years later. When the Autobot and Decepticon insignias were created at the behest of Hasbro (by the way, there's this guy named Wayne Molinare who worked as an art director for Coleman, Lipuma, Segal & Morrill in New York City in the 1980s who claims to have created the faction insignias, along with the "Transformers" title logo, in case anyone is wondering), Hasbro considered them to be sufficiently protected by copyright so no-one else would seriously consider using them in commerce. I just did a quick USPTO search, and sure enough, National Publications/DC Comics didn't actually bother to register a trademark for the Superman "S" symbol, arguably one of the most well-known insignias in the world, until 1979! So yeah, those simply were different times, and looking at them from a modern-day perspective will inevitably result in skewed perceptions.

It wasn't until the early 2000s, when things such as "brand identity" became much more important to Hasbro (coinciding with the first major Transformers nostalgia wave that began with Armada, and especially the Dreamwave comics and the "Commemorative Series" reissues) that they thought that maybe they should also trademark those things.


Another factor might be the fact that Hasbro simply didn't expect any of those lines to last as long as they did. The original run of the Transformers line lasted for seven years (1984 through 1990) in the United States, while Beast Wars lasted for another five (1996 through 2000), both of which were massively exceeding anyone's expectations. At that time, Hasbro most likely never expected to be using those insignias for that damn long. I mean, just look at how the entire packaging design and the "Transformers" logo itself were drastically changed in 1989, and then again during the European continuation of the line in 1992, and then again for Generation 2, including the all-new Autobot and Decepticon faction insignias! There was always this constant push for reinventing the line and giving it a whole new look every few years, so why bother registering these insignias as trademarks when they would fall out of use anyways after just a few years? It wasn't until Hasbro realized that they could ride the 1980s nostalgia wave of the early 2000s big time that they bothered registering the Autobot and Decepticon faction insignias as trademarks.

Regarding the Beast Wars faction insignias, the reason why Hasbro registered the Predacon insignia as a trademark in 2002 (at the same time as the Autobot and Decepticon insignias, as well as the Armada Mini-Con insignia, for that matter) but not the Maximal one was because they were still using it during the 2001 Robots in Disguise line. As for why they wouldn't bother (re-)registering them during those many times they used them for the Beast Wars 10th Anniversary reissues or the 2008 Universe line, among others, I would assume that they were not expecting to use them on a frequent basis (one of the requirements for continued trademark protection), and Thrilling 30 Waspinator was just a case of bad timing, resulting in the trademark registration being canceled just a few months before the toy came out.
 
Last edited:

Magnusblitz

Active member
Citizen
Regarding the Beast Wars faction insignias, I have no idea why they would register the Predacon insignia as a trademark in 2002 but not the Maximal one (what did they even need it for at that point?).

Perhaps the tail end of RiD? I don't think it had any Maximals, but it did have some Predacons, and Cryotek came out as late as (early) 2002 (though from what I can tell by looking at pics of his packaging, no TM/R symbol by the faction sign).

So perhaps they just registered the three main symbols they were using at the time (Autobot, Decepticon, Predacon) whereas the Maximal symbol hadn't been used in a couple years (probably last used on the Fox Kids Transmetals in 2000?), so they didn't bother with that one. And then they just decided to stick with Autobot/Decepticon after that and let the Predacon one sit unused. All the Beast-era characters in 2003 Universe are Autobots and Decepticons, for example.
 
Last edited:

Nevermore

Well-known member
Citizen
Perhaps the tail end of RiD? I don't think it had any Maximals, but it did have some Predacons, and Cryotek came out as late as (early) 2002 (though from what I can tell by looking at pics of his packaging, no TM/R symbol by the faction sign).

So perhaps they just registered the three main symbols they were using at the time (Autobot, Decepticon, Predacon) whereas the Maximal symbol hadn't been used in a couple years (probably last used on the Fox Kids Transmetals in 2000?), so they didn't bother with that one. And then they just decided to stick with Autobot/Decepticon after that and let the Predacon one sit unused. All the Beast-era characters in 2003 Universe are Autobots and Decepticons, for example.
Duh. It was filed on the same day as the Autobot and Decepticon insignias (as well as the Armada Mini-Con insignia).

I'm stupid.
 


Top Bottom