Latest news with #RedBubble
Business Mayor
25-04-2025
- Entertainment
- Business Mayor
Sydney woman who sold a cartoon cat T-shirt told to pay US$100,000 in Grumpy Cat copyright case
Alda Curtis, a 63-year-old counselling student from Sydney, set up a Redbubble store as a hobby, including selling a T-shirt featuring an unhappy cat cartoon. After years of running the store, a single sale of that T-shirt resulted in a US$100,000 default judgment against her for infringing on the trademark of Grumpy Cat late last year. Then Curtis noticed nearly US$600 had been taken from her PayPal account. Grumpy Cat, also known as Tardar Sauce, shot to internet fame in 2012 due to her permanently grumpy facial expressions that were caused by a permanent underbite and feline dwarfism. The American domestic cat became a symbol for everyone on the internet who felt disgruntled about life, with millions of followers on social media, memes, merchandise including clothing and soft toys, and even a fragrance. At the peak of the cat's fame in 2014, the film Grumpy Cat's Worst Christmas Ever was released. It starred the grumpy cat herself, voiced by Aubrey Plaza. Rotten Tomatoes gives the film an aggregate score of 27%. The world of internet stardom moves on quickly, however, and Grumpy Cat's fame has dimmed since Tardar Sauce died in 2019, aged 7. But the ghost of the frowny feline still haunts anyone trying to sell a product that could be confused with the real Grumpy Cat. The owner of the Grumpy Cat trademark is ever vigilant for unauthorised products sold online. Last year, Grumpy Cat Ltd filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against more than 200 online sellers in an Ohio court. They sought damages for products sold on sites such as RedBubble that allegedly infringed on the trademark. Alda Curtis, 63, received a default judgment against her for a T-shirt sold on RedBubble. Photograph: Supplied In September last year, the court ruled a default judgment in favour of Grumpy Cat Ltd. The company was awarded damages of US$100,000 per defendant. If the payments were made in full, the company would win more than US$24m. The sellers have also been restrained from continuing to sell the products identified, forcing the removal from the online stores. Curtis set up a Redbubble store as a hobby while studying counselling in the northern suburbs of Sydney, Australia. She first became aware of the Grumpy Cat Ltd case against her two weeks after the default judgment in Ohio. The problem for Curtis was one item she sold: a T-shirt of a frowning purple and yellow cat. She said the sale had been made just before the US lawsuit was launched against her. The T-shirt had sat unsold for years on her site. The design for the T-shirt had been licensed from a design website, titled 'Grumpy Cat Pattern Graphic T-shirt'. Curtis earned just over US$1 from the sale. In the six years she had been running her store, she had generated about US$200 in revenue. Curtis said she had 'absolutely no intentions' of infringing the trademark. 'I've seen a picture of that cat, but I didn't even cross my mind that was in any copyright infringement or anything like that,' she said. 'So it was totally just a fluke, and they're taking advantage of that. If everyone in the world is going to be not allowed to call [a design] Happy Cat, Grumpy Cat, feathered cat, or whatever it might be … where does it end?' In February, a few months after the ruling, Curtis discovered US$592.75 was missing from her PayPal account, without explanation. After multiple attempts to contact PayPal to try to get the money back, Curtis said PayPal referred her to Grumpy Cat's lawyers. Others across the globe have found themselves in similar situations. There are posts on Reddit asking what to do after finding a default judgment has been made against them. 'I had no idea 'Grumpy Cat' was a thing. 'Grumpy Cat' was not even mentioned on my design neither looked my design like their stupid cat,' one poster said. Prof Graeme Austin, chair in private law at Victoria University in New Zealand, said US trademark law gives courts powers to impose tough damages awards in infringement cases, including statutory damages of up to US$200,000. 'Wholesale default judgment proceedings in trademark and copyright cases are a familiar strategy for intellectual property owners,' he said. skip past newsletter promotion Sign up to Afternoon Update: Election 2025 Our Australian afternoon update breaks down the key election campaign stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. after newsletter promotion 'They can be a useful tool for trademark owners – but they risk imposing very harsh remedies on individual defendants who might have had good defences if they had acted sooner.' Austin said such cases were not unusual, and it was important for anyone served with a complaint to act quickly. 'The last thing you want is to be swept up in proceedings against a large group of other defendants. You want to be in the position to raise any defences as early as possible.' Curtis said it could be a case of what has been termed 'SAD Scheme'. In a 2023 Columbia Law Review Forum article, Prof Eric Goldman described the 'Schedule A Defendants Scheme' in the northern district of Illinois – where the Grumpy Cat case was filed – targeting online merchants in China, mostly. Goldman said the scheme allowed rights owners 'to extract settlements from online merchants without satisfying basic procedural safeguards like serving the complaint and establishing personal jurisdiction over defendants'. Goldberg argued the scheme 'goes far beyond just curbing online infringement and instead causes substantial harm to innocent merchants'. Australian copyright law expert Fiona Phillips said the US-based PayPal taking the US$592.75 from Curtis's account was the company enforcing its user agreement, which outlines funds may be taken in response to a court order. 'It is an interesting development in the enforcement of IP across national borders and a further reason for people to pay more attention to the terms and conditions,' she said. Curtis is now battling to have the default judgment vacated. In response to her filing in the court, lawyers for Grumpy Cat have argued that service was made to Curtis' Gmail account on 2 May 2024, and have sought to have the motion dismissed on the grounds that Curtis has filed the motion under her name, not in the name of the online seller name she had used. The company also argued that the trademark infringement was due to the name of the product being 'Grumpy Cat Pattern Graphic T-Shirt'. Curtis said a search of her inbox shows no email from the lawyers until the first one she received in September. A ruling has yet to be made. Lawyers for Grumpy Cat offered to settle the case for US$1,000 in an email to Curtis in March, seen by Guardian Australia. Users on Reddit have reported similar offers. In 2018, Grumpy Cat Ltd won $750,000 in damages from a US coffee company for violating the terms of their agreement to use the cat's image on a line of iced coffee drinks called 'Grumppuccinos'. Grumpy Cat's owners said the company had 'blatantly infringed' their copyrights and trademarks when they began selling roasted coffee and Grumppucino T-shirts featuring Tardar Sauce's face. As of 2024, it was reported that Grumpy Cat Ltd had filed more than 50 lawsuits related to the use of Grumpy Cat in unauthorised merchandise. Grumpy Cat's lawyers and PayPal were contacted for comment.
The Guardian
25-04-2025
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
Sydney woman who sold a cartoon cat T-shirt told to pay US$100,000 in Grumpy Cat copyright case
Alda Curtis, a 63-year-old counselling student from Sydney, set up a Redbubble store as a hobby, including selling a T-shirt featuring an unhappy cat cartoon. After years of running the store, a single sale of that T-shirt resulted in a US$100,000 default judgment against her for infringing on the trademark of Grumpy Cat late last year. Then Curtis noticed nearly US$600 had been taken from her PayPal account. Grumpy Cat, also known as Tardar Sauce, shot to internet fame in 2012 due to her permanently grumpy facial expressions that were caused by a permanent underbite and feline dwarfism. The American domestic cat became a symbol for everyone on the internet who felt disgruntled about life, with millions of followers on social media, memes, merchandise including clothing and soft toys, and even a fragrance. At the peak of the cat's fame in 2014, the film Grumpy Cat's Worst Christmas Ever was released. It starred the grumpy cat herself, voiced by Aubrey Plaza. Rotten Tomatoes gives the film an aggregate score of 27%. The world of internet stardom moves on quickly, however, and Grumpy Cat's fame has dimmed since Tardar Sauce died in 2019, aged 7. But the ghost of the frowny feline still haunts anyone trying to sell a product that could be confused with the real Grumpy Cat. The owner of the Grumpy Cat trademark is ever vigilant for unauthorised products sold online. Last year, Grumpy Cat Ltd filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against more than 200 online sellers in an Ohio court. They sought damages for products sold on sites such as RedBubble that allegedly infringed on the trademark. Sign up for the Afternoon Update: Election 2025 email newsletter In September last year, the court ruled a default judgment in favour of Grumpy Cat Ltd. The company was awarded damages of US$100,000 per defendant. If the payments were made in full, the company would win more than US$24m. The sellers have also been restrained from continuing to sell the products identified, forcing the removal from the online stores. Curtis set up a Redbubble store as a hobby while studying counselling in the northern suburbs of Sydney, Australia. She first became aware of the Grumpy Cat Ltd case against her two weeks after the default judgment in Ohio. The problem for Curtis was one item she sold: a T-shirt of a frowning purple and yellow cat. She said the sale had been made just before the US lawsuit was launched against her. The T-shirt had sat unsold for years on her site. The design for the T-shirt had been licensed from a design website, titled 'Grumpy Cat Pattern Graphic T-shirt'. Curtis earned just over US$1 from the sale. In the six years she had been running her store, she had generated about US$200 in revenue. Curtis said she had 'absolutely no intentions' of infringing the trademark. 'I've seen a picture of that cat, but I didn't even cross my mind that was in any copyright infringement or anything like that,' she said. 'So it was totally just a fluke, and they're taking advantage of that. If everyone in the world is going to be not allowed to call [a design] Happy Cat, Grumpy Cat, feathered cat, or whatever it might be … where does it end?' In February, a few months after the ruling, Curtis discovered US$592.75 was missing from her PayPal account, without explanation. After multiple attempts to contact PayPal to try to get the money back, Curtis said PayPal referred her to Grumpy Cat's lawyers. Others across the globe have found themselves in similar situations. There are posts on Reddit asking what to do after finding a default judgment has been made against them. 'I had no idea 'Grumpy Cat' was a thing. 'Grumpy Cat' was not even mentioned on my design neither looked my design like their stupid cat,' one poster said. Prof Graeme Austin, chair in private law at Victoria University in New Zealand, said US trademark law gives courts powers to impose tough damages awards in infringement cases, including statutory damages of up to US$200,000. 'Wholesale default judgment proceedings in trademark and copyright cases are a familiar strategy for intellectual property owners,' he said. Sign up to Afternoon Update: Election 2025 Our Australian afternoon update breaks down the key election campaign stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion 'They can be a useful tool for trademark owners – but they risk imposing very harsh remedies on individual defendants who might have had good defences if they had acted sooner.' Austin said such cases were not unusual, and it was important for anyone served with a complaint to act quickly. 'The last thing you want is to be swept up in proceedings against a large group of other defendants. You want to be in the position to raise any defences as early as possible.' Curtis said it could be a case of what has been termed 'SAD Scheme'. In a 2023 Columbia Law Review Forum article, Prof Eric Goldman described the 'Schedule A Defendants Scheme' in the northern district of Illinois – where the Grumpy Cat case was filed – targeting online merchants in China, mostly. Goldman said the scheme allowed rights owners 'to extract settlements from online merchants without satisfying basic procedural safeguards like serving the complaint and establishing personal jurisdiction over defendants'. Goldberg argued the scheme 'goes far beyond just curbing online infringement and instead causes substantial harm to innocent merchants'. Australian copyright law expert Fiona Phillips said the US-based PayPal taking the US$592.75 from Curtis's account was the company enforcing its user agreement, which outlines funds may be taken in response to a court order. 'It is an interesting development in the enforcement of IP across national borders and a further reason for people to pay more attention to the terms and conditions,' she said. Curtis is now battling to have the default judgment vacated. In response to her filing in the court, lawyers for Grumpy Cat have argued that service was made to Curtis' Gmail account on 2 May 2024, and have sought to have the motion dismissed on the grounds that Curtis has filed the motion under her name, not in the name of the online seller name she had used. The company also argued that the trademark infringement was due to the name of the product being 'Grumpy Cat Pattern Graphic T-Shirt'. Curtis said a search of her inbox shows no email from the lawyers until the first one she received in September. A ruling has yet to be made. Lawyers for Grumpy Cat offered to settle the case for US$1,000 in an email to Curtis in March, seen by Guardian Australia. Users on Reddit have reported similar offers. In 2018, Grumpy Cat Ltd won $750,000 in damages from a US coffee company for violating the terms of their agreement to use the cat's image on a line of iced coffee drinks called 'Grumppuccinos'. Grumpy Cat's owners said the company had 'blatantly infringed' their copyrights and trademarks when they began selling roasted coffee and Grumppucino T-shirts featuring Tardar Sauce's face. As of 2024, it was reported that Grumpy Cat Ltd had filed more than 50 lawsuits related to the use of Grumpy Cat in unauthorised merchandise. Grumpy Cat's lawyers and PayPal were contacted for comment.
Yahoo
12-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Siam Piwat reinforces its position as a Creative Powerhouse in developing global destinations, supporting Bangkok Design Week 2025 with showcases of creative works
BANGKOK, Feb. 12, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Siam Piwat, a leading real estate and retail developer, reaffirms its position as a pioneer in creativity-driven global destinations by supporting Bangkok Design Week 2025 with the showcases of exceptional works from Thai and international artists and various activities across its globally renowned shopping centers—Siam Paragon, Siam Center, Siam Discovery, and ICONSIAM. To create an art and design phenomenon and reinforce its role as a Creative Powerhouse, Siam Piwat is set to continuously introduce unprecedented experiences and deliver inspiration for visitors, promoting Thailand as a global hub for the creative economy. Chanisa Kaewruen, Head of Creative and Innovation, Siam Piwat Co., Ltd. stated, "Siam Piwat has remained steadfast in its commitment to crafting experiences that continually leave visitors amazed (Be Amazed), inspired (Be Inspired) while playing a key role in revolutionizing the industry (Be Revolutionary) through every generation. We were the first shopping mall in Thailand to open creative spaces that make art a part of the everyday lifestyle. As a pioneer, we have introduced new experiences that blend art, culture, innovation, and aesthetics to ensure equal accessibility for everyone." "Siam Piwat's shopping centers serve as hubs of creativity and inspiration. We have continuously collaborated with Thai and international artists, designers, and emerging talents to create world-class works within our malls. Additionally, we actively support the growth of a creative community, fostering its development into one of the largest art communities in Thailand." In 2025, Siam Piwat has collaborated with the Creative Economy Agency (CEA) and various partners as a key supporter of Bangkok Design Week 2025, which runs from February 8–23, 2025 with the theme "Design Up+Rising: Facing Challenges with a Positive Twist". Siam Piwat has provided spaces for Thai and international artists, to showcase their talents in two districts: Siam District—home to Siam Paragon, Siam Center, and Siam Discovery—and Khlong San District, ICONSIAM. Among highlights are "The Future in Our Hand", a one-of-a-kind sculpture by renowned artist Jaime Hayon, who collaborates with Siam Paragon for the first time in Thailand, and Red Bubble by Donghoon Oh, South Korean contemporary artist. Another one is Reflection You - an immersive art installation by acclaimed artist Arnon Neiysoongnoen, and Visual Merchandising, a creative showcase celebrating Chinese New Year under the theme "Harmony of Prosperity: A New Year's Awakening." ICONSIAM, a pioneer in creating the first Art in Mall experience, presents the showcases of exclusive artworks, art installations, and activities. Highlights include ICONCRAFT X THANIYA : The Stellar Zodiac Collection - An exhibition that tells the story of zodiac signs, and ICONSIAM ART & CULTURE, showcasing invaluable masterpieces that elevate Thai art to the global stage. Bangkok Design Week 2025 takes place across various districts in Bangkok. Stay updated on exhibition details within Siam Piwat's shopping centers by following the official Facebook page: Siam Piwat and its shopping centers' pages at View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE Siam Piwat Sign in to access your portfolio
