Defcad Everytown - Firebolt 5.56 Bolt Catch (R) Magwell Panel
Courtesy Defcad

The Defendants have created and distributed downloadable files for use in 3-D printers to extrude gun parts and accessories. These files include the identical Everytown Marks in the file names and/or on the resulting extruded gun parts and accessories emblazoned with the Everytown Marks. The downloadable “printing kits” are accessible to consumers in New York and bear unauthorized identical copies of Everytown’s registered trademarks. Each Defendant has targeted New York consumers by uploading these files to a full interactive online website that is viewable by and accessible to New York consumers. …

Defendants are actively engaged in unlawfully distributing downloadable files for the manufacture of actual 3-D printed gun parts and accessories, where the files and/or the resulting gun parts and accessories bear the Everytown Marks (hereinafter “Infringing Products”). Despite being put on notice of their unlawful conduct, the Defendants have not only continued to distribute the Infringing Products but have recently escalated their efforts to harm Everytown by distributing photographs and videos of the resulting gun parts and accessories bearing the Everytown Marks. An example of one such recent video retweeted by Defendant Twitter User xYeezySZN on October 4, 2021 is screen captured below.

— Lawsuit Filed in the Southern District of New York by Everytown for Gun Safety Action Fund

 

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

61 COMMENTS

  1. Hilarious!

    Expect the Streisand effect on this one. If Everytown doesn’t like it, they are going to be on every rifle now.

    • The Rookie,

      “Legally not the smartest move …”

      Correct. While I despise Everytown (including all of their related/affiliated entities), that does not entitle me or anyone else to infringe on their legally registered trademarks and copyrights.

      • Does anyone else find it ironic that Everytown is upset about “infringing”?

        A well regulated Media, being necessary to the threat of a free State, the right of Everytown to keep a logo shall not be infringed.

      • To prove copyright infringement, they would have to also prove a profit motive if I understand the law correctly. Does DefCAD charge to download files? If they don’t, this suit will more than likely blow up brilliantly in their face.

      • Unless “Everytown” is engaged in manufacturing firearms, any Copyright protect to the tradename “Everytown” would no extend any protection to use on a firearm.

        • I think you have a point here. Does Everytown even have “products” that the printed receivers on which the logo appears cause any confusion to consumers? Given the fact that printed guns are not typically sold to consumers but only the code is provided to the person printing the objects, the presence of any consumer “confusion” is entirely unproveable.

  4. Not quite as cool as the old “Moms Demand Action” shirts with all the sex positions, but still cool. Everytown can suck my vanilla salty balls.

    • “Not quite as cool as the old “Moms Demand Action” shirts with all the sex positions, but still cool.”

      Anybody got a link to that graphic?

      *Please* 🙂

  7. Strikes me as a stupid move, but these are the same nitwits that believe criminals will turn in their guns to avoid breaking the law, rather than the obverse.

    • …and likely also the same whiners who fact-check Babylon Bee content…

      Exquisite satire.

  10. Yeah, this lawsuit is not gonna end up going anyplace in the end. Every word in those logos is not trademark capable actually and are words common to the English language and free to use by anyone.

    • “Yeah, this lawsuit is not gonna end up going anyplace in the end.”

      should have been

      Yeah, this lawsuit is gonna end up not going anyplace in the end.

    • .40 cal Booger,

      “Every word in those logos is not trademark capable …”

      Any single word by itself in any generic case (e.g. lower case versus capitalized) and any generic font is not trademark capable. What is trademark capable is when you string multiple words together, with a specific font, and a specific case (e.g. all upper case letters). Furthermore, there is no such word “everytown” in the English language. That alone is trademark capable.

      The defendant will lose this lawsuit.

      • Yes of course, but the use here doesn’t duplicate the uniqueness of the EveryTown use, its used in a generic fashion and does not duplicate the uniqueness and such use is fair use.

        EveryTown “invited” its use publicly and did not place constraints on that “invitation” that it could not be used “commercially” as well.

        If EveryTown is going to sue DEFCAD they need to also sue any other commercial entity that has used the phrase “EveryTown”

        • and besides EveryTown via Shannon Watts qualifies as a “public Figure” entity brand because Shannon Watts directly relates and promotes ‘EveryTown’ as being her business entity personna and she is outspoken and active in public affairs having to do with government. A person or business is free to use public figure branding as “satire” or statement or promotion and its clear that DEFCAD is in this area. Its fair use.

        • Oh, also “Moms Demand Action” via Shannon Watts also qualifies as a “public Figure” entity brand because Shannon Watts directly relates and promotes ‘Moms Demand Action’ as being her business entity persona and she is outspoken and active in public affairs having to do with government.

          A person or business is free to use public figure branding as “satire” or statement or promotion and its clear that is its use here by DEFCAD and others. Its fair use.

      • Can Everytown prove a profit motive, the grounds for copyright infringement? If I’m misunderstanding the law, please clarify, but if they can’t prove DEFCAD is financially benefiting, then DEFCAD should have an affirmative defense under parody and satire statutes. Does anyone remember the PETA vs PETA.com lawsuit in the 2000s? Shit, that guy was making mad money off of it, and PETA lost because of the defendant’s satire claim.

        • Even if they do make money from it; EveryTown via Shannon Watts qualifies as a “public Figure” entity brand because Shannon Watts directly relates and promotes ‘EveryTown’ as being her business entity personna and she is outspoken and active in public affairs having to do with government. A person or business is free to use public figure branding as “satire” or statement or promotion and its clear that DEFCAD is in this area. Its fair use.

          There is nothing in public figure branding use related laws or rules that prohibits making money from its use, as long as its not the primary business.

      • Not so sure. Defcad has a number of defenses. This is plainly a parody. I highly doubt people will be confused and think Everytown is selling rifles, lol.

      • “The defendant will lose this lawsuit.“

        Correct, ‘everytown’, a unique creation of the trademark owner, is eminently valid as a trademark.

        The damage done to their brand by the unauthorized public use of their trademark logo is actionable.

        And the fact is, as it probably won’t be difficult to prove malicious intent, there may be special damages applicable as well.

        • “The damage done to their brand by the unauthorized public use of their trademark logo is actionable.”

          Nope, parody and a public figure make that claim *laughable*.

          Kinda like you, ‘minor’… 😉

    • It’s being done…still hilarious! Personally I would never give publicity to the scum gals. Let’s go Brandon!

    • I’m sorry to report that Brandon isn’t doing so well these days…

      “Capitol Insurrectionist Brandon Fellows sought to have his bond status revoked, only to make the legal case against him stronger.

      Author: Jordan Fischer, Eric Flack, Stephanie Wilson
      Published: 11:47 AM EDT October 13, 2021
      Updated: 11:47 AM EDT October 13, 2021
      WASHINGTON — Before his bond hearing began Tuesday, a federal judge warned Brandon Fellows he could be opening himself up to perjury – or even obstruction of justice – charges if he testified on his own behalf, and that he would likely be going back to jail, regardless. Two hours later, the judge’s warning turned out to be prescient.

      “Most people do not do this,” U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden told Fellows. “Obviously your attorney has discouraged this. I do not think this is a good idea… but I’m going to allow you to take the stand, if you wish.”

      • I agree “Brandon” isn’t doing so well. But that’s what happens when you spend almost 50 years in government doing nothing else.

      • ” Capitol Insurrectionist Brandon Fellows ”

        Wrong Brandon. The Brandon that’s part of “Lets Go Brandon” is Brandon Brown, a NASCAR driver. But, you already knew that, right?

  15. “The downloadable “printing kits” are accessible to consumers in New York and bear unauthorized identical copies of Everytown’s registered trademarks.”

    Not true. None of the markings “identically” copy the “registered trademark” “EveryTown”. They are different in size, font, color, alignment, and font sizing and capitalization.

  16. I was just looking at their website and until today I never considered the idea of puting a broomhandle style grip on an AR.

    • The files are free, you have to join Legio to get access to the website. You can thank the state dept for that

      • plenty of other places to get the files free without registering.

        I jointed Defcad and they wanted to charge me money for the files.

  19. Now I have to “build” another AR-15 rather than clones of a muzzleloading, 30mm recoilless, revolver cannon and thermonuclear handgrenades.

  21. I thought all those files were part of file sharing sites, protected like other publishers.

    Is DEFCAD not a file sharing platform?

    • DEFCAD appears to be a scam where they require you to register, log in, and pay money for the files.

      These files are readily available for free without registration elsewhere.

  22. Actually in this case turn about is fair play. Everytown lies and distorts information to promote the anti gun narrative. So someone who is apparently very clever has turned the tables on them and by placing their logo on the parts makes it appear that they have approved these parts. Now I don’t know for sure what is legal here or illegal but if the people who thought this up are willing to pay the price if it is illegal they are to be commended at least for the idea to show that two can play the same game. Everytown, is essentially ignorant of the facts concerning gun violence and statistics. FBI just came out with stats that showing hands and feet cause more gun deaths than rifles. You will never see that stat in an Everytown publication nor will you see the stat that almost 2/3 of gun deaths are suicides not homicides.

    • I would think that anyone printing these parts would know that it was delicious satire and therefore not infringement.

  24. For starters “Everytown” isn’t. They might have 1 or 2% of all the towns in the US, but most don’t want anything to do with them. They are worthy of ridicule, nothing more.

  25. Well, I believe this is a common practice and suing someone over it is a right move because this is being done very commonly and I feel that this needs to stop, its hard work of others that people steal online and claim which is actually not the case, this shows how morally a corrupt these companies are, having no values and abiding by it, it makes me angry too because this happened with me in Logo Company in USA which was called logocorps here is the site: https://logocorps.com/ I designed some cars logos and next I see someone stole it and literally made me in rage, we took them down for cleaners thou.

Comments are closed.