DC Comics, Inc. v. Filmation Associates
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
486 F. Supp. 1273 (1980)

- Written by Sarah Holley, JD
Facts
Since 1941, DC Comics, Inc. (plaintiff) had marketed comic books featuring the Aquaman character, an unwater hero, who, with his female companion, Mera, and his walrus-like companion, Tusky, fought against assorted forces of evil. Aquaman was featured in numerous animated television series and licensed to others to market goods based on the character. Since 1967, DC Comics had marketed comics featuring the Plastic Man character, a crime-fighting hero with the abilities to stretch and assume the shape of inanimate objects that retain the color and design of his costume. Like Aquaman, Plastic Man was featured in an animated television series. In 1978, Filmation Associates began exhibiting two animated television series—Manta and Moray and Superstretch, both as part of the “Tarzan and the Super 7” series—and licensed others to market goods based on the Manta and Moray and Superstretch characters. Manta was an underwater hero, Moray his female companion, and Whiskers their walrus-like companion. And Superstretch had the same abilities as Plastic Man. Shortly thereafter, DC Comics initiated suit against Filmation for trademark infringement, among other claims. The jury found in favor of DC Comics. Filmation moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, arguing that it was entitled to judgment as a matter of law on DC Comics’ trademark-infringement claim because it had failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (MacMahon, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.