The Duracell Bunny

[Helena]

Picture a pink bunny rabbit. A toy one, playing a drum. It’s powered by a battery — in fact, it’s the mascot for that battery brand.

Is this what you pictured? That’s the Energizer Bunny — and if you’re from the United States, that’s almost certainly what sprung to mind. But if you’re from Europe or Australia, you probably pictured the guy below: the Duracell Bunny. And either way, there’s a good chance that you didn’t even know the other one existed.

How does the world get two pink drum-playing battery mascots? It’s a mix of good advertising and bad lawyering. ...MORE

[Lummy]

It turns out that Duracell, for reasons unclear, did not originally filed a trademark application for a “battery bunny” in the United States. Energrizer did in 1989, right after its ad debuted; Duracell tried to follow shortly thereafter. But it was too late — Energizer, the U.S. trademark holder, could block that action. That’s basically what they did. According to AdAge, “after Duracell filed for a U.S. trademark on its competing bunny, the two sides reached a largely confidential agreement in 1992 allowing Energizer to use the bunny in the U.S. and Duracell to use it elsewhere.”

Interesting because priority in time apparently belonged to the Duracell bunny (Energizer acknowledged as much), and this was or is certainly known to millions of people. Doesn't say what the agreement was between the companies.

[Lummy]

If I'm not mistaken, the fee for filing copyright/trademark in the US is not very much money, like something under $100?