Sex Journo Violet Blue Sues Porn Star

[gonzo]

Violet Blue, the well-known sex and sexuality writer and blogger, filed suit this week against Violet Blue, the nom de plume of a porn performer, alleging that Ada Mae Johnson adopted the writer's name and distinctive black, Bettie Page bangs for performances in films such as Shut Up and Blow Me #29, Whore of the Rings and Who Violet Blew.

Journalist Violet Blue, whose actual name appears to be Violet Blue (pictured right), filed suit in a San Francisco federal court Monday, accusing Johnson of trademark violation and dilution, as well as unfair business practices. Blue wants the court to stop Johnson from using her name and to force her to pay Blue damages.

Journalist Blue writes a sex-focused column for SFGate, blogs at tinynibbles.com and was recently named one of the 25 most influential people on the web by Forbes magazine. She's also written and edited more than 15 books, ranging from Best Women's Erotica 2008 to the Ultimate Guide to Fellatio.
Violet Blue the porn actress (pictured with both blond and black hair left) began making porn films in 2000, and won the emerging starlet awards from adult film industry trade mag AVN in 2002, according to the bio on her site.
The porn actress registered violetblue.org in 2001, and four years later, founded Violet Blue, Inc, which now runs the paid-subscription pornographic website on that domain, according to the lawsuit. An email request for comment sent to the Whois contact information for violetblue.org immediately bounced, and no one immediately replied to a voice message left for the company.
Blue the journalist says Johnson's movies and her appearance at San Francisco's Annual Exotic Erotic Ball under the name Violet Blue have damaged her reputation and caused journalists and others to confuse her for the porn actress.
Even the porn industry got confused, Blue the journalist contends. In October 2007, she got an email from "Dave Pounder," a person who has perfomed in films with Johnson, through SFGate's feedback mechanism, congratulating her on her column.

The email begins "What's up, girl! I see you are writing for SFGatge.com now.... very interesting." It continues with the plainly mistaken belief that Plaintiff Blue is in fact Defendant Johnson: "I'll never forget you because you were my first scene ever..."

Plaintiff Blue has never met nor appeared in any film with "Dave Pounder."

Johnson has repeatedly told Blue she would quit using the name, but has not stopped, according to the suit.

Blue the journalist says she has been using the name Violet Blue in her writings since 1999, and she registered "Violet Blue" as a trademark in March, 2007.
Photos: Right- Journalist Violet Blue by Joi Ito; Left: Screenshot of porn thespian Violet Blue from violetblue.org.

read more

[TheEnforcer]

Oh boy... porn star versus erotic writer.

[EmporerEJ]

Should be an interesting fight.
At first blush, you would think the writer would come out on top (no pun intended) as she "used it first in commerce."

However, one wonders why it took 6 years for her to notice this damaging person using her name?

Forbes 25 most influential people on the web?
Oh, I don't think so.
And I'm not sure Forbes has the competence to make such a statement on this topic.

[RawAlex]

I think this one comes down to a case of more than one person can have a name.

Technically, as Violet Blue the pornstar is in IMDB with 165 movies, http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1013326/ ,I think that the pornstar is in a pretty good position - plus having the name in a company. That the trademark was only issued in 2007 gives a pretty wide open field for anyone with prior use.

The journalist sounds like she recently became aware of this situation and is now trying to profit from the hard work of the pornstar.

[EmporerEJ]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

I think this one comes down to a case of more than one person can have a name.

Technically, as Violet Blue the pornstar is in IMDB with 165 movies, http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1013326/ ,I think that the pornstar is in a pretty good position - plus having the name in a company. That the trademark was only issued in 2007 gives a pretty wide open field for anyone with prior use.

The journalist sounds like she recently became aware of this situation and is now trying to profit from the hard work of the pornstar.

I'm afraid that's just not how it works. Trademarks grow from "use in commerce." The journalist first used it in commerce. So she has a strong case from that standpoint. She writes about sex, and the other girl "acts sex." a bit close in their fields. Another bad point. But it's not in the acting/performance field, so there is a glimmer of hope for the adult star.

If it were like Cadillac dog food, and Cadillac cars, she would have a better case of saying they were different.

Nope, I'm thinking the journalist might just win this one if she pushes it.
(After her trademark matures into a registration.)
I don't see how she has a case at this point.
Had she waited until AFTER it was registered, it might have been a little stronger for the journalist. She has just alerted the actress she is pursuing the mark.

The actress should file an opposition to the registration, after it is published for opposition.