Fine Brothers abandon 'react' trademark attempt after sparking online outrage

After facingthe overwhelming wrath of the internetfollowing an attempt to trademark the word"react,"the duobehindFine Brothers Entertainmentisback-pedalling in response to the negative feedback.

• How YouTube turned 13 ordinary people (and 1 cat) into superstars
• PewDiePie tops Forbes list of YouTube millionaires
• Dot-sucks domain name not our problem, Ottawa says

The Fine Brothersalso known asRafi and Benny Finerunone ofYouTube's most popular channels, producingand postingvideos that featurepeople of all ages reacting to objects oronline clips.

The channel boasts 13.7 million followers and featurestitles like"Kids React to Old Computers" and "Elders React to Netflix."

Fine Brothers Entertainment actuallyfiled a U.S. trademark application on "react" last year.But the backlash onlybegan last week after thepending trademark was revealedas part ofnew program known as "React World."

Under "React World,"the company plannedto license its "react"assets for other creators, who could then make their own videos in a similar style to the Fine Brothers.

Criticsquicklyvoiced concerns thatthe brothers could use the trademark to takedown otherreaction videos already onYouTube, or attempt to claim profits on such clips.

The "reaction" genre is wellestablished and popularon the website.

As a result of the uproar, the Fine Brotherslost more than300,000 subscribers and ultimately opted toendtheir trademark filing.

In astatement released Monday, Fine Brothers Entertainment apologized and acknowledged that critics'concerns were valid.But the company also notedthatthe trademark application wasnot ill-intended.

"We realize we built a system that could easily be used for wrong. We are fixing that," the statement read."The reality that trademarks like these could be used to theoretically give companies (including ours) the power to police and control online video is a valid concern, and though we can assert our intentions are pure, there's no way to prove them."

The statement also said the company would go a step further,rescinding all similar trademarks it already owns.

Legalchallenge pending

Initiallythe Fine Brothers tried to defend the trademark, saying they had no plans to try tocontrol all reaction videos. Rather, theywanted to use the trademark to help license and monetize their assets, while also providing tools and support for other creators.

But thisdefence was not wellreceived by critics.

Ryan Morrison, a lawyer who planned to legallyoppose the trademarkfor free on behalf of concerned YouTube creators, said the trademark would have given the brothers too much control over the reaction genre.

"Owning the 'react' in the YouTube space, or the internet space, would be akin to owning 'sitcom' in the TV space," said Morrison. "React is a genre of video in YouTube, just like sitcom is a genre of show on TV."

I know there's never a certainty in the law, but I'm certain this [trademark]would have been shut down.- Ryan Morrison, lawyer

Morrisonalsonotes descriptive terms tend to be rejected under trademarklaw.

"You can't own a descriptive word," he said. "So we would have just opposed, saying that this was clearly descriptive, and clearly generic, and clearly a term used over the entire internet for an entire genre.

"I know there's never a certainty in the law, but I'm certain this [trademark]would have been shut down."

However, Daniel Anthony, a lawyer withSmart &Biggarwho specializes in internet trademarks, said it is possible to get descriptive trademarks approved if they are synonymous with the company.

But he notes these trademarks do not give companies complete power over the terms.

"When you get trademark for descriptive words usually you can't get thembut when you do, it just blocks other people from using the same thing as a trademark," said Anthony."It wouldn't prevent other people from using those words in sentences or in descriptive matters."

It's hard to be certain of what the Fine Brothers would do with the trademark, Anthony added, and whetherthey could have feasibly triedto use it to take down otherreaction videos.

Online backlash widespread

The online reaction to the trademark was swift, with angrycommentsspreading not only across YouTube, but alsoTwitter, Facebookand Reddit.

Morrisonsuggests the backlash shouldn't have been unexpected, asthe online worldtends togreatly value creative freedom.

"When people like thiscomeacross and really just put theirfoot down on the neck of creators, that's just not going to be allowed," said Morrison. "That's never going to be well-received."

Anthony saidonline backlash, and its ability to quickly escalate, is increasingly becoming a morecommon problemfor companies.

"That's just the nature of the internet. It's instantaneous, it's global and people without any legal knowledge post things and make comments," he said. "[The reaction to this trademark] just confirms for me the current risk in today's internet society that things can get blown out of proportion really quickly."