Rosco Files Suit Against ETC

Rosco files suit against ETC for federal trademark infringement and unfair competition (PDF of the complaint attached). The latest version of EOS software has also removed any use of Rosco trademarks. The below is from the release notes of EOS 3.2. There is also a "conversion" chart in the release notes to the new color nomenclature.

"EOS-54441 - Rosco has filed suit against ETC alleging infringing use of Rosco trademarks in
various ETC products. We do not agree with the claims but are going to proactively remove
any uses of Rosco trademarks from ETC products going forward.
Other products’ documentation will carry advice on how these changes affect their use.

CAUTION: These changes will affect show files that were created
previous to v3.2.0, and are loaded into v3.2.0 and later software.
While playback and show content will not be changed, removed
assets may affect Augment3d, Magic Sheets, ML Controls, and more.
For information regarding Eos import features, which allow images
to be loaded from a flash drive, see Managing Show Files >
Importing Show Data in the Eos Family v3.2.0 User Manual."

While I thought the "Are you gel-less yet?" line of advertising was a tad bit heavy-handed, I don't think it warrants a lawsuit. Throw 'em a bone and settle for $787M.

Some discussion of this on CB's Discord channel earlier this week.

This isn't unprecedented. Pantone charges a licensing fee for their colors that any number of other companies has to pay for. Where it gets...complex...is that the color libraries for Eos were generated by Carallon, who licenses those databases to multiple companies, not just ETC, and apparently Carallon's licensing from Rosco lapsed or otherwise wasn't maintained for unknown reasons.

The suit is less than surprising. Rosco's business model of selling gel has evaporated and now they basically sell gobos, tape, and paint. They have to make up the lost revenue for their colors through licensing deals else their company's overall revenue falls to pieces compared to where it was 10 years ago. We're getting to the point where comparing the capability of LED fixtures to gel, while a convenient baseline, seems archaic -- and while laborious, ETC could generate their own color database and throw it into some algorithm that transposes into the capabilities of both ETC fixtures and non-ETC fixtures in the Eos library -- though, to my understanding, this is effectively the purpose Carallon had served until the licensing lapsed, which ETC was apparently notified of in December 2020.

I assume because the dialogues started in 2020 and the lawsuit has only started just last month means there has probably been some negotiation in the interim that's failed. The question would be how much money Rosco is demanding -- and at what cost they are willing to develop the level of contempt many people have for Pantone in how outrageously expensive it is to use their color reference systems. But if Rosco 's gel revenue evaporates and they can only sell paint, tape, gobos, and miscellaneous other gak, they may simply not care what anyone thinks of their reputation while ETC and potentially other lighting console brands take advantage of their color reference system that they've honed in over several decades, albeit through an analog medium.

There was a similar fallout between Adobe and Pantone recently for anyone who's interested.

The over-arching existential question would be how much longer it's worth using GAM/Apollo/Rosco/Lee as reference systems in an increasingly LED world, and at what point these other vendors will raise their licensing fees as well or file similar infringement suits.

Another question is -- how much $$$ would users actually be willing to additionally spend for access to Rosco's colors? Probably doesn't seem too bad if Lee/GAM/Apollo are still available, but if all of those systems because additional upgrade fees, what's the pain threshold people have or would they just mix their own palettes for the amount of money all of those companies would demand for access to their colors?

derekleffew said:

While I thought the "Are you gel-less yet?" line of advertising was a tad bit heavy-handed, I don't think it warrants a lawsuit. Throw 'em a bone and settle for $787M.

Click to expand...

Low blow but I still laughed.

Funny.. I just recieved a tube of gels yesterday. From where I sit, It was maybe a minor convenience to get a close match of conventional and LED by picking the number off the ion color chooser, and seeing if I'm close enough, and of course the historical familiarity of .. "I've used that color for this" before. But really I could also look on screen at a list of numbers without R in front of them and get really close with a little quick trial and error. Maybe Rosco should consider that having the equivalents right on the ion might sell more gel for them vs not having it there, and maybe the other brands are right there.. hmm maybe it's time to try some GAM or Lee because I see an "exact" equivalent right there on my screen. Never underestimate greed and or stupidity.

(Edit to clarify) If I were asked to rule.. hands down Rosco is entitled to the cease order, in lieu of licensing.. but damage to Rosco is minimal to non existent, other than the loss of whatever licensing fee should maybe have been paid. But they didn't lose a cent in sales of their architectural fixtures or gel products, and may have even sold more gel since the ability to match may have slowed the pace of transition to all LED.

"No animals were harmed in the posting of this comment, but if we had we would have used Jones brand buggy whips to do so"

jtweigandt said:

Funny.. I just recieved a tube of gels yesterday. From where I sit, It was maybe a minor convenience to get a close match of conventional and LED by picking the number off the ion color chooser, and seeing if I'm close enough, and of course the historical familiarity of .. "I've used that color for this" before. But really I could also look on screen at a list of numbers without R in front of them and get really close with a little quick trial and error. Maybe Rosco should consider that having the equivalents right on the ion might sell more gel for them vs not having it there, and maybe the other brands are right there.. hmm maybe it's time to try some GAM or Lee because I see an "exact" equivalent right there on my screen. Never underestimate greed and or stupidity.

(Edit to clarify) If I were asked to rule.. hands down Rosco is entitled to the cease order, in lieu of licensing.. but damage to Rosco is minimal to non existent, other than the loss of whatever licensing fee should maybe have been paid. But they didn't lose a cent in sales of their architectural fixtures or gel products, and may have even sold more gel since the ability to match may have slowed the pace of transition to all LED.

"No animals were harmed in the posting of this comment, but if we had we would have used Jones brand buggy whips to do so"

Click to expand...

Rosco bought GAM 10 years ago. So I doubt companies will have licenses for one without the other.

I'm curious to know what the gelmaker in Indiana thinks of all this. If only we knew someone...

So colored cellophane from the florist is always an option...

MNicolai said:

Some discussion of this on CB's Discord channel earlier this week.

_snip_

Another question is -- how much $$$ would users actually be willing to additionally spend for access to Rosco's colors? Probably doesn't seem too bad if Lee/GAM/Apollo are still available, but if all of those systems because additional upgrade fees, what's the pain threshold people have or would they just mix their own palettes for the amount of money all of those companies would demand for access to their colors?

Click to expand...

The obsolescence of a medium is pretty much end of the line for whomever makes it. Look at Eastman Kodak; without the silver-based imaging business they all but evaporated and that's a big downfall from a former Dow Jones Industrial Average corporation. What I'm sure were closely held Kodak trade secrets in making these products are now available to all of us on YooToob. In one series of videos it became obvious that the key employees remaining were there mostly as a labor of love and I was left with the impression that when these folks retire, die, or move away from Rochester, the products will cease production. That there is any silver-on-acetate (or paper) business remaining is a curiosity, outside of art photography, cinematography, and archival uses.

We're already into a generation of students that may have never owned a Rosco swatch book.

The comparison to Pantone® is apt. *Someone* has to have names and specifications for specific colors of light and the gel makers have a whole lot of legacy there. How many years will it take before we stop calling colors by their "R" name? Should Rosco Labs be compensated for the creation of something that is both standards-based and a nomenclature that has fallen into "common use" but is otherwise obsolete?

Anyway, it's just a thought...

Didn't Rosco adopt Lee numbers for one of their ranges? Wonder what sort of licence fee that attracted.

Cinemoid # 8 was #108 in both Rosco and Lee.

almorton said:

Didn't Rosco adopt Lee numbers for one of their ranges? Wonder what sort of licence fee that attracted.

Click to expand...

Rosco e-colour+ uses the same numbers as Lee (and Cinemoid).

So this is kinda interesting. We recently had a local university Greek dance of thing. For their lighting colors they sent us certain times in this video....

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

.

Which kinda worked. It was weird. But it worked. You do need some way to talk about color numbers. I've always felt that the rosco book didn't have enough colors. Maybe we'll now just get to the point where we call out pantone numbers for everything and call it a day.

Footer said:

So this is kinda interesting. We recently had a local university Greek dance of thing. For their lighting colors they sent us certain times in this video....

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

.

Which kinda worked. It was weird. But it worked. You do need some way to talk about color numbers. I've always felt that the rosco book didn't have enough colors. Maybe we'll now just get to the point where we call out pantone numbers for everything and call it a day.

Click to expand...

Agree Footer about the number system is a starting reference. For us old timers. I'm certain there are countless young designers who have no idea what the Rosco and Lee numbering system in an Eos is used for.

I have about 75,000 sheets of gel in stock in my warehouse available for sale. At the same time, I've never used a gel color reference in my programming. I always mix up from RGBCMY to whatever mood I'm going for, and create palettes from there.

Gels are perfect for what they're for, color down a white source to a very specific look and mood, and being incredibly consistent (as long as your source is) over time.

Very early in my programming career I spent a lot of time being frustrated at color palettes not matching off the presets or the color picker between several different fixture types. I rapidly came to terms with that and just mixed them to be eyeball identical, or camera identical, depending on the medium.

All that old man rant aside, there must have been some pretty contentious negotiations going along for them not to be able to come to a deal outside court.

cbrandt said:

I have about 75,000 sheets of gel in stock in my warehouse available for sale. At the same time, I've never used a gel color reference in my programming. I always mix up from RGBCMY to whatever mood I'm going for, and create palettes from there.

Gels are perfect for what they're for, color down a white source to a very specific look and mood, and being incredibly consistent (as long as your source is) over time.

Very early in my programming career I spent a lot of time being frustrated at color palettes not matching off the presets or the color picker between several different fixture types. I rapidly came to terms with that and just mixed them to be eyeball identical, or camera identical, depending on the medium.

All that old man rant aside, there must have been some pretty contentious negotiations going along for them not to be able to come to a deal outside court.

Click to expand...

Follow the Benjimens

cbrandt said:

I have about 75,000 sheets of gel in stock in my warehouse available for sale. At the same time, I've never used a gel color reference in my programming. I always mix up from RGBCMY to whatever mood I'm going for, and create palettes from there.

Click to expand...

But would your process change if you were the designer, not allowed to touch the console, having a separate programmer? "Put the backlights in R80" is a lot shorter than, "Backlights, mixing color palette, blue at 100, mag at 30, no, mag at 25, blue at 75. Lime at zero." Using color names/numbers is just a shortcut, a dyeing one at that, as has been pointed out, both programmers and designers of today are growing less familiar with "gels."

derekleffew said:

... Using color names/numbers is just a shortcut, a dyeing one at that...

Click to expand...

I see what you did there....

What’s to stop someone with a lustr2 documenting the mix and creating a mix list. Weigandt07. Weigandt66. I’m da new swatch king dammit

Footer said:

Which kinda worked. It was weird. But it worked. You do need some way to talk about color numbers. I've always felt that the rosco book didn't have enough colors. Maybe we'll now just get to the point where we call out pantone numbers for everything and call it a day.

Click to expand...

Rosco, as much as I love em, had *better* lose this lawsuit: it strikes at the heart of nominative use, a fundamental principle of trademark law.

Additionally, I think they're gonna find out that R80 is *descriptive* and hence not a trademarkable item.

As for Pantone, I don't understand that they do *light*, just flat and print and ink and stuff, right?