I’ve been getting questions about the Friendly case since the story I wrote appeared in the Homesteader, including one from an interested reader at this site.
“How can this so-called Friendly group have the rights to a book title? Did Laura’s daughter sign them over or what?” — Janine Johnson, Orlando, Fla.
This is actually a fundamental part of the argument between Friendly productions and the Little House site in Independence, Kansas, both of whom claim to own the rights to the phrase “Little House on the Prairie” for merchandising purchases. According to the court filing:
* Roger Lea MacBride, heir to the Wilder-Lane estate, allegedly sold the rights to the book “Little House on the Prairie” to Ed Friendly Productions (the predecessor to the current Friendly Family Productions LLC) in 1974. Friendly bought the rights to “exploit” the book “on television, in motion pictures and in theme parks.”
* Under that the title “Little House on the Prairie,” Friendly sold a variety of products tied into its original series, making that title–referred to as the “mark”–”an extremely valuable asset” that Friendly was poised to exploit, again, in connection with the stage musical. (The term “exploit” is used in the court filing, and should not be construed as negative.)
* The non-profit organization “Little House on the Prairie,” which runs a museum on the site of the Ingalls home in Independence, Kansas, acquired the rights to the domain name “littlehouseontheprairie.com” in 2001, and began to offer sales of LHOP merchandise online. Up until this time, court documents say, their sales were local. It’s at this point that Friendly says LHOP began infringing on their rights.
* LHOP, the site, registered the trademark “Little House on the Prairie” in 2005.
So, the question is, who actually holds the trademark and has the right to exploit the title “Little House on the Prairie”? Friendly thought it worth suing to find out. As the case makes its way through the system, we’ll keep you posted.
In 1974, Roger Lea MacBride did not sell the book rights to Ed Friendly. He only sold (or actually gave) the rights to that “name or title” for the television show and the merchandising, etc., but not the publishing rights. And he only did this because turning over such rights to Ed was the only way he could make money from the show. Ed agreed to make Roger a partner, so both benefited from the show and the merchandising. I think if Roger were still here today, he’d step up and work out a deal that the historic site could use the name, but perhaps change it to add something to clarify that it is the site. And look at who is doing this, anyway. It’s not Roger or Ed, who are both dead now…it’s the “money hungry” kids!
What does it hurt? Why does he even care?
He needs to go do something with Little House to make his own money. Don’t they have enough money as it is? Why does he need the historic site’s money? Little House on the Prairie, the historic site, has done nothing wrong. And if I were them, I would continue to call their site whatever they want. Sell any products they wish using that name. That represents Laura and her family, not Ed Friendly and his. Laura would turn in her grave if she only knew the mess people could be today.
By the way…Happy Birthday to Gillette Lane today! And, it would have been Rose and Gillette’s wedding anniversary, too — if they hadn’t divorced!
Hey John,
Great to see you in print. Hope you are well.