One of the founders of Burning Man has disturbed the harmony of the annual self-expression extravaganza, claiming in a trademark infringement suit that his ex-partners have cheated him out of his share of licensing revenues.

John Law helped transform the annual bonfire gatherings on a San Francisco beach into the multimillion dollar behemoth that Burning Man is today. More than 39,000 people paid at least $250 for admission to the 2006 Burning Man in Nevada's remote Black Rock desert.

But the suit filed Jan. 9 in San Francisco federal court alleges Law has not gotten his just rewards as co-founders Larry Harvey and Michael Mikel have taken control of the revenue stream from the licensing of the Burning Man trademark.

“Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that within the last year, Harvey announced that he ... always believed the [mark] was his alone,” the complaint says.

Law claims the trademark rights actually belong to Paper Man, a company he formed with Harvey and Mikel in 1997 as part of an agreement dissolving their partnership. Paper Man, he says, is supposed to license the rights every year to Black Rock City, the entity which operates the Burning Man festival.

But Harvey and Mikel are also Black Rock City board members and, according to Law, have paid him nothing from license fee revenues. “Harvey's and Mikel's positions with BRC and the Burning Man event created interests in Harvey and Mikel that conflicted with their interests in [Paper Man],” he argues.

No doubt mindful of Burning Man's noncommercial ideals, Law has cast the suit in an altruistic light. The trademark, he suggests on a blog, should be released into the public domain “where ANYONE can then BE Burning Man.”

“If it’s a real social movement with 'legs' and a destiny greater than being simply an awesome tailgate party then those who really are part of it and support it will never mistake the event, and their involvement in it, with 'Burning Man condoms' or 'Burning Man antacid tablets,'” he adds.

Black Rock City doesn't sound too keen on that idea. "Making Burning Man freely available to individuals who would only use it to make money would go against everything all of us have worked for over the years," spokeswoman Marian Goodell said in a statement. "We will not let that happen."

The complaint, moreover, requests a series of financial remedies, among them that Law should be paid his share “of the fair market licensing fees ... for all past uncompensated and under-compensated uses” of the Burning Man mark, trade dress and logo.

That share could total in the millions of dollars -– the fair market value of a license for the 2006 Burning Man, Law estimates, could be as high as $1 million. With those kinds of numbers, Law's lawsuit may ultimately be more about money than the “destiny” of Burning Man.

By Matthew Heller
1/12/07