stands

What a surprise. David Ellison has decided to name the Frankenstudio media company created by the merger of Paramount Skydance and Warner Bros. Discovery simply Skydance.

And why not? “Massive Debt Funding Media” doesn’t really roll off the tongue (though “Ultra Leveraged” has a nice ring); “Ellison and Dad” is a bit too on the nose; and “Skydance” is, after all, the name he chose for the one company out of those four that he built rather than bought.

Skydance is a poetic term with some definite “Star Wars” overtones and perhaps unintentional symbolism. Before the aviation-loving Ellison claimed it, “sky dance” referred to the aerial mating of certain birds, most famously the American woodcock, also known as the timberdoodle or (I’m not making this up) the bogsucker.

(“Timberdoodle Media,” now that’s a splendid name, and “Bogsucker Productions” could work as well.)

In his attempts to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery, Ellison has certainly engaged in some high-flying … well, courtship might not be the right term for the dizzying mix of cajoling and threats he has employed to get the deal done, and it certainly does not seem fair to the American woodcock. I’m no expert, but I don’t think their mating rituals involve using the New York Times to plead their case or, when that doesn’t work, threatening to move en masse to Tennessee.

For those inexplicably hoping for ParaBros, Skydance seems a bit of a letdown, especially considering all the trouble Ellison went to. It’s been quite a show, the various razzle-dazzle versus strong arm tactics (not to mention the Middle Eastern money) he mobilized to turn two of Hollywood’s preeminent founding studios into ingredients in sub-brand stew that also includes CNN, HBO Max, CBS, DC Comics, Nickelodeon, MTV and Food Network.

Overseeing such a diverse mix is obviously too big a job for one person so Ellison added yet another flavor by drafting Ynon Kreiz as co-chief executive. Kreiz was previously chairman and chief executive of Mattel, where he facilitated the toy company’s big Hollywood push with “Barbie,” “Masters of the Universe” and the upcoming Hot Wheels movie. (Polly Pocket, now in development at Reese Witherspoon’s Sunshine Productions, should be preparing for her close-up.)

By sticking with Skydance, Ellison is not just making a large swath of Hollywood indisputably his own, he’s showing remarkable confidence in a name that first came to many people’s attention in 2019 when he hired John Lasseter.

Six months after Walt Disney Co. ended its relationship with the then-chief creative officer of Pixar and Disney Animation Studios following an investigation into multiple accusations of sexual harassment and workplace misconduct, Ellison hired him to oversee Skydance Animation.

Unsurprisingly, this led to all manner of protest, within and outside the company. When Emma Thompson learned of Lasseter joining Skydance, she withdrew from its highly anticipated upcoming animated film “Luck.” In a stinging letter she sent to the company at the time (and allowed The Times to make public), she wrote: “It feels very odd to me that you and your company would consider hiring someone with Mr. Lasseter’s pattern of misconduct given the present climate in which people with the kind of power that you have can reasonably be expected to step up to the plate.”

Lasseter was not Skydance’s only controversial hire. After merging with Paramount, the company made deals with or hired multiple men, including Brett Ratner, Max Landis and Jeff Shell, who had been accused of sexual harassment and/or misconduct.

Shell was made president of Paramount less than three years after losing his job as NBCUniversal chief executive following the disclosure of an “inappropriate relationship” with an NBC employee. He stepped down from Paramount in April after a monthslong legal battle with a Las Vegas gambler and self-described “fixer” who claimed that Shell had reneged on a deal to develop a series in exchange for free crisis control.

Now, of course, all of that is ancient history. Now Paramount is merely a sub-brand and Hollywood is less concerned with who Skydance hired as it is with who, and how many, Skydance will fire.

Also how exactly the CNN/CBS oversight committee Ellison agreed to create as part of the settlement with 12 states is going to work. And what will happen if Skydance does not release 30 new films each year, which Ellison has promised to do as part of the settlement deal. And how expensive the new Skydance streaming bundles are going to be. And if, perhaps, in some language Skydance translates to “the end of the entertainment industry as we know it.”

Most important, is it too late for the American woodcock to sue?

In one corner is bnb-side, a six-room bed and breakfast on the Isle of Portland – a tiny wedge of limestone tied by a narrow ribbon of shingle to the Dorset coast – that was created to help secure the future of the rock’s much-loved arts festival, b-side.

On the other is Airbnb, the San Francisco-based booking colossus. The battle between them is over the three little letters they share.

b-side says the “bnb” in bnb-side means what it has always meant: bed and breakfast. But lawyers for the Silicon Valley titan say the name of the guesthouse, perched on an outcrop just 4 miles long by 1.5 miles wide, threatens the global brand of the $100bn heavyweight.

“We thought the name was both really obvious and really cool,” said Rocca Holly-Nambi, director of b-side. “b-side was founded almost 20 years ago, so when we set up our BnB in 2024 to raise money for the festival, we just popped the ‘bn’ in front because it’s a universally recognised description of what we’re offering.”

Airbnb doesn’t agree. In May, it sent the first of three legal letters to the tiny social enterprise to demand it cease its attempt to register the B&B using the name it had used since it opened its doors.

“They won’t let us compromise by using a different case, an ampersand or an ‘and’,” said Holly-Nambi. “According to Airbnb, we can’t describe our BnB as a BnB at all.”

For bnb-side, losing the argument could mean more than abandoning a clever name. It would mean replacing signage and rewriting websites, social media and all other material referencing and advertising the B&B.

“That’s not just a huge waste of money – of which we don’t have much – and of the equally valuable time of our volunteers, but it would throw b-side’s core income stream into chaos,” said Holly-Nambi. “We’d have to painstakingly build our reputation and brand back up from scratch all over again.”

Raina Summerson, chair of b-side, is fuming and incredulous. “We opened bnb-side because we were completely dependent on public funding and wanted to be more financially secure,” she said. “bnb-side now generates almost half the festival’s annual £250,000 turnover. If it loses its name, we risk having to establish it all over again.”

Airbnb has opposed the name on three separate legal grounds: that consumers will confuse the two brands, that bnb-side could benefit from or damage Airbnb’s reputation, and that bnb-side will financially profit by misrepresenting itself as an official Airbnb service.

b-side is asking the Intellectual Property Office to reject Airbnb’s opposition in full, with costs awarded in their favour. The case is still under way, with no ruling having yet been made.

Airbnb’s claim has hit a nerve on the proud, windswept outcrop. Cat Wightman, manager of bnb-side, said: “It’s pretty bitter. We’ve watched other small, local hospitality businesses go under, and local people unable to afford homes here, who have been negatively affected by the force with which the Airbnb market has conquered Portland. One person owns eight properties on the island, all of which are rented out on Airbnb.”

b-side obtained pro bono advice and is working with the law firm Stevens Hewlett & Perkins to defend them, but the process is still intimidating. “It’s terrifying but we’re not going to back down,” said Holly-Nambi. “We do things differently here in Portland.”

Craig Beaumont, a trademark attorney and senior associate at Barker Brettell, a law firm that specialises in intellectual property, said that for all Airbnb’s might, this would not be an easy or straightforward win for them.

“This feels like an uphill battle they’re embarking on,” he said. “BnB has long been widely understood as shorthand for a descriptive phrase, and descriptive phrases are available for the public to use.”

bnb-side are not the only company who agree with Beaumont: Companies House records show that in the past decade 14 accommodation companies with “bnb” in their name successfully registered their businesses.

Darren Meale, a partner and trademark litigation specialist at Simmons & Simmons, said it was no surprise the term was used so often. “It’s quite punchy of Airbnb to say they’re so well-known that they can monopolise a term that they only incorporated into their name in the first place because it was a descriptive one that everyone immediately understood, and then say that someone else using the term is going to confuse customers and damage them.”

Lee Curtis, a partner and chartered trademark attorney at IP law firm HGF, agreed that Airbnb “may be testing the limits” of the law. But he pointed to another risk for the lodging colossus.

“There’s a public relations angle to take into account,” he said. “Some companies may welcome getting a reputation for aggressive enforcement but that can backfire when the target is a community organisation, like this one.”

Airbnb has been approached for comment.