George Lucas Wields Light Saber 139
sarchasm writes: "Apparently George Lucas is suing
medical intsrument company Minrad for calling some of its new laser-based surgical devices Light Sabers. According to the suit: "Any deficiencies or faults in the quality of the defendant's goods are likely to reflect negatively upon, tarnish and seriously
injure the reputation which Lucasfilm has established for goods and services marketed under its Light Saber mark. This confusion is likely to result in loss of revenues to Lucasfilm and damage to its reputation."" I know that I myself have on occasion confused surgical cutting implements and little-plastic-flashlights-with-plastic-cones. If you go into surgery, and the surgeon has one of these, he's made the same mistake, and you'd better let him know!
In other news... (Score:1)
Puh, whatever...
All-Michael frontpage! (Score:1)
Re:You have no clue. (Score:1)
For example, Sun has a trademark on the Java computer language. If I made a language and called it Java, I would be infringing. If I opened a coffee shop called "The Java", that would not be an infringement.
However consider words and phrases that have no history of common use, like "Microsoft", "Compaq" or "Mickey Mouse". The first two are nonsense words, and in the US, Microsoft and Compaq can enforce their trademark in any realm. You could not sell Microsoft Beer in the US, or open a "Compaq Diner". "Mickey" and "Mouse" are both common enough words, but the combination phrase is unique enough to have general trademark protection.
In this case, I think it's pretty obvious that "Light Saber" is a Star Wars reference and violates Lucas's trademark.
Re:Solution: (Score:2)
You have no clue. (Score:4)
Minrad's trademark on Light Saber (they have a live, valid trademark too) is for "G & S: Surgical instruments, namely syringes, trokars, biopsy needles, drills and cannulas adapted to be guided by an energy beam targeting and directing system".
On the other hand, Lucas Licensing's trademark on Light Saber is for "G & S: TOY SWORD".
This is merely a free publicity grab, and it worked.
--
Re:lucas is full of shit (Score:3)
What makes this instrument a "sabre", as opposed to a knife, scalpel, sword, rapier, epee, scimitar, dagger, cutlass or stiletto? Do you really think they chose "sabre" at random from the list of dozens of synonyms? It's pretty obvious to me it was chosen because of the well known Star Wars light sabre.
Short memories - 2 years ago Lightsabers Recalled" (Score:2)
Two years ago, in this Slashdot article [slashdot.org], light sabres were being recalled because of faults, which caused minor burns and eye irritation.
Call them Beam Sabers. (Score:2)
I am Taco of Slashdot (Score:1)
Really, people: develop some consistency. As Slashdot's political leanings (leftist statist Commie pinko hypocrisy) become more evident, I find myself reading less and less. It's really sad that this forum has become the sounding board for some really misinformed politics.
Kyle
scene from the operating room (Score:1)
Re:Solution: (Score:2)
Curiousity having gotten the better of me I hopped on Google and tracked down the hero's name: David Starr, Space Ranger, known from the second book of the series on as Lucky Starr. (Corny, yes, but they were written around 1952)
Re:What ever happened to being happy? (Score:2)
Of course, software that you as much fight with as use is nothing like being *really* disabled.
Although, speaking of being disabled, who would want to be operated on by a doctor using a saber? "Doctor Guillotine, I see you've switched to a smaller, more maneuverable blade."
Re:He has no choice. (Score:2)
And wouldn't it be a tragedy, if he didn't have the exclusive rights to put these two common English words together to describe a science fiction concept that was invented years before he ever made Star Wars?
-
Re:You're wrong. Trademarks do not work like that. (Score:1)
I was following your train of thought but was disappointed when you got to the end and didn't apply your reasoning to the topic at hand. There was no conclusion.
Also, is a trademarked brand name the same as a trademarked product name? Your argument about Kodak might not apply to light sabers, since it's not a brand. Does the "reasonable person" standard apply here? Would a reasonable person think that Lucas Films had manufactured surgical equipment?
Dammit I'm getting in on this.... (Score:1)
So Timothy.... Start Coughing up dough for useage fees or change you name....
(NOTE: The above is a joke. Many people here on slashdot cant understand jokes so I have to label it as such.)
Re:it's a good thing he sued! (Score:1)
How This Post Should Really Read... (Score:1)
Re:Actually... (Score:1)
--
Re:it's a good thing he sued! (Score:2)
This would make it harder for Lucas to move toys off shelves, costing him cash. C'mon.
--
Sue the press corps! (Score:2)
And regardless of your opinion of a super-tech missile defense system, you've got to admit that it's been presented by the mainstream press exactly as I described it.
Well, now. Ain't that ironic? (Score:2)
And this is from the company that brought us Jar Jar Binks and Howard the Duck...
Re:You have no clue. (Score:2)
Re:Lawsuits (Score:2)
Re:lucas is full of shit (Score:1)
Yet another person pusaded by the dark side (Score:5)
His Lawyers: That's right *show* your anger George: oh. Ok. Luke: nooooooooooo.....
A good thing [tm] (Score:5)
Therefore I fully support all action that George takes against these people, but please George, don't get too full of yourself.
He has no choice. (Score:5)
If he doesn't defend against this, it can mean that his ENTIRE CLAIM on "light saber" is lost. Some other company can then make duplicates of the toys and call them the same thing.
The wording used "loss of revenue" and "tarnish the reputation" is standard Trademark-Suit boilerplate and comes from the legal requirements to sue over this sort of thing.
It is silly, but that is the way trademark law works.
--
Charles E. Hill
Re:It sort of makes sense (Score:2)
(Although, I think he did a pretty good job of tarnishing them himself with that last stinker...)
--
Reagan is also getting sued (Score:2)
But I do want a light-saber surgical laser. Think what you could do with those and some Lego Mindstorms!
Re:The report is utterly bogus (Score:3)
I'm unable to find any information at the Lucas Films Ltd. [lucasfilm.com] website, at the Minrad [minrad.com] website, or anywhere else..
I heard they already settled. (Score:3)
Re:All-Michael frontpage! (Score:1)
--------
Re:Famous trademarks (Score:2)
Nope, I don't think that they should have a right to sue in that case, because it's the same thing. AIM is a strong trademark, given the installed base. Does that mean AOL should have the right to sue the Aim Recording Company, or Automated Information Management, or American Image Marketing? No. The AIM trademark, just like the LEGO trademark and the "light saber" trademark, is for a specific category. It prevents Apple Computer from harassing every orchard owner in the US (apart from basic common sense, which we all know is severely lacking in most of corporate America).
Oh, and by the way, Lego Irrigation is the name of a company that makes irrigation systems valves and nozzles and such. For one example.
-Todd
---
The court should throw this out (Score:5)
Minrad has one trademark application for the term "light saber", filed in April of 2000. It's categorized under medical equipment. Not anything remotely connected to toys.
This is why the trademark system has categories, and why two people can own the same trademark in different categories. Yeah, Lucas made the term popular. But unless some other toymaker uses the term, he shouldn't have a leg to stand on in a trademark dispute.
-Todd
---
Re:Get a closer look (Score:1)
Tarnish WHO'S Reputation? (Score:1)
You know this aint so bad really. (Score:1)
The name Lightsaber is not public domain, and Lucas does have a point. If this product is a colossal failure and starts cutting off arms and legs by mistake, it could cause his franchise to falter. Oh wait Episode I already did that.
Runestar
Re:Isn't that a stupid name for a medial instrumen (Score:1)
Imagine you're about to go in for major surgery and someone tells you the doctor's going to be using something called a light-saber.
That doesn't scare me. What would scare me is if he put on a helmet with a face shield before he started cutting me...
-J
Re:He has no choice. (Score:5)
But that doesn't mean he has to sue. He only needs to react. And a perfectly valid reaction would be to grant the light-saber wielding doctors a license to use the term. And no, this won't force him to grant a license to everybody else too; he still keeps the right to consider each infringment individually.
The only thing he cannot do is silently ignore the case. Btw, the purpose of this regulation about "having to react" is actually to protect the "infringer" rather than the trademark owner: it avoids situations like we hav with patents (.gif, etc.), where the owner may wait until the infringer has built a sufficiently large business around the trademark, and then force a costly change of name.
Re:We live in a tremendously litigious society... (Score:2)
Reminds me of the '77 Denver Broncos, famous for their "Orange Crush" defense. The soft drink became an unofficial mascot for the team, and fans bought a ton of it... people drank more crush at games than beer. That was, until PepsiCo sued the team for trademark defamation. Idiots.
Redundant, but important. (Score:2)
Re:Solution: (Score:2)
Re:Sue the press corps! (Score:1)
Furthermore as others have pointed out, if he doesn't want to lose the copyright he has to defend it, it's not a matter of being a good or bad person.
You're wrong. Trademarks do not work like that. (Score:1)
Class designation has essentially nothing to do with a trademark being applicable in more than one field. Trademarks have relative strength. This strength comes from the nature of the mark (arbitrary collections of letters that aren't "real" words like "Kodak" or "Exxon" or "Flikead" are stronger than real words like "Apple") and the distinctiveness of the mark (the better known the mark is, the stronger it is). The stronger the mark, the more of the world is commanded.
A strong enough mark captures the entire world. The top example of this is "Kodak" it is an arbitrary mark that has an incredible amount of distincitiveness. Everyone in the world knows their products. The key test is "Liklihood of confusion." If I saw a Kodak-brand hammer, I would probably conclude that Kodak was launching a line of tools for whatever reason. But what if they didn't? Do you really think you could sell a Kodak-brand hammer (Class 8: Hand Tools) simply because the Eastman Kodak Company doesn't sell hand tools? I doubt you're looking for that much trouble. If you did, they would crush you. They would win. And they would be right. Why should you ride the coattails of a brand they've spent billions to build
As for the Linux detergent, Linux is know to perhaps millions of people. In my opinion it is a distinctive mark. However, I know it as the kernel of an operating system. I doubt I'd confuse it with soap. However, Linux is a very distinctive word (at least in English) so an interference action might well have succeeded. Don't know. Perhaps Linus isn't protecting the mark? I hope that's not true because if he doesn't he might lose the rights to it.
Re:You're wrong. Trademarks do not work like that. (Score:1)
Sorry about that. I was in rant mode and forgot. But my primary point was about TM law, not the facts of this case.
Also, is a trademarked brand name the same as a trademarked product name? Your argument about Kodak might not apply to light sabers, since it's not a brand. Does the "reasonable person" standard apply here? Would a reasonable person think that Lucas Films had manufactured surgical equipment?
I'm not sure I follow what you mean by brand / product names. Let's see if this clears it up: In trademarks, "brand" is not synonymous with "manufacturer." Sticking with the Eastman Kodak Company, "Kodak" is a trademark that is synonymous with the manufacturer. Another of Eastman Kodak's trademarks is "Advantix." Advantix is not a product. It is a brand name used for Kodak's APS photography products. It is used on both film and cameras. An actual roll of APS film would have both Kodak and Advantix trademarks on it. But the underlying product is film. "Film" can not be trademarked as a name for film.
As applied to the light saber thing, Lucasfilm is the company, "light saber" is the brand, and "toy" is the product. Note, there could obviously be more than one product called "light sabre" so the question is: Is "light saber" a strong mark or a weak one?
"Light" and "saber" are real words. The phrase "light saber" is very suggestive of the idea. That's bad for Lucas. However, they've spent millions promoting the whole Star Wars / Jedi / light saber thing. That tends to make the mark stronger.
Personally, I think "light saber" is distinctive in that when I hear it, I think Star Wars. However, I don't think it is so distinctive as to preclude the use in other ways. The "likelihood" of confusion test seems a bit of a stretch for Lucas. As you imply, who would think that Lucasfilm was manufacturing surgical equipment?
OTOH, imagine that the name had been given to surgical equipment that consisted of advanced VR imaging hardware. That starts to sound like a special effect and not so much of a stretch. Could be an ILM product.
I think Lucasfilm may have over-reacted (which they are famous for) but I think the medical equipment people should have asked. They probably thought of it as a tribute of some kind but that isn't always taken that way. (Remember Apple's "Sagan" / "BHA" code names?) Do I think they'll win? Don't know. They have a lot of lawyers though who are zealous in protecting their billion dollar empire.
well... (Score:1)
-Legion
Why not call them (Score:2)
Laser scalpels? Hells, I'd buy them if you called them laser scalpels... how many SF universes have "laser scalpels?"
Star Trek does, right? Or am I delusional (it's been too long since voyager ended, sniff)?
-jPS. I have often envisioned a laser-based facial razor, with a low-power scanning beam to detect your facial topography and a higher-powered beam to slice off the hair. I know that's totally impossible, but the name "Laser Razor" would be so much fun to market....
Re:Why not call them (Score:2)
Heh. Yeah. Voyager had its low points. I was actually expressing woe at a general lack of Star Trek.
-jRe:F-150 (Score:1)
Ford Fiesta (car)
Fiesta Ferrero (chocolate cake)
Re:Isn't that a stupid name for a medial instrumen (Score:3)
joke all you want... (Score:1)
This could keep George busy (Score:2)
Re:Old news (Score:1)
The only "intuitive" interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned.
Re:We live in a tremendously litigious society... (Score:2)
Re:He has no choice. (Score:1)
More race stuff in one place,
Re:What ever happened to being happy? (Score:1)
The whole point to marketing is that you get something burned into someones brain. Once it is there you have them.
When you heard Light Saber before today the first thing that entered your mind was a Star Wars Light Sabre most likely.
In the marketing world, and we know what good marketing can do *cough MS* *cough MS*, you live and die by your brand recognition.
A lot of
I definitely think that all the money Lucas spent building up Star Wars and Light Sabre represent a lot of marketing and money. He gained the brand recognition. He deserves a legal way to defend all of the investment in mindshare. A lot of that mindshare was won through really good filmmaking and memorable marketing. Does he not deserve to defend that?
I see a lot of facetious jokes about "I hope a surgeon doesnt mix up his Light Sabres". That is plainly an asanine and not very well thought joke to make.
It is all about dilution of the trademark and not getting any negative press and thus actually damaging the trademark and investment!
Jeremy
Re:Lucas needs to protect it now (Score:1)
Jeremy
Famous trademarks (Score:1)
Lucas has 1 trademark for the term "light saber", number 1126220. It's stated very carefully that it is a toy sword, and it is categorized under toys and recreation ... Minrad has one trademark application for the term "light saber", filed in April of 2000. It's categorized under medical equipment. Not anything remotely connected to toys.
It's true that trademarks usually are restricted to one domain of goods and services, but sufficiently strong trademarks can gain protection across trademark domains. For example, if a surgical tools company called its new tool "LEGO", don't you think the LEGO Group [lego.com] would have a right to sue?
The question here is whether LIGHT SABER® is strong enough and famous enough to cross domains.
DISCLAIMER: Most of the "armchair lawyers" on Slashdot are full of sh*t, myself included.Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995 (Score:2)
Nope, I don't think that they should have a right to sue in that case, because it's the same thing. AIM is a strong trademark, given the installed base. Does that mean AOL should have the right to sue the Aim Recording Company
No. AIM isn't that strong. Such strengths are generally reserved for trademarks such as AMERICA ONLINE®, WARNER BROS.®, NINTENDO®, POKEMON®, MICROSOFT®, DISNEY®, STAR WARS®, and other marks along those lines where use of a trademark by a company in a related field would be considered endorsement of the new business by the existing TM owner. For example, Israel's Supreme Court overturned a registration for "BAKARDI" brand jeans [ladas.com] because it was too similar to BACARDI® brand liquor. The Republic of China, based on the island Taiwan, also has a law about famous trademarks [commitment.com.tw]. And here's some information about the Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995 [mycounsel.com], which sets guidelines for protection of famous trademarks in the U.S.
But remember Tetrisgate [slashdot.org]? The Tetris Company [tetris.com] was found not to have a copyright or patent on the game of falling tetraminoes but merely a trademark on TETRIS® [everything2.com]; the cloners simply changed the names of their games [misunderestimated.net], all of which had been clean-room from the start. Nevertheless, the findings didn't stop a quality control consulting firm based out of Edmonton, Alberta, from calling itself Tetris Management Group [eon.net]. Guess the TETRIS trademark isn't that strong in Canada.
Government-granted monopolies[?] [everything2.com] are easiest to deal with when problems are solved before they escalate; that's why trademark law (unlike US copyright and patent law) requires TM owners to react in a speedy manner, that is, either license or sue would-be infringers.
Oh, and by the way, according to Lego^H^H^H^H Elgo Irrigation [lego-elgo.co.il]'s web site, there was a recent name change.
Trademarking the obvious? (Score:2)
How much innovation went into the creating the term "light saber"? About as much as "cornflake" I'd say, which thankfully has been dismissed as a trademark (though perhaps not for the right reasons
Next Microsoft will be claiming that "innovation" is their trademark...
Re:It sort of makes sense (Score:1)
Hey I just thought of something... (Score:2)
Just a thought...
Blah (Score:1)
Now I know why I had Michael's news posts filtered out. DOH! Time to recheck that checkbox.
Re:He has no choice. (Score:1)
Re:Just switch the name to (Score:1)
I'm sure you would be sued out of existence if you founded a company named "Microslot" and started producing operating systems named "Microslot Wildows".
Remember, it's not about the name being exactly the same, it's about being confusingly similar.
Re:He has no choice. (Score:5)
Yes, but also unlike copyrights, trademarks are only valid in one field. For example, take the case of the trademark [uspto.gov] on Linux (TM) laundry detergent [slashdot.org]. The different classes for which trademarks are defined [uspto.gov] are on the USPTO's web site [uspto.gov].
--
Does this mean window companies can sue Microsoft? (Score:2)
Re:Get a closer look (Score:1)
Re:Old news (Score:1)
Edward Burr
Old news (Score:3)
2001-07-27 00:53:54 Star Wars vs. a medical tool (science,patents) (rejected)
Edward Burr
And if it works well? (Score:1)
If it doesn't work worth a darn, people already know the name lightsaber from Star Wars and know what one is. The doctors will figure out it's a piece of crap faster than the marketing will and if it doesn't work, it'll die quietly. If it does work, though, it's not going to damage anything name-wise, but will equate light sabers with life saving devices.
DanH
Cav Pilot's Reference Page [cavalrypilot.com]
Re:He has no choice. (Score:1)
--
Just curious (Score:3)
--
Re:Why not call them (Score:2)
Re:It sort of makes sense (Score:2)
Ahh. Pinheads with an IQ hovering near room temperature would indeed have trouble distinguishing the two. That's why all of us must give up our rights to freely use these important terms in ways other than their creators (or at least first-to-the-trademark-office-holders) intend, because we might distress and mislead the imbeciles of the world. And who knows what might happen to the U.S. economy if George Lucas couldn't sell another fucking movie ticket!!!!
trademark (Score:1)
On the other hand, borrowing a well established name to flog your stuff is as unimaginative as it is cheap-ass. They deserve what they get.
Please...step away...from the Light Sabre... (Score:1)
...darn, there goes my story... (Score:2)
Re:He has no choice. (Score:1)
In the business of laser surgery, I would imagine that it is important to create an atmosphere of comfort for the patient and a familiar term would do that. If not for Star Wars' popularity, I don't believe the name would have been applied. I wonder if the same company would name their steel scaple line after famous swords. "Doctor, would you like the Scimitar?" "No, nurse, I'll think I'll use the Rapier on this uterous."
But Lucas may not be unfounded in his worry about protecting his trademark. What if another manufacturer uses the term Light Saber on a product that is not as distant from his own product line as medical equipment. The more products that are allowed to exist commercially with the name "Light Saber," the more difficulty Lucas will have in defending against those who would capitalize on his good will. He may one day have to market "Light Saber brand light sabers" like a popular band aid.
it's a good thing he sued! (Score:3)
er, wait a second..
Can we get a price list? (Score:2)
Services? Exactly what light saber services is Lucasfilm marketing?
I smell an innovative business model.
-
Re:It sort of makes sense (Score:2)
Well it's more than just that. As someone else pointed out if Lucas did _not_ defend the trademark than that would give _anyone_ the legal right to abuse it.
Trademark law (as I understand it) says that you have to defend it yourself and you can't pick and choose if and when you defend it.
So if Lucas did not defend it this time then the next time if Lucas decided to defend it he would have a very poor case because he let this one slide.
--
Garett
F-150 (Score:5)
Apologies to the [majority of?] Ford F-150 buyers who DID buy an F-150 as a penis prostheic.
Isn't that a stupid name for a medial instrument? (Score:3)
If these things take off, maybe they should make a new rule that you're not a true surgeon until you've constructed your own lightsaber.
Highest percentage of lawyers (Score:2)
Of all the countries in the world, the U.S. has the highest percentage of lawyers.
We live in a tremendously litigious society... (Score:4)
Unbelievable. You'd think Lucasfilm would be honored that the words 'Light Saber' have infultrated so deeply into pop culture that a manufacturer of a completely serious preoduct would choose to refer to their product line using the mane of a ficticious weapon that appeared in several movies 30 years ago (and one more recently, but that interupts the flow of my rant on this subject).
Pathetic. I'm vary disappointed in LucasFilm for pursuing this issue at all. From a purely financial perspective, LucasFilm's Light Sabers are marketed to an entirely different demographic who would most likely be unaware of the existance of the medical instruments of the same name. LikewiseThe medical instrument manufacturer is is no way attempting to steal customers from LucasFilm by using the name, and if they were, I'd be truly frightened. I can see it now
Billy: I just got a Light Saber. It makes these neat noises and lights up, and only takes two AA batteries.
Joey: My daddy bought me a light saber too but mine has to be plugged into the wall bacause it's more powerful. It can cut through bone like butter. Wanna see?
Truly Frightning.
--CTH
Re:Actually... (Score:3)
Matters size so much? So sure are you, mmm?
Who's suprised ? (Score:2)
while (!tripple_multi_biljoneer) {
recount();
whine();
sue();
if (lost_court_proceeding)
lock(trademark, long_time);
}
Re: (Score:2)
typical in the trademark business... (Score:2)
I would suspect the boys at Lucas Arts troll all kinds of media looking for suspect violations, or in their case, future customers.
What ever happened to being happy? (Score:3)
Does Lucas want to the name just in case they really make a light saber?
Re:The report is utterly bogus (Score:2)
The report quoted states that Minrad applied for the trademark. Another slashdotter checked the PTO site to find the Minrad application and the Lucas trademark grants.
But no, the sensationalist coverage in Yahoo has to be definitive, even though as you yourself quote it as saying:
when it asked permission from the government to call its new group of tools Light Sabers
This is the US, not the USSR, you don't ask permission from the government to name your product, you ask permission to stop other people using your name
Do you really think the court records of a district court are bogus? I don't believe you
You gibber on about checking facts and then on the basis of an idiot reporting in Yahoo claim that your equally dim witted opinion is backed by court records you have not read. You are not by any chance a relative of Jeffrey Archer? Somehow you don't seem to be practising what you preach.
The report is utterly bogus (Score:5)
So all the weenies who are gibbering on about how evil Lucas is for defending his trademark have to ask why Minrad should have exclusive trademark rights to the name 'Light Sabre'.
The trademark categories are not definitive, an application in one category does not foreclose a dilution claim in another category. In this case I think Lucas's lawyers have very good case. Minrad want to trade on the name recognition that Lucas has created. If they want to do that presumably the greedy bastard lawyers at Lucas will be happy to license the light sabre trademark to the greedy bastards running Minrad.
Lucas is almost certainly not directing this as a personal vendetta. His trademark lawyers are simply doing their job.
Showing now, at a operating theatre near you (Score:2)
The scene: A surgeon, having being hastly called to the operaing theatre finds before him a hulking great mass.
The surgeon prepares himself for action; he is about to open the patient's guts. Cowled, hooded and cloaked, he looks a strange sight. Slowly but surely though, he activates his lightsaber and makes a long incision along the length of abdomen.
The stench of the the air released by the innards once exposed to the air is nauseating. The surgeon staggers visiblyh, unprepared for such a olefactory assault.
Surgeon: And I thought they smelled bad on the outside.
(Apologies to George Lucas, Harrison Ford and Star Wars fans everywhere. No tauntons were harmed in the narration of this story.)
Actually... (Score:3)
Full report here (plaintext link for the goat paranoid):
http://cgi.theforce.net/theforce/tfn.cgi?storyI
Heh, I'd love to have seen this...especially since Lucas has got to be pushing 300lbs these days.
Should Sue Himself (Score:5)
George Lucas gets away with another one on /. (Score:2)
Oh, by the way, George Lucas is a total asshole. Sorry to let you guys know. Although, I'm sure Slashdot will be one of the first to tell the coming of Star Wars II.
Pop under? (Score:2)
It sort of makes sense (Score:4)
USA Intellectual Property Laws: 5 monkeys, 1 hour.
Help me remember the earlier light saber? (Score:3)
Weren't there a few cheesy science-fiction movies that pre-dated Star Wars that used light sabers? I can't quite recall which, but I recall light saber duels where they were more pencil thin... something along the lines of Stella Star Crash [globalserve.net]?
I believe Star Wars [imdb.com] was 1977 and Star Crash [imdb.com] was 1979, but I have a nagging memory I can't bring out into the open about one or more films predating Star Wars that used light sabers. (Parenthetically, I wonder when the script/story Copyright dates on both were, and if Star Crash had a light saber in the initial story or was it total rip off of Star Wars [which would make sense if you saw Star Crash]).
Can anyone old enough to qualify as Bantha fodder refresh my memory? Thanks.
p.s. I miss those Ray Harryhausen [imdb.com] movies I saw when I was growing up. You were probably looking at Caroline Munro [imdb.com] and forgot the rest of the movie.