A Guide to Trademarking Words and Phrases

Is it not the ultimate in the ridiculousness™ of capitalism to think that you can actually “own” a word or phrase? Former overrated basketball coach Phil Jackson is said to have registered the word “threepeat” before Michael Jordan and those other guys wearing red shorts in Chicago won their third straight NBA championship. Therefore, every time you saw a T-shirt with the word “threepeat” on it, you were seeing a little bit of Phil Jackson’s money. Now, I know for a fact™ that I heard the word threepeat long before I ever heard of Phil Jackson, so can someone please tell me how this man can own that word? It all comes down to the unfair system of trademarking in America where no matter how creative you may be (as far as I can tell I was the first person to ever refer to Donald Rumsfeld in print as Donald Rumsfailed™, though I could be mistaken™; one thing I know for sure is I came up with the name on my own) if you don’t have a pretty hefty wallet you can’t register a trademark yourself. To be eligible for trademark registration, the word or phrase has to qualify as having a distinct characteristic. Sorry, but I fail to see how threepeat is distinctive.™ What qualifies as a distinctive characteristic for a trademark. Glad you asked. Join me, won’t we.™

Distinction can be manifested through whimsy or, to put it more aptly, meaningless. A good example is Xerox, which is sheer whimsy and was utterly lacking in meaning before it became synonymous with making a copy. This is the kind of trademarkable invented word known technically as a neologism.™ If the word can’t be located in any primary dictionary, then it can be up for grabs for trademarking, though the lack of a prior definition is no guarantee.

You may be aware that the estate of the Beatles and Apple Computer were for a long time engaged in a trademark infringement case. This one takes the cake for stupidity.™ After all, how is possible in anyone but a lawyer’s mind that you could own the rights to a word commonly used a billion times a day? An apple has been around since, well, creation, right? (According to some.)™ The battle between the Beatles and Apple Computer is a case study in how you can trademark a word that has no meaning within the context to which it will be applied. For instance, let’s say you wanted to start a business that sold shoes and you named it Sundial Shoes.™ Well, a sundial is completely devoid of contextual meaning when applied to shoes. On other hand, if you wanted to trademark Sundial Clocks™ you could potentially run into problems. A similar distinction can be made by using trademarking a word that merely suggests the nature of a business. For instance, Soulless Connections™ could probably receive the okay for a business that repaired shoes because the customer could easily apprehend the connection between the name and the business. It requires just enough of a leap of imagination to transform from customers to imbue it with the distinct quality necessary for trademarking,

Other than those, you are pretty much locked out of trademarking. Unless, of course, you’re Phil Jackson or Paris Hilton.™