Go Back
  • Posted by: Jerome McDonnell on Monday, September 24 2012 05:23 PM | Comments (0)

    As reported on brandchannel.com, Yahoo! recently decided to remove the trademark registration symbol [®] from its logo, discarding something that has been a part of its brand identity since 1995. Apparently a new employee was “bugged” by the symbol, so CEO Marissa Mayer allowed them to go on a spree removing the offending item from the website and company campus. Mayer even posted an image of one of the forsaken “R’s” on Instagram.

     Trademark Registration Symbol

    While use of the trademark symbol ™, (SM) or ® is not mandatory (as Mayer later tweeted, “Legal assures us that our trademark is implied and quite secure”) it does serve a purpose: not only does “marking” provide notice of ownership rights (or claim to ownership of the trademark) and help reinforce the public’s association of the mark with its owner, it also may allow the owner to assert certain types of damages in lawsuits against infringers. In the US, failure to use a registration notice [®] limits the remedies available to the owner in a lawsuit and may prevent a plaintiff from recovering damages and profits in a suit for infringement if the defendant is not shown to have actual notice of the registration.

    In this writer’s humble opinion, the ® isn’t just a symbol for Registered trademark, it’s a mark of Respect. Knowing the time, money and effort that generally goes into securing trademark registration, why shouldn’t ® be proudly proclaimed? The legal rights that are acquired through registration are significant and deserve acknowledgement, as indicated in the form of the “R” symbol. Why graduate with a Ph.D. if you’re only going to list high school on your resume?

    Rather than be seen as a hindrance to design aesthetic, the ® symbol can be regarded as a beauty mark or a badge of honor, to be displayed with pride. While typically placed to the upper or lower right of the mark, credit goes to brands that embrace the symbol in creative ways –

    • note how American Express puts it to the left of its logo:

    American Express

    • As does LEVI’S -- while also incorporating the ® as part of the overall design:

    LEVI'S

    • Broadcaster HBO at times uses the ® faintly:

    HBO

    • While the 20th Century Fox logo places it to almost 3-D effect:

    20th Century Fox

    • Meanwhile Intel (never one to shy away from trademark marking incorporated the ® symbol into the holding shape for “Intel Inside”:

    Intel Inside

    Let's acknowledge brand logos that blatantly alert consumers to the fact that they are trademarks… or trade marks, if you will:

    Metro Goldwyn Mayer:

    MGM

    Guinness:

    Guinness

    Heineken:

    Heineken

    Your trademark is your brand’s most valuable asset, and registration is earned through no small investment. It’s your property — and you should alert others to this fact. Like your favorite outfit or item of clothing, the trademark notice is not something that needs to be worn everyday — (typical guidelines recommend applying it at least once, in the first or most prominent use of the trademark) — but it sure does make you feel good when you have it on.

    One can’t help but wonder if Yahoo!’s clean-up efforts could perhaps have been put to better use, and TechCrunch, for example, speculates if the exclamation point is the next thing to go. Considering what removal of it did for Google, maybe Yahoo! was focusing on the wrong symbol all along.

    Jerome McDonnell is Group Trademark Director for Interbrand.

    Post a comment

  • Posted by: Jerome McDonnell on Friday, May 18 2012 03:30 PM | Comments (0)
    INTA 2012

    The 2012 annual meeting of the International Trademark Association (INTA) was the association’s 134th meeting. With nearly 10,000 IP professionals from across the globe, it was its largest yet.

    With recent reports on trademark “bullying,” the breakdown of SOPA/PIPA and ICANN’s gTLD expansion, the term “intellectual property” could risk negative connotations. Public hostility to IP means companies must reconsider how to enforce their marks.

    INTA President Gregg Marrazzo urged public education on IP’s value and importance. INTA launched “Unreal,” an awareness campaign targeting the next generation of consumers – teenagers – on trademark importance and harms/risks of counterfeits.

    Leonard Lauder keynoted, sharing Estee Lauder tales. Their lawyers cleared “Clinique” for use, until, one month before launch, the product “Astringent Clinique” was discovered. Handled for $100,000, the lesson was learned: “You can never be too careful.” Lauder said he loved the name “Origins” so much he bought the company (that held senior rights to the mark). “Country Mist” had to change its name to “Country Moist” in Germany because “mist” translates as “manure” there. Touching on INTA’s “Unreal,” Lauder said a trademark is a “guarantee of brand promise. Counterfeiting breaks that promise.”

    With more than 2000 applications submitted/in progress, totaling more than $350 million in application fees, it’s no surprise ICANN’s gTLD expansion was a hot topic. Marrazzo attributed “confusion and an array of potentially harmful illegal practices” to it, noting hopes that TAS will be the system’s only malfunction and not an indication of things to come.

    A concerned trademark community noted the proposed Trademark Clearing House is “far behind” in development. One speaker warned that protecting just 5 trademarks in the sunrise period for only 150 of the expected 2000 gTLD extensions could cost nearly $150,000, concluding, “it’s both not as terrible, and also much more terrible, than you think.”

    Yahoo’s J. Scott Evans advised, “Know exactly why you did, or did not apply.” With so much uncertainty regarding timing and impact, Evans contends disputes and litigation over a particular domain string or outcome of an auction are likely. If so, it could impact timing of the second round of gTLD applications – “it could be very far away.”

    Social media brings brands much closer to customers, but complicates trademark enforcement. Twitter’s global brand protection manager stressed its policy in dealing with impersonators and infringers. As Twitter, Facebook and Pinterest become key marketing tools, it’s important for brands to know when to embrace, ignore or pursue infringers/impersonators. “The reality is,” Adam Palmer of Symantec observed, “that cybercriminals move at the speed of light, but we move at the speed of law.”

    A sesison on “trademark trolls” particularly stood out. A trademark “troll” – defined as the attempted enforcement of rights by an individual who (allegedly) has no business owning them – example: word leaks of a new brand name, so someone attempts to register the domain name, buy AdWords on Google and set up a fake company using the name, all to try to assert prior rights.

    With these “quasi-rights,” the troll then makes it “easier” for the legitimate company to buy the name from them rather than go through the legal process of having it transferred or cancelled. In case this all sounds theoretical or rare – FACT: $24 million is the estimated cost to defend against notorious troll Leo Stoller’s trademark oppositions and lawsuits.

    Related: “non-traditional trolling,” when a party claims it owns the unownable, such as asserting rights in descriptive marks or phrases/cultural movements. With recent news stories of trademark “bullying,” brands’ aggressive enforcement of legitimate rights now fall in the “troll” category.

    Other takeaways:

    • Linguistic and legal differences make it important to understand the requirements for trademark use in Asia. Register a local language of your mark before a squatter gets the chance.

    • In Latin America, registration is key to enforcement. In certain jurisdictions individuals were registering the mark far ahead of a foreign brand owner. In other cases, brand owners registered the marks, but didn’t use within allotted time, allowing third parties to step in, forcing brand owners to essentially buy back that which is theirs

    • At “The Living Brand” session, P&G, Caterpillar and Fremantle Media discussed brand extension, citing Yamaha’s pianos and motorcycles , as well as Hooters’ expansion to airlines and energy-drinks. On instant brand recognition and “at least you know who you’re in bed with (your own biggest fan),” “Virgin” was held as the success to which all aspire. Risks of cannibalization, equity dilution and SKU proliferation all need to be considered too.

    As one tweet from @ipkat nicely summed it up: “Saying farewell to IP friends old and new, I realize how much I learn each year from them -- such friendship is a renewable resource.”

    Jerome McDonnell is Group Trademark Director for Interbrand.

    Post a comment

  • Posted by: Melinda Flores on Monday, April 12 2010 04:07 PM | Comments (0)

    People use Facebook to brand themselves. Through fan pages, links and photos, we show our friends who we are by showing them what we like.

    For example, I am a fan of Blue Bottle Coffee, Vitaminwater, Dove and Johnnie Walker. I am also a fan of “No, Justin Bieber, you don’t love that girl — you’re 12” and “I don’t care how comfortable they are, Crocs make you look like an idiot”.

    Thus explains Facebook’s recent (and brilliant) decision to create community pages for brands, helping make official brand pages more distinct from third-party pages and groups on the site. Now people will declare their loyalty for brands by announcing they “like” them rather than becoming a fan.

    And brands stand to benefit. A Facebook search query for Coca-Cola currently yields more than 500 fan page results such as “I love Coca-Cola,” an independent fan page that has garnered over 9,000 fans. Community pages will also help differentiate companies from the more irreverent fan pages associated with a brand (e.g., "Green M&Ms make me horny").

    Given that the average U.S. Internet user spends more time on Facebook than on Google, Yahoo, YouTube, Microsoft, Wikipedia and Amazon combined, it’s a powerful thing to shape and respond to the conversation happening around your brand.

    Facebook pages bring new levels of brand awareness, in a community setting where brands are often being endorsed by people users trust. When a person “likes” a brand on Facebook, they’re basically sending out a referral card for that brand to all their friends. If they share content posted on behalf of a brand (using Facebook’s new “via” feature), they’re telling their friends to listen to what that brand has to say.

    Facebook makes brands a part of the larger conversation, and allows users to ask brands questions as well as define their own interaction with the brand — from asking for specific content on the Facebook page to requesting new products or services. Plus Facebook pages are easy to update, appear in search engines, and accept live feeds from blogs. It’s a cheap, effective, efficient return to grassroots marketing.

    So what are the implications for the future? Many. Perhaps some brands — as a number of small businesses have already done — will forgo company websites in favor of pages on Facebook, using the new customizable “boxes” feature to add their own content and information.

    And shopping through Facebook is next. Take SocialShop, a new Facebook application from Big Commerce that allows companies to add a "shop" link to their community page. Facebook users can then browse the company's products and share those products with their friends, creating more instant referrals and more brand loyalty.

    Perhaps not the viral spread garnered by fan pages like “If 1 million people join, my girlfriend will let me turn our house into a pirate ship,” but viral spread nonetheless.

    This post is the tenth in a series called That’s Debatable: Social Media Edition – posts designed around oft-debated topics in our community, meant to spark conversation and gather different perspectives. Learn more about That’s Debatable, and take our social media survey, and join the debate on brandchannel.

    Post a comment