Patriots Still Want 19-0 Trademark; So They Can Pretend They Had A Perfect Season

from the someone-sack-the-lawyer dept

Wed, Apr 23rd 2008 7:55am — Mike Masnick

Right before the Super Bowl this year, we noted that the New England Patriots had filed for a trademark on "19 - 0" to be used in merchandise commemorating what the team believed would be the culmination of an undefeated season. This, by itself, was rather ridiculous, as the idea that one team could trademark its won-loss record seems totally unacceptable. It also showed off a bit of hubris, which got knocked back down to earth by Eli Manning and the NY Giants in an unexpected upset of the Patriots in the Super Bowl. However, it appears that the Patriots are still pursuing the trademark despite its final record of 18-1. The Smoking Gun noticed that a lawyer for the team recently updated the trademark application, fixing a typo (changing "toy bans" to "toy banks") which suggests that the team still wants the trademark, despite not having actually won the Super Bowl and not actually having a 19-0 record. Perhaps the team figures that it talked about it enough that people will actually think it was undefeated, allowing the Patriots to cash in on the term. Or maybe the team figures that if it can't own a 19-0 record, no one should be able to. Either way, when the story first broke, the NY Post had jokingly applied for a trademark on 18-1. If the Patriots really do continue to pursue this 19-0 trademark, then hopefully the Post will continue to pursue its trademark as well.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: football, new england patriots, trademark

45 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

MIchael, 23 Apr 2008 @ 8:26am

More likely: the lawyer is just doing this on his own because his billable hours are a little low this month.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dave's Football Blog, 23 Apr 2008 @ 8:35am

Pat Riley
Maybe they got the idea from Pat Riley. Back in 1992, when Riley was coaching the New York Knicks, he registered the trademark for "Threepeat" after the Chicago Bulls won their *second* NBA title in 1992, so he could cash in just in case the Bulls won a third.

The only difference here is that the Patriots are buying an empty trademark. Nobody's going to go 19-0 anytime soon, and they proved it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- jozdaman, 23 Apr 2008 @ 9:16am
  
  Re: Pat Riley
  Sour Grapes!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 23 Apr 2008 @ 9:53am
  
  Re: Pat Riley
  No, I'd say there's a big difference. In the first case, a made-up word (threepeat) would be registered. Now, whether Riley had himself made up the word or not would be something that might be questioned, but using a made-up word as a trademark is perfectly fine. There are many other ways to describe winning 3 titles.
  
  This one on the other hand was trying to trademark *the score itself*. If it were to be successful, no other team would be able to describe their undefeated season without violating the trademark in some way. Very stupid, and it would be a travesty if this were trademarked.
  
  "Nobody's going to go 19-0 anytime soon"
  
  Who knows? Maybe it'll happen next season, maybe in 50 seasons. The thing is, this trademark would adversely affect anyone who did achieve that, and as such shouldn't be allowed.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PopeRatzo, 23 Apr 2008 @ 11:41am
  
  Re: Pat Riley
  There's another difference:
  
  "Threepeat" is a neologism. "19-0" is a won-loss record that many teams have achieved in various sports and many more will in the future. If they are granted this trademark, our system is absolutely beyond repair and ought to be dismantled and/or ignored. Certainly subverted at every opportunity.
  
  I mean, if they had tried to trademark "The New England Patriots went 18-1 in 2007" it would make more sense than the notion of trademarking simply three digits and a dash.
  
  Can I trademark "411" and have every phone system in the world pay me? Or how about "911" and shut down every emergency system? Maybe I can trademark "69" and spoil a lot of couples' fun. Maybe I can trademark "867-5309" and never have to hear that awful song again. "Niiy-ee-eyeeen", indeed.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
jim, 23 Apr 2008 @ 8:36am

Or they think they can get it next year...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2008 @ 12:57pm
  
  Re:
  Or they KNOW they can do it next year... or in the near future. The Patriots WILL go undefeated. No other team has come as close as they did last year. That one loss will be forgotten.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - ToySouljah, 24 Apr 2008 @ 1:00am
    
    Re: Re:
    That one lose was the one that counted though...lol. I would have rather gone 18-1 with the 1 being in the first 15 games. I'm a Cowboys fan and I can even admit that the Patriots are a great team, but back to the actual story.
    
    I really do not think they should be able to trade mark 19-0 since like someone else mentioned...there are other sports that could end up with that score easily (NBA comes to mind easily). So if lets say some NBA team goes 19-0 in the beginning...will they have to pay up until the next game? Just doesn't seem right.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mischa G, 23 Apr 2008 @ 8:36am

Nice
I guess you copyright what you can't accomplish.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2008 @ 8:38am

Empty trademark or no, it's dumb. I might trademark 30-6-2 just in case that's Manchester United's record next season. They're statistics, you can't trademark statistics. Well, unless you're the MLB nobbers I guess.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TheTraveler, 23 Apr 2008 @ 8:40am

New England what?
WHAT?!?! Out of the question! If anything the Dolphins should claim that trademark since they where the first to do it! No offence to anyone in New England but your football team’s coach is a cheating scum ball, which makes your whole team look like bunch of babbling no talent capybara on acid trying to scale the side of a water tower! What really should happen is that they should shut up, sit down and stop being all big on themselves! This is just another way for Mr. Bill Belichick to make some money and free advertising for a team that has a cheat stick up there ass!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- jimmy kELLEY, 23 Apr 2008 @ 8:46am
  
  Re: New England what?
  Actually they went 17-0.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Terry, 23 Apr 2008 @ 9:41am
    
    Re: Re: New England what?
    Actually, they went 16-0 regular season and 2-1 in the playoffs.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Nasch, 24 Apr 2008 @ 3:06pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: New England what?
      They're talking about the 1972 Dolphins, who were 14-0 in the regular season, and 3-0 in the playoffs, to date the only undefeated NFL season.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2008 @ 8:53am
  
  Re: New England what?
  Umm...the Patriots are no more cheaters than any other NFL team. It is a known fact that all teams do what the Pats were caught doing. It is just bad luck that they were caught red handed. The prosecution was done to make an example of them in the hopes that every single other NFL team would stop too. Despite that I am sure they all still continue to do it, including the Patriots. Bill Belichick is one of the best coaches in NFL history.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2008 @ 9:08am
    
    Re: Re: New England what?
    Actually, if it was a known fact that all the other teams cheated, they would have all been sanctioned. As it is, it's really just your upset ego that is responding to the (unwarranted) Patriot bashing. They are a great team, but they are also the only PROVEN (as of yet) cheaters. Live with it.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - boost, 23 Apr 2008 @ 9:48am
    
    Re: Re: New England what?
    If it's a known fact, maybe you could back it up with some citations? hmmm?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - TheTraveler, 23 Apr 2008 @ 10:12am
      
      Re: Re: Re: New England what?
      I did not say they WHERE a bad team... I said that by them getting caught it makes them LOOK like one. I admit I don’t like Bill B. but I think the Pats are a good team… they have a lot of good players I don’t doubt that for one min. But again, it throws there integrity into question. Now every time they play I think… are they cheating? I must add I have a bitter taste in my mouth because I am a Steelers fan, but still cheating is cheating and they got caught!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Matty C, 23 Apr 2008 @ 11:41am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: New England what?
        First off, I am 100% a die hard Pats fan. Secondly, I am so damn sick of hearing about "Spygate" and how the Patriots are cheaters and the ridiculous nicknames, ie. "Cheatriots or Bill Bellicheat" I mean come on, what are you 5 years old? If this had happened to any other NFL team, their fans would be coming out in droves to defend their team. What happened was a man, and I use that term loosely, told on his former boss because he was sick of being seen as Bellicheck's former flunkie. The fact that the Jets were caught video taping, illegally I might add, the year before in a game against the Patriots and were merely asked to stop shows the spite Mangini has for Coach Bellicheck and the Pats organization. Not to mention the numerous other times were teams catch each other spying on each other and police it themselves rather than telling the commissioner on them. And anyone that does not believe that a majority of teams in the NFL did this or similar actions before Spygate are in complete denial and are just looking for an excuse to hate the Patriots for the years of dominance on the NFL the Patriots have shown this decade.
        People need to get the hell over it and realize that last season is last season. No more will come of this aside from stupid fans making themselves look even more stupid with asinine comments.
        
        By the way, wasn't this an article about frivolous and unnecessary trademarks?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Derek (profile), 30 Apr 2008 @ 5:55am
    
    Re: Re: New England what?
    "It is a known fact"
    
    Please back this up with a link that has evidence, otherwise don't say it. Just makes you look like ever other idiot on the internet that knows everything.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- CVPunk, 23 Apr 2008 @ 8:58am
  
  Re: New England what?
  I don't think it would be Belichick trying to trademark this.. but the team front office instead. If Belichick was going to trademark something it would be sleeveless sweatshirts.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2008 @ 9:22am
  
  Re: New England what?
  "[a] bunch of babbling no talent capybara on acid trying to scale the side of a water tower!"
  
  Oh man, I remember that trip. Remember what Fred tried to do? Classic.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ajax 4Hire, 23 Apr 2008 @ 8:53am

I will trademark the other 18 combinations...
Some do not make sense but most of the other are good.
18-1, 17-2, 16-3, ... 0-19
Although, 3-16,2-17,1-18,0-19 are not really possible.
(Not possible to loose 15 regular season and then go to super-bowl)

and of course if you are not super-bowl/playoff material then you can trademark;
16-0, 15-1, 14-2, ... 0-16

The combinations are endless, literally.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lite Wizzard, 23 Apr 2008 @ 9:17am
  
  Re: I will trademark the other 18 combinations...
  Its not one of your 18 but, 36-24-36 will be mine. As soon as I get it trademarked I will start looking for violators.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2008 @ 9:24am
    
    Re: Re: I will trademark the other 18 combinations...
    ...I already AM looking for violators...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2008 @ 8:53am

.... if we can't have it, Noone can .....WAAAAAAAA!

LMAO
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TheDock22, 23 Apr 2008 @ 9:02am

Preemptive
I think the Pats are doing this for next season. I am pretty confident they can get a 19-0 record at some point even with Brady on the team.

As far as the Dolphins go maybe they should Trademark 0-19 as will be their stats next season ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ajax 4Hire, 23 Apr 2008 @ 9:06am

Super-Bowl 7(VII) Miami Dolphins undefeated...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bowl_VII
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Danny, 23 Apr 2008 @ 9:24am

just another word for mediocre
My Buffalo Bills should trademark 7-9.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2008 @ 9:32am

Obviously post # 8 is by a Patriots fan that fails to realize the difference in what Belichick did and what other teams do. Yes, all teams videotape with the other teams permission. What the Patriots did was videotape defensive signals from the sidelines. The sooner you let that sink into your brain, the sooner you can get on with your life.

And I think I'll trademark "New England Cheatriots" and start collecting royalties.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Reality Check, 23 Apr 2008 @ 10:24am
  
  Re:
  Techogeeks you all might be, sports geeks you are not.
  
  Taping defensive signals IS NOT illegal.
  
  The legality of such an action is dictated by WHERE you tape from.
  
  Rules stipulate that you are only allowed to tape from the end zones, no where else.
  
  THAT is why the Pats got busted - they taped from the SIDELINES.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2008 @ 11:39am
    
    Re: Re:
    Taping defensive signals IS NOT illegal. The legality of such an action is dictated by WHERE you tape from. Rules stipulate that you are only allowed to tape from the end zones, no where else. THAT is why the Pats got busted - they taped from the SIDELINES.
    That's true but when ranting on a blog, having factual information is not necessary.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
trapper, 23 Apr 2008 @ 9:46am

Like the old saying says...
Those who can do. Those who can't trademark...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Vince Lombardi, 23 Apr 2008 @ 10:02am

Cheatriots.
So would that mean that the Giants can trademark "we beat the team with thw 19-0 record"???

Maybe the Patriots (and I agree with renaming them Cheatriots) should apply for the title "top of the list of losers" since that is only what they are ... just another loser.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
-publius, 23 Apr 2008 @ 10:53am

at least the mark is fanciful, not descriptive...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2008 @ 11:09am

Um, I agree that the idea is outrageous. If you didn't win 19 games, you don't deserve to get the 19-0 title.

That being said, I would like to know how this blog post even remotely relates to the world of technology. After all, this is "Tech" dirt. This is definitely dirt, but where's the tech?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Raymond, 23 Apr 2008 @ 11:12am

Three years of disuse = abandonment
"Who knows? Maybe it'll happen next season, maybe in 50 seasons."

It has to happen within the next three seasons. If they don't use the mark for three years, it is declared abandoned. Odds are they're just throwing their money away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2008 @ 11:24am
  
  Re: Three years of disuse = abandonment
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Vince Lomardi, 23 Apr 2008 @ 11:25am
  
  Re: Three years of disuse = abandonment
  Nobody's awarded it to them yet. Hopefully one of the dorks in the trademark office will have a lick of sense and realize you can't trademark it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
inc, 23 Apr 2008 @ 12:35pm

I thought you could not trademark numbers, hence pentium and every name that Intel now names its CPUs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2008 @ 2:13pm
  
  Re:
  I thought that ruling only applied to Europe and Australia. They could trademark the numbers in the US, and other companies couldn't release chips with the same name, but in Europe and Australia they wouldn't trademark the numbers so other companies could release them.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2008 @ 12:35pm

i'm going to trademark the letter 'a', then any time someone wants to use it, they'll have to talk to me first.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
jeffj (profile), 23 Apr 2008 @ 2:53pm

"Pats were caught doing. It is just bad luck that they were caught red handed"

Keep telling your self that. You will feel much better than if you had thoughts like "if they didn't secretoly film the all the opposing teams' defense and study it, maybe they would be 9-7 for the season".

Now THAT'S a bad thought so I agree we should all keep thinking it's the first thought. Denial makes me feel better too. In fact, the surge is working and Hillary doesn't lie. See how easy that was?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Willton, 23 Apr 2008 @ 3:25pm

Much ado about nothing
This psycho-babble about "a broken system" is totally unfounded here. Folks, you can't get trademark protection unless you actually use the trademark. Ask yourselves this: do you really think that the Pat are actually going to use "19-0" as a trademark after what unfolded at the Super Bowl? Really? Come on ....

I'm sure the Patriots filed an intent-to-use application, but it would be pretty easy to show that the Pats do not have a bona fide intention to use the mark after losing the big game. Seriously, folks, give it a rest.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Roger, 24 Apr 2008 @ 5:09am

Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades
Maybe the Patriots ought to trademark "18 and CHOKE"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]