Gene Weingarten Shows How To Respond To Bogus Trademark Threats: Stetson(R) Hats Suck
from the nicely-done,-sir dept
One of the lines in Techdirt's style guide (yes, we have a style guide, even if we're not always good at following it) is that we never, ever, post the little registered trademark sign: ® with a company or product name. If you follow business reporting, you will see that show up from time to time. Companies love to use that little symbol in press releases and such even though they don't need to. But, where it gets really silly and ridiculous is when they insist others must do so too. JJ sends an example of a company doing this to humor columnist Gene Weingarten, and his rather simple response. The company in question was Stetson, of the hats by that name, and Weingarten had made an offhand comment in a previous column about how readers who wanted to feel more American could "put on a Stetson." Stetson's COO then chose to demand that Weingarten post a correction and in the future use "Stetson®" when referring to the brand. Weingarten's reply was straightforward and simple:The correction you are seeking, and which I now solemnly herewith deliver under the implied threat of a trademark-infringement lawsuit, is that "Stetson" is the name of your company and not a generic term for a hat. You further demand that all future references to "Stetson" contain a little R in a circle, like this: Stetson®. Okay. Done, and done.He then goes on to point out just how silly all of this is, before then clearing up any confusion:
Stetson® hats suck.
I would like to clear up one misconception, though: I was not, as your letter suggests, using the word Stetson® as a synonym for "hat." I was using it as a synonym for "doofusy cowboy hat" of the sort that has made the Stetson® company famous, and that can in an instant, on any city street, transform any ordinary man into a pretentious, truly comical-looking weenis®. I made up that word just now, and therefore own it, and therefore am requiring an ® sign whenever it is used.Now that's one way to respond to a bogus trademark claim.
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: gene weingarten, stetson, trademark
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
That is funny stuff right there...
Oops, just realized I used the word Stetson twice, now three times, without the symbol. I sure hope I don't get a nasytgram.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Smith: Uh no...
CEO: Excuse me? Then what the hell did you do you?
Smith: Well...I saw some articles that mention the Stetson hat, and sent...drumroll please...thank you...a strongly worded demand they put the registered symbol next to the Stetson name!
CEO *blinks, swears underneath his breath and signs a termination of contract*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
CEO: I don't understand what you just said, but you're obviously doing something. Have a bonus!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
CEO: Well golly gee, did you challenge him to a duel? That there city slicker don't know who hes messin with. You done shown him good with that there letter. Here, have a whiskey.
For those I offended with this... I don't care.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Improper use of registered trademark ®
A registered trademark costs $ to register, but for any company doing business globally (or on the internet), it's about the only way to protect your brand rights internationally.
I agree with the sentiments expressed about overuse of the symbol, BUT registered trademark holders have to "use it or lose it", lest their registered trademark become a common idiom -- like 'xerox' or 'kleenex'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Improper use of registered trademark ®
And that poor q-tip company, they never stood a chance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Laughed for five minutes. Awesome.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Texas
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
As long as our trademark is protected, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Brand Delusion(tm)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Google has taken over from the term "search the internet".
Kleenex has replaced "tissue".
Xerox had/has replaced "photocopy/photocopier".
Tippex has replaced "white correction fluid"
Post-It has replaced "little bits of paper with glue on one edge".
Has that diluted their brands? I wouldn't think so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Has that diluted their brands? I wouldn't think so.
Actually, Google did experience their own version of "Brand Delusion" at one time:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/137641/google_outraged_at_its_name_being_used.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://threatblog.org/brand-abuse/brand-owners-beware-don%E2%80%99t-let-your-trademark-be come-genericized/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So what?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So what?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
As long as our trademark is protected, right?
Not as much as you would think. When you ask for a bandaid you are not asking for the bandaid brand bandaid, your asking for A bandaid, whatever brand. Therein lies the issue. Same with kleenex (facial tissue) or any other product such. The concept of keeping your brand name separate from the product keeps people saying "I need new facial tissue, I want Kleenex." versus "I need more kleenex, ah here is some cheap no-name stuff."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stetson's are cool
Hello, sweety.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Stetson's are cool
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Stetson's are cool
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Stetson's are cool
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Stetson's are cool
Now I want to see the first all Fez western complete with Stetson Fez's.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Stetson's are cool
Gotta love the reference to the Doctor. I bet the Doctor doesn't get his shirt in a knot over little r's in circles.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stupid Hat®
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Harvard Business School grad....
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/holly-lim/0/3a9/230
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That is funny stuff right there...
Stetson University
Stetson Building Products Inc.
Stetson Hats, Bags, Eyewear, shoes, and watches.
SOMEONE is going to have a cow...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There's Stetson(R) and Stetson(?)
The CEO there is:
Pamela Fields
263 West 38th Street
10th Floor
New York, NY 10018
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: There's Stetson(R) and Stetson(?)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Weenis® made me...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
weenis™
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: weenis™
And, no, I did not have to look that up, and I'm somewhat upset by that realization.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Weenis isn't registered..
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4006:enf8pr.1.1
So at the most he can only request that it be written as weenis™
I know...details.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Article filled with (R) and (TM) and (C) characters
The corporation spent its money on a lawyer, rather than writing, proofreading or fact-checking. The article is probably on-brand, iconic and is guaranteed not to offend, and it meets Federal Requirements, does not violate the Law of the Sea, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and does not make Baby Jesus cry. But it's certain to suck.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Article filled with (R) and (TM) and (C) characters
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
®ecursion
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ®ecursion
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ®ecursion
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stetson hats suck?
Stetsons are cool, The Doctor wore one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yeah you guys don't know how Registered Trademarks work
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
cowboy hats
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Weenis
I just read this. My wife has used the word "weenis" for years. I should have had her copyright it:)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]