Gene Weingarten Shows How To Respond To Bogus Trademark Threats: Stetson(R) Hats Suck

from the nicely-done,-sir dept

Tue, May 17th 2011 11:38am — Mike Masnick

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.

Stetson® hats suck.

He then goes on to point out just how silly all of this is, before then clearing up any confusion:

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

52 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

John Doe, 17 May 2011 @ 12:06pm

That is funny stuff right there...
I cannot believe the COO at Stetson has the time to send nastygrams to everyone who uses the word Stetson without the registered trademark symbol. They need to find that guy something to do.

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 ]
Rikuo (profile), 17 May 2011 @ 12:07pm

Annual Board Meeting: Okay, Mr. Smith, it's time to elect a new COO. Tell us, what have you done for the company this past year? Raised profits? Increased productivity?
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 ]
- ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 17 May 2011 @ 12:15pm
  
  Re:
  More likely:
  
  CEO: I don't understand what you just said, but you're obviously doing something. Have a bonus!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2011 @ 12:56pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I do believe that you are mistaking Stetson, with one of our great financial institutions. I think it would go something more like.
    
    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 ]
    - Chris Novak, 17 May 2011 @ 1:42pm
      
      Improper use of registered trademark �
      In the last line, the use of the � (registered trademark) symbol associated with a term just made up is improper. Instead, it should be weenis�. Registered Trademark means you have used the term for a period of time AND received application approval from the US Patent & Trademark Office that the term be registered to you.
      
      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 ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2011 @ 2:51pm
        
        Re: Improper use of registered trademark �
        Yeah poor kleenex and xerox nobody uses them anymore.
        
        And that poor q-tip company, they never stood a chance.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - canuk, 1 Jun 2011 @ 2:37pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      
      For those I offended with this... I don't care.
      
      Laughed for five minutes. Awesome.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 17 May 2011 @ 12:18pm

Texas
When I saw Stetson Hats, I figured this had something to do with East Texas. Oh well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ima Fish (profile), 17 May 2011 @ 12:20pm

Someone at Stetson Hats will respond to Weingarten's mockery with the "we have to protect our trademark" mantra starting in 3... 2... 1...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Planespotter (profile), 18 May 2011 @ 1:37am
  
  Re:
  Nope, some smartass comment did it for them.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2011 @ 12:24pm

Sadly, as Mike would point out, Stetson could have used to opportunity to improve its brand repution. A simple "thank you for using our Stetson(r) brand of hats to represent Americana and its long history as a hat made in America(r), by American's(r), for Americans(r)!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Donnicton, 17 May 2011 @ 12:46pm
  
  Re:
  I find it incomprehensibly counterproductive when they do things like this. You would think that the company would be proud to have their name be a household colloquialism for a product, much like Band-Aids(r/tm/c), but instead they want to C&D people into their names not being household status.
  
  As long as our trademark is protected, right?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Rich, 17 May 2011 @ 1:27pm
    
    Re: Re:
    The LAST thing any company wants is their band name to become a household colloquialism. That's brand delusion and it puts them at risk of losing their trademark. (not that I agree with their decision, because I don't!)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Pitabred (profile), 17 May 2011 @ 1:39pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "dilution" Brand delusion is what Stetson is currently experiencing
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Rich, 17 May 2011 @ 2:12pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        D'oh. Yes, thank you.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Nina Paley (profile), 17 May 2011 @ 3:17pm
        
        Brand Delusion(tm)
        Best. Typo. Ever.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - dwgoldman (profile), 17 May 2011 @ 4:38pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Did you say "brand delusion?" You got THAT right, pardner.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Planespotter (profile), 18 May 2011 @ 1:41am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Why?
      
      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 ]
      - Anonymously Brave, 18 May 2011 @ 1:49pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Google has taken over from the term "search the internet".
        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 ]
      - Rich, 20 May 2011 @ 7:42pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Because it puts them in danger of LOSING their trademark status:
        
        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 ]
        
        Vincent Clement (profile), 21 May 2011 @ 7:10am
        
        So what?
        Losing trademark status is a red herring. Is anyone else other than Kimberly-Clark (or any licensee) using the term Kleenex?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Rich, 21 May 2011 @ 7:41am
        
        Re: So what?
        Don't misunderstand me. I don't agree with them. I'm saying that their fear. Whether or not it's true is besides the point.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Laughing out loud, 17 May 2011 @ 2:43pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Clearly you don't know anything about trademarks if you 1) think brand owners should be pleased with genericide, 2) use R and TM as alternatives, and 3) put C after a brand name! Brilliant!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 17 May 2011 @ 3:32pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Genericide? You should trademark that.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Planespotter (profile), 18 May 2011 @ 1:41am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        too late ;)
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Laughing out loud, 20 May 2011 @ 6:17am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Why? It's a known trademark concept. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Bender, 22 May 2011 @ 1:02pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I find it incomprehensibly counterproductive when they do things like this. You would think that the company would be proud to have their name be a household colloquialism for a product, much like Band-Aids(r/tm/c), but instead they want to C&D people into their names not being household status.
    
    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 ]
Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 17 May 2011 @ 12:43pm

Stetson's are cool
*Bang*
Hello, sweety.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Nathan F (profile), 17 May 2011 @ 12:48pm
  
  Re: Stetson's are cool
  Definitely better than bow ties..
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2011 @ 1:13pm
    
    Re: Re: Stetson's are cool
    But not as cool as a fez.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Grey Ferret, 17 May 2011 @ 1:16pm
    
    Re: Re: Stetson's are cool
    Stetson's� were cool, but it's too hard to pronounce the �. That's not cool! I wear a Fez now! Fezzes are cool!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2011 @ 5:13am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Stetson's are cool
      Well the Doctor knows best.
      
      Now I want to see the first all Fez western complete with Stetson Fez's.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Bender, 22 May 2011 @ 1:05pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Stetson's are cool
      I wear a Fez now! Fezzes 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 ]
Nina Paley (profile), 17 May 2011 @ 1:23pm

Stupid Hat�
Forget Stenson� - all the cool weenis�s are wearing the Stupid Hat�.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2011 @ 1:26pm

Harvard Business School grad....
who needs to relearn brand management in the digital age:

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/holly-lim/0/3a9/230
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PlagueSD, 17 May 2011 @ 1:30pm

Re: That is funny stuff right there...
A quick google search turned up 3 results for Stetson.

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 ]
sehlat (profile), 17 May 2011 @ 1:30pm

There's Stetson(R) and Stetson(?)
I decided I'd bring the COO's behavior to the attention of the company, since this is, IMO, a major Do Not Buy recommendation for the Stetson(R)(TM){can't be too careful} brand, and discovered that there are two such companies in association. There's the manufacturer in Texas, and the company in New York associated with them (marketer? brand name "guardian"?) and it's the New York office(Microsoft tm) from which this idiocy originated.

The CEO there is:

Pamela Fields
263 West 38th Street
10th Floor
New York, NY 10018
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2011 @ 2:53pm
  
  Re: There's Stetson(R) and Stetson(?)
  your office(microsoft tm) gave me a case of the lulz
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ellis Humphres, 17 May 2011 @ 1:47pm

Weenis� made me...
The word Weenis��made me Guffaw�.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tom The Toe, 17 May 2011 @ 2:28pm

weenis�
Weenis was first used in the TV sitcom "Friends" by Chandler. It was a report generated by Chandlers manager. "I can't go now I have to look at the bosses Weenis."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jeff Rife, 18 May 2011 @ 1:14pm
  
  Re: weenis�
  That would be "WENUS" in Friends, as it stands for "Weekly Estimated Net Usage of System".
  
  And, no, I did not have to look that up, and I'm somewhat upset by that realization.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
umccullough (profile), 17 May 2011 @ 2:28pm

Weenis isn't registered..
I checked, it 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 ]
Bruce Ediger (profile), 17 May 2011 @ 2:59pm

Article filled with (R) and (TM) and (C) characters
When you see an article filled with (R) and (TM) and (C) characters (online or not) you can be sure that the article is content free. All those characters, every one in its proper place, means that some entity, probably a large corporation or foundation, had the money to let a lawyer pore over the text in question, and insist that little (R) and (C) and (TM) symbols appear by words that he or she has verified are trademarks or copyrighted or whatever.

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 ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2011 @ 4:34pm
  
  Re: Article filled with (R) and (TM) and (C) characters
  Seriously, even one use of those symbols serve no useful purpose to anyone outside of an anal-retentive trademark lawyer and, as the examples above show painfully well, only clutter up text. The standard non-superscripted registered symbol, as employed in most fonts used on the Web, looks positively ugly and only gets worse with overuse.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nina Paley (profile), 17 May 2011 @ 5:58pm

�ecursion
If you register the trademark on registered trademark, you get this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 17 May 2011 @ 6:28pm
  
  Re: �ecursion
  How about doing a fractal version? That is, an � sign made up of little � signs, made up of even littler � signs ...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- BearGriz72 (profile), 18 May 2011 @ 4:15am
  
  Re: �ecursion
  Love it!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Marcel de Jong (profile), 18 May 2011 @ 2:18am

Stetson hats suck?
I think you're mistaken.
Stetsons are cool, The Doctor wore one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2011 @ 7:42am

Yeah you guys don't know how Registered Trademarks work
If stetson becomes generalized than anyone can make a hat calling it a stetson.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ric berlin, 18 May 2011 @ 7:49am

cowboy hats
What kind of cowboy would wear a hat from New York City?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 May 2011 @ 8:16am

What next? Whenever someone says "Stetson" they'll want to have him say "Stetson(R)"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Khory (profile), 23 May 2011 @ 4:29pm

Weenis
Lol,

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 ]