Section 2(a) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. §1052(a), prohibits the registration of marks that are immoral, deceptive, scandalous, or falsely suggest a connection with individuals (living or deceased), institutions, national symbols, or beliefs. These provisions apply to both the Principal Register and the Supplemental Register. This particular provision aims to safeguard an individual's right to privacy and prevent unauthorized use of a person's or institution's persona. Unlike most trademark laws that protect the public, this provision primarily serves to protect individuals or institutions. Additional information on this topic can be found in Section 1203.03 of The Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure (TMEP).
The burden of proof for a false suggestion of a connection refusal lies with the Examining Attorney at the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO). Any uncertainties should be resolved in favor of the Applicant. It is not necessary for a mark to include a person's full or accurate name to be prohibited, as established in the case of Buffet v. Chi-Chi'S, Inc., 226 U.S.P.Q. 428, 430 (TTAB 1985). In Buffet, the Board concluded that the term "MARGARITAVILLE" was uniquely associated with the Opposer, thus constituting the Opposer's name. When the Applicant used the mark for restaurant services, a false connection with the Opposer was presumed.
To demonstrate that a proposed trademark falsely suggests a connection with a person or institution, the Examiner must establish the following:
-The trademark is the same as or closely resembles the name or identity previously used by another person or institution.
-The Applicant's trademark is recognized as uniquely pointing to the other person.
-There is no connection between the other person or institution and the Applicant's goods or services.
-The person's name or likeness is sufficiently famous for a consumer to perceive a connection.
Examining Attorneys raise this refusal in an Office Action, allowing Applicants an opportunity to challenge the refusal. If unsuccessful, a final refusal may be issued. The Applicant can then appeal the decision to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (the "Board"). For example, in the case of Lesley Hornby a/k/a Lesley Lawson a/k/a Twiggy v. TJX Companies, Inc., 87 USPQ2d 1411 (TTAB 2008), the Board granted the petition to cancel the registration of "TWIGGY" for children's clothes due to a false suggestion of a connection with the internationally famous model "TWIGGY." Similarly, in 2004, the Board refused the registration of the mark "APACHE" for cigarettes, deeming it a false suggestion of a connection with nine recognized Apache tribes.
A recent example of refusal by the USPTO was the mark "BLUE IVY CARTER NYC." The Office Action attached evidence showing that Blue Ivy Carter is the well-known child of singer Beyonce´ and rap artist Jay-Z. Consequently, the public could mistakenly assume a connection between Blue Ivy Carter (through her parents' control) and the Applicant's clothing line.
Another provision of the Trademark Act, Section 2(c) (15 U.S.C. §1052(c)), aims to protect rights of privacy and publicity. This section prohibits the registration of a trademark consisting of the name, portrait, or signature identifying a specific living person or a deceased U.S. President during the life of their widow, unless there is written consent. Refusals under this provision have occurred when trademarks incorporated President Obama's name. In such cases, the Examining Attorney requires written consent from President Barack Obama for the trademark application to proceed.
If you need legal advice regarding your trademark rights, assistance with trademark prosecution, or representation in a domain name dispute, contact Wilson Whitaker Rynell. Our team of trademark lawyers has extensive experience in all aspects of trademark and copyright law, including the filing of trademark applications and representing clients in defense or prosecution before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
Getting in touch is easy. Use the form below and request a free consultation today.
Recognized in the legal industry as dedicated board-certified lawyers and Rising Stars.
Your project will be handled by legal experts every time. You will have the most experienced attorneys working for you.
Let's talk about your legal issue
Wilson Legal Group P.C.
d/b/a Wilson Whitaker Rynell
(972) 248-8080 (Dallas) MAIN OFFICE
(713) 830-2207 (Houston) Appointment Only
(512) 691-4100 (Austin) Appointment Only
For more information on how we can assist in your intellectual property, commercial litigation, divorce, or other personal needs, let us know how we can help you:
WILSON WHITAKER RYNELL
Thank You for Contacting Us!
Your information has been sent, and we will contact you shorlty...issues.
WILSON WHITAKER RYNELL
Oops, there was an error sending your message.
Please try again later.
Disclaimer:
This form does not establish an attorney-client relationship, and should only be used to contact the firm about scheduling a call or meeting. No confidential or sensitive information should be sent using this form.
We represent clients nationwide, including Dallas, Austin, Houston, and other Texas areas such as Fort Worth, Arlington, Carrollton, Plano, Allen, Lewisville, Flower Mound, Irving, Denton, McKinney, North Richland Hills, and all cities within Dallas County, Tarrant County, Collin County, and Denton County.
Wilson Whitaker Rynell
16610 Dallas Parkway, Suite 1000
Dallas, Texas 75248
972-248-8080 (MAIN)
972-248-8088 (FAX)
info@wrrlegal.com (E-MAIL)