Nixon Peabody LLP

  • People
  • Capabilities
  • Insights
  • About

Trending Topics

    • People
    • Capabilities
    • Insights
    • About
    • Locations
    • Events
    • Careers
    • Alumni

    Practices

    View All

    • Affordable Housing
    • Community Development Finance
    • Corporate & Finance
    • Cybersecurity & Privacy
    • Environmental
    • Franchising & Distribution
    • Government Investigations & White Collar Defense
    • Healthcare
    • Intellectual Property
    • International Services
    • Labor & Employment
    • Litigation
    • Private Wealth & Advisory
    • Project Finance
    • Public Finance
    • Real Estate
    • Regulatory & Government Relations

    Industries

    View All

    • Cannabis
    • Consumer
    • Energy
    • Entertainment
    • Financial Services
    • Healthcare
    • Higher Education
    • Infrastructure
    • Manufacturing
    • Non Profit
    • Real Estate
    • Technology

    Value-Added Services

    View All

    • Alternative Fee Arrangements

      Developing innovative pricing structures and alternative fee agreement models that deliver additional value for our clients.

    • Continuing Education

      Advancing professional knowledge and offering credits for attorneys, staff and other professionals.

    • Crisis Advisory

      Helping clients respond correctly when a crisis occurs.

    • DEI Strategic Services

      Providing our clients with legal, strategic, and practical advice to make transformational changes in their organizations.

    • eDiscovery

      Leveraging law and technology to deliver sound solutions.

    • Global Services

      Delivering seamless service through partnerships across the globe.

    • Innovation

      Leveraging leading-edge technology to guide change and create seamless, collaborative experiences for clients and attorneys.

    • IPED

      Industry-leading conferences focused on affordable housing, tax credits, and more.

    • Legal Project Management

      Providing actionable information to support strategic decision-making.

    • Legally Green

      Teaming with clients to advance sustainable projects, mitigate the effects of climate change, and protect our planet.

    • Nixon Peabody Trust Company

      Offering a range of investment management and fiduciary services.

    • NP Capital Connector

      Bringing together companies and investors for tomorrow’s new deals.

    • NP Second Opinion

      Offering fresh insights on cases that are delayed, over budget, or off-target from the desired resolution.

    • NP Trial

      Courtroom-ready lawyers who can resolve disputes early on clients’ terms or prevail at trial before a judge or jury.

    • Social Impact

      Creating positive impact in our communities through increasing equity, access, and opportunity.

    1. Home
    2. Insights
    3. Articles
    4. Competitors may (sometimes) legally use a brand’s trademarked puns, rhymes, and catch phrasesArticles

    Article

    Competitors may (sometimes) legally use a brand’s trademarked puns, rhymes, and catch phrases

    Sep 28, 2022

    Share

    By Staci Trager (Riordan) and Vincent Capati

    If a “fun” mark—such as a pun, rhyme, tagline, or other catch phrase—is appealing because of how the words sound or how the marks look, it may be fair game for public use even if registered as a valid, protectable trademark.

    Brands and consumers alike generally understand that trademark laws protect a brand’s goodwill and consumers’ confidence in correctly associating brands with their goods. Au-Tomotive Gold, Inc. v. Volkswagen of Am., Inc., 457 F.3d 1062, 1067 (9th Cir. 2006). However, trademark laws feature a surprising (and evolving) quirk: if a brand’s mark features a design that “improves the usefulness or appeal of the object it adorns,” or stated differently, if “protection of the mark significantly undermines [a] competitors’ ability to compete in the relevant market,” then the mark functions as an unprotected ornament rather than as a protectable trademark. Vuitton et Fils S.A. v. J. Young Enters., Inc., 644 F.2d 769, 774 (9th Cir. 1981); Christian Louboutin S.A. v. Yves Saint Laurent Am. Holdings, Inc., 696 F.3d 206, 222 (2d Cir. 2012) (emphasis in original).

    Case in point

    The litigated trademarked pun “LETTUCE TURNIP THE BEET” is instructive. See LTTB LLC v. Redbubble, Inc., 840 Fed. Appx. 148 (2021). In that case, the trademark was registered and not invalid, and the trademark owner even presented undisputed evidence that its goods featuring those marks were popular. Id. at 150–51. Yet, the court found in favor of the competitor—the evidence showed that consumers were buying marked goods because they appreciated the pun, not because the mark identified the brand as the source of the goods. Id. Used in this way, the pun was aesthetically functional rather than source identifying. Id. at 150–52. Accordingly, it did not matter whether the mark caused any sort of confusion, and the competitor won.

    This trademark protection limiting doctrine is known as “aesthetic functionality,” and not every jurisdiction abides by it. Compare Bd. of Supervisors for La. State Univ. Agric. & Mech. College v. Smack Apparel Co., 550 F.3d 465, 485-86 (5th Cir. 2008) (rejecting aesthetic functionality) with, e.g., Blumenthal Distrib., Inc. v. Herman Miller, Inc., 963 F.3d 859, 864 (9th Cir. 2020), cert. denied, 141 S. Ct. 1514 (2021) (assessing aesthetic functionality). And for those jurisdictions that do recognize this doctrine, some do not assess it separately from “utilitarian functionality,” which limits brand protection when the design serves a function, for example to use the goods or to affect quality or cost. Inwood Labs., Inc. v. Ives Labs., Inc., 456 U.S. 844, 850 n.10 (1982).

    The central question is whether the mark’s alleged aesthetic function is indistinguishable from the source-identifying function. See, e.g., Au-Tomotive Gold, 457 F.3d at 1074. If yes, then the mark is a protectable trademark. If no, then the mark might not be protectable.

    Takeaway

    For competitors, this regime grants some freedom. “Fun” marks—such as puns, rhymes, taglines, or other catch phrases—that are appealing because of how the words sound or how the marks look are at risk for being fair game for public use. Nevertheless, the prudent approach is to still evaluate risks before using “fun” marks that you do not own. They may be owned by another brand, and they may not fall within the exception.

    For trademark applicants and owners, trademark rights are still enforceable. In addition to the standard playbook of performing clearance searches, trademark applicants must consider how the public may perceive those “fun” marks and how competitors might use them. And for trademark owners of “fun” marks, brands must consider how to re-deploy those “fun” marks on goods and services to ensure that they serve as brand-identifying marks rather than just being “punny.”

    As always, Nixon Peabody LLP is continuing to monitor these developments and can provide practical considerations to brands and competitors when navigating intellectual property.

    Intellectual PropertyTrending

    Practices

    Intellectual Property

    Insights And Happenings

    • Alert

      Greenwashing Litigation 101: A brand owner’s guide to avoiding the “fashion police”

      March 8, 2023
    • Alert

      Original? Nope. Ornamental? Yup. Protectable? 100%

      Feb 9, 2023
    • Press Release

      Nixon Peabody expands Intellectual Property practice with experienced and innovative patent litigator

      Nov 13, 2022

    Subscribe to stay informed of the latest legal news, alerts, and business trends.Subscribe

    • People
    • Capabilities
    • Insights
    • About
    • Locations
    • Events
    • Careers
    • Alumni
    • © 2023 Nixon Peabody. All rights reserved
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use
    • Statement of Client Rights
    • Supplier Diversity Program
    • Nixon Peabody International LLC
    • PAL