'BROKEN Matt Hardy' Trademark Attempt by Matt Hardy, Refused by US Patent and Trademark Office

Everything that is happening in the wrestling world.
Post Reply
User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 20950
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32

'BROKEN Matt Hardy' Trademark Attempt by Matt Hardy, Refused by US Patent and Trademark Office

Post by cero2k » May 26th, '17, 14:40

Source: pwinsider.com

The 'Broken Matt Hardy' trademark application filed by Matt Hardy in March, has been given an initial refusal by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The trademark refusal was listed as:
"Registration is refused because the applied-for mark, as used on the specimen of record, identifies only the name of a particular character/personal name; it does not function as a service mark to identify and distinguish applicant’s services from those of others and to indicate the source of applicant’s services. Trademark Act Sections 1, 2, 3 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051-1053, 1127; see In re Hechinger Inv. Co. of Del., 24 USPQ2d 1057, 1059 (TTAB 1991); In re McDonald’s Corp., 229 USPQ 555, 555 (TTAB 1985); TMEP §§904.07(b), 1301.02(b).

The name of a character is registrable as a service mark only where the record shows that it is used in a manner that would be perceived by consumers as identifying the services in addition to identifying the character. In re Fla. Cypress Gardens Inc., 208 USPQ 288, 292 (TTAB 1980); TMEP §1301.02(b).

Personal names (actual names and pseudonyms) of individuals or groups function as marks only if they identify and distinguish the services recited and not merely the individual or group. In re Mancino, 219 USPQ 1047 (TTAB 1983) (holding that BOOM BOOM would be viewed by the public solely as applicant’s professional boxing nickname and not as an identifier of the service of conducting professional boxing exhibitions); In re Lee Trevino Enters., 182 USPQ 253 (TTAB 1974) (LEE TREVINO used merely to identify a famous professional golfer rather than as a mark to identify and distinguish any services rendered by him); In re Generation Gap Prods., Inc., 170 USPQ 423 (TTAB 1971) (GORDON ROSE used only to identify a particular individual and not as a service mark to identify the services of a singing group).

In this case, the two Youtube specimens merely name a wrestler. The name of the wrestler, however, is not an indicator of source for the services. Consumers would understand “TNA One Night Only” as the trademark for the wrestling service. The “Moments of Glory” specimen does not appear to advertise the provision of any services at all.

The “Eventbrite” specimen appears to show proper service mark use and function as a service mark. However, the specimen is unacceptable because it is unclear that it shows “use in commerce” that the United States can regulate as the specimen advertises an event in Cork County, Ireland and not in the United States. 15 U.S.C. §1127; TMEP §§901.03, 901.04.

Applicant may respond to this refusal by submitting a substitute specimen or amending applicant’s basis to intent to use under Section 1(b) for each applicable international class."
Hardy has six months from today to respond or the application will be abandoned.
Image

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 27378
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12

Re: 'BROKEN Matt Hardy' Trademark Attempt by Matt Hardy, Refused by US Patent and Trademark Office

Post by Big Red Machine » May 26th, '17, 15:13

If I'm reading this right- and I am in no way certain that I am- this ruling seems to say that you basically can't trademark either a name or a gimmick... which would not only let the Hardys use this whenever they wanted, but it would also mean that ex-WWE guys can use their WWE names (at least so long as they are using the same persona). This could be HUGE.
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
DGUSA Open the Ultimate Gate 2013
ROH/CMLL Global Wars Espectacular: Day 3

User avatar
Serujuunin
Posts: 2441
Joined: Dec 17th, '10, 19:56

Re: 'BROKEN Matt Hardy' Trademark Attempt by Matt Hardy, Refused by US Patent and Trademark Office

Post by Serujuunin » May 26th, '17, 17:11

Big Red Machine wrote: May 26th, '17, 15:13 This could be HUGE.
I feel like that's understating it. I think this would change the face of wrestling. Ex-WWE guys could use their WWE gimmicks elsewhere, and non-WWE guys could use their same gimmicks if they made the jump. They would have a personal brand, of sorts, and keep the reputation they have from other places if they so choose, which would help some people coming into a new promotion.

Not to mention, if they rule this, all of the existing trademarks on character names held by wrestling companies would likely be nullified.

User avatar
Bob-O
Posts: 3390
Joined: Dec 17th, '10, 06:06

Re: 'BROKEN Matt Hardy' Trademark Attempt by Matt Hardy, Refused by US Patent and Trademark Office

Post by Bob-O » May 27th, '17, 00:27

You can trademark a name but you can't trademark a recipe. Without seeing the application, it's impossible to know exactly what exactly he was applying for.

I'm honestly confused by this whole thing. The only other time I can remember a wrestler not being allowed to use a gimmick, or a "tribute" to a gimmick, was Warrior in WCW. I heard he wasn't allowed to run to the Ring or shake the ropes, but I'm not even sure if there was any truth to it.
Image

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 20950
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32

Re: 'BROKEN Matt Hardy' Trademark Attempt by Matt Hardy, Refused by US Patent and Trademark Office

Post by cero2k » May 27th, '17, 14:27

That may be the key @Bob-O , because the name is irrelevant if he can't act like broken, so he maay have tried to trademark more than just the name.
Image

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest