Background

The Ohio State University, a prominent public research university, has filed a trademark application seeking to protect the word “The” as part of its official name. This move has sparked both amusement and criticism.

Rationale

According to the university’s application, “The” has become an integral part of its brand and helps differentiate it from other universities in Ohio, such as Kent State and Wright State. With numerous public and private higher education institutions in the state, Ohio State believes it is essential to distinguish itself.

Trademark Details

The trademark application covers a wide range of merchandise, including T-shirts, baseball caps, and hats that bear the full name “The Ohio State University.” The university argues that the use of “The” in conjunction with its full name creates a unique and recognizable brand identity.

Reactions and Criticism

The news of the trademark application has been met with mixed reactions. Some observers have expressed amusement, while others have criticized the move as unnecessary and pretentious. Columnist Ted Decker of the Columbus Dispatch noted that the university’s attempt to become “THE Best Damn Brand in THE Land” has drawn chuckles and eye rolls.

Legal Considerations

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will determine the validity of The Ohio State University’s trademark claim. The USPTO defines a trademark as any word, symbol, or device used to identify and distinguish the goods or services of one entity from those of others.

Enforcement

Even if the USPTO grants the trademark, it will be up to The Ohio State University to enforce it. The university has stated that it will vigorously protect its brand and trademarks, including the newly sought trademark for “The.”

Historical Context

The Ohio State University has a history of trademarking its intellectual property. In the past, it has secured trademarks for the names of football coaches Woody Hayes and Urban Meyer. However, a previous attempt to trademark “OSU” was met with objections from Oklahoma State University, which also uses the initials OSU. The two institutions eventually reached an agreement to avoid confusion.

Conclusion

The Ohio State University’s trademark application for “The” has generated both positive and negative attention. While the university believes it is necessary to protect its brand, some critics view the move as excessive and unnecessary. The USPTO will ultimately decide on the validity of the trademark claim, and it remains to be seen how the university will enforce it if granted.

The Origins of a Classic

The Dark ‘n’ Stormy is a classic cocktail that has been enjoyed for over a century. It is made with dark rum, ginger beer, and lime, and is typically served in a highball glass. The cocktail is said to have originated in Bermuda in the early 1900s, when British sailors on shore leave mixed Gosling’s Black Seal rum with homemade ginger beer. The name “Dark ‘n’ Stormy” is said to have come from a British soldier who observed that the concoction resembled “the color of a cloud that only a fool or a dead man would sail under.”

Gosling’s Trademark

Gosling Brothers Limited, the Bermudan rum distributor, has held trademarks for the Dark ‘n’ Stormy since the early 1900s. These trademarks specify that the cocktail must be made with Gosling’s Black Seal rum and ginger beer. Gosling’s has aggressively defended these trademarks, taking legal action against companies that have tried to use different ingredients in the cocktail.

Legal Battles

In 2009, Gosling’s sued another rum distributor for trying to offer their rum as an alternative to Gosling’s Black Seal in the Dark ‘n’ Stormy. In 2012, a mixology blog received a cease and desist letter from Gosling’s after suggesting that readers could use a cheaper rum in the cocktail.

Gosling’s argues that these legal battles are about more than just money. The company believes that the Dark ‘n’ Stormy is a unique cocktail that should be made with specific ingredients. Gosling’s has also created its own brand of ginger beer, Gosling’s Stormy Ginger Beer, in order to further control the quality of the cocktail.

Other Trademarked Cocktails

The Dark ‘n’ Stormy is not the only trademarked cocktail. The Painkiller cocktail is trademarked by Pusser’s, a rum distiller in the British Virgin Islands, and Tropical Isle store in New Orleans has trademarked the Hand Grenade.

Impact on Mixology

Some bartenders find Gosling’s trademark practices to be distasteful and anathema to the creativity in mixology. However, Gosling’s argues that its trademarks are necessary to protect the integrity of the Dark ‘n’ Stormy.

Making a Dark ‘n’ Stormy

To make a Dark ‘n’ Stormy, you will need:

• 1.5 ounces Gosling’s Black Seal rum
• 4 ounces ginger beer
• Lime wedge (optional)

Instructions:

1. Fill a highball glass with ice.
2. Add the rum and ginger beer.
3. Stir gently.
4. Garnish with a lime wedge, if desired.

Variations

There are many variations on the Dark ‘n’ Stormy. Some bartenders like to add a splash of lime juice to the cocktail, while others prefer to use a different type of rum, such as Mount Gay Black Barrel or Appleton Estate Reserve. You can also experiment with different brands of ginger beer.

Enjoy Responsibly

The Dark ‘n’ Stormy is a delicious and refreshing cocktail, but it is important to enjoy it responsibly. Please drink in moderation and never drink and drive.

Background:

Toblerone, the iconic Swiss chocolate bar, found itself in a legal battle with British grocery chain Poundland over the latter’s copycat product, Twin Peaks. Poundland’s chocolate bar, featuring triangular peaks with slim gaps, bore a striking resemblance to Toblerone.

The Trademark Dispute:

Mondelez International, the owner of Toblerone, argued that Poundland’s Twin Peaks infringed on its trademark, as the shape of Toblerone was a distinctive feature protected by law. However, Poundland countered that Toblerone had lost its trademark protection due to a recent redesign that reduced the amount of chocolate in the bars and widened the gaps between the peaks.

The Compromise:

After three months of legal wrangling, the companies reached a compromise. Poundland was allowed to sell the 500,000 Twin Peaks bars already in production, but it had to change the packaging to differentiate it from Toblerone. The background color of the wrapper was changed from gold to blue, and the lettering from red to gold. Additionally, Poundland agreed to modify the shape of the chocolate peaks to better represent the Ercall and Wrekin hills, which inspired the Twin Peaks design.

The Inspiration Behind Twin Peaks:

Poundland created Twin Peaks in response to Toblerone’s redesign, which removed 10% of chocolate from its bars. Poundland claimed that its customers had missed out on 250 tonnes of chocolate due to the reduction. Twin Peaks was marketed as offering “30g more chocolate” than the slimmed-down Toblerone.

The Packaging Changes:

The packaging changes required by the compromise were designed to ensure that Twin Peaks was visually distinct from Toblerone. The blue background and gold lettering created a different color scheme, while the modified shape of the chocolate peaks further differentiated the two products.

The Legal Implications:

The Toblerone-Twin Peaks lawsuit highlighted the importance of trademarks in protecting the distinctive features of products. It also raised questions about the potential loss of trademark protection if a product’s design undergoes significant changes.

The Market Impact:

The legal battle and subsequent compromise had a significant impact on the market for chocolate bars. Poundland’s ability to sell Twin Peaks provided consumers with a more affordable alternative to Toblerone. However, the packaging changes ensured that consumers could easily distinguish between the two products.

The Future of Twin Peaks:

Twin Peaks bars went on sale at Poundland stores across the UK in December 2018. It remains to be seen whether the modified design and packaging will affect the popularity of the product. However, the legal battle and compromise have undoubtedly raised the profile of Twin Peaks and established it as a legitimate competitor in the chocolate bar market.

In 1988, Samsung launched an advertising campaign that playfully imagined the future of technology and society. These ads, published in Smithsonian magazine, used humor to position Samsung’s home electronics as the products of the future.

Robot Vanna White and the Longevity of ‘Wheel of Fortune’

One of the most striking ads depicted a robot version of Vanna White, the iconic hostess of the game show “Wheel of Fortune.” The ad claimed that the show would still be running in 2012, making it the longest-running game show in history. Samsung asserted that they would be the ones providing the VCRs to record this futuristic version of “Wheel of Fortune.”

Trash Talk and Presidential Ambitions

Another ad featured Morton Downey, Jr., a controversial shock jock, as a presidential candidate in the year 2008. The ad humorously suggested that Samsung would be making the televisions on which Americans would watch Downey’s speeches if he were elected.

Steak as Health Food: A Prescient Prediction

A third ad made the bold claim that steak would be considered healthy food by 2010. This prediction proved to be remarkably prescient, as high-protein diets like the Atkins Diet and the Paleo Diet gained popularity in the following decades. Samsung positioned itself as the manufacturer of the microwaves that would be used to cook these 21st-century steaks.

Vanna White’s Legal Victory

Interestingly, the robot Vanna White ad became the subject of a legal battle. Vanna White sued Samsung, arguing that the company was using her likeness for promotional purposes without her consent. Even though the ad depicted a robot, White claimed that Samsung was capitalizing on her identity. The case, known as White v. Samsung Electronics America, ultimately ruled in White’s favor, establishing her right to control her persona under the Lanham Trademark Act and California common law.

Samsung’s Forward-Thinking Vision

Samsung’s 1988 ad campaign demonstrated the company’s ability to think creatively and imagine the future of technology. The ads used humor and clever predictions to position Samsung as a forward-thinking brand that would continue to innovate and meet the needs of consumers in the years to come.

A Legacy of Innovation

Today, Samsung remains one of the world’s leading technology companies, known for its cutting-edge smartphones, televisions, and home appliances. The company’s 1988 ad campaign serves as a reminder of its long-standing commitment to innovation and its ability to anticipate the future trends that will shape our lives.

The Birth of a Classic

On November 29, 1870, the William Underwood Co. of Boston, Massachusetts, made history by registering the first trademark for a food product in the United States: “Deviled Entremets” – a spicy spread intended for sandwiches, luncheons, and travelers’ repasts.

A Culinary Innovation

Underwood’s Deviled Ham was not the first trademarked food, but it quickly gained popularity. Its unique flavor and convenience appealed to consumers, and it soon became a staple in American pantries. The trademark itself was a testament to the company’s foresight and marketing savvy.

A Legacy of Endurance

Remarkably, Underwood’s Deviled Ham remains in use today, a testament to its enduring popularity. While other trademarked food products from that era have faded into obscurity, Underwood’s has stood the test of time.

The Trademark’s Significance

The longevity of Underwood’s trademark is a testament to the power of branding. By securing a trademark, the company established a strong legal claim to the unique identity of its product, protecting it from imitators and ensuring its continued recognition in the marketplace.

The Evolution of Trademarks

Underwood’s Deviled Ham trademark was filed with the newly established U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Since then, the trademarking process has undergone significant changes. Today, trademarks are essential for protecting intellectual property and ensuring fair competition in the marketplace.

Other Notable Early Trademarks

Underwood’s Deviled Ham was not the only notable early trademark. Other early trademarks included:

• J.B. Baldy & Co. Railroad Brand Mustard
• Tracy Coit Shadine (canned menhaden)
• William Lanfair Ellis canned oysters

These trademarks, along with countless others, have played a vital role in the development of the American food industry.

The Canning Industry and Underwood’s Success

The William Underwood Co. was one of the first successful canning companies in the United States. Canning was a revolutionary technology that allowed food to be preserved for longer periods of time, making it more convenient and accessible to consumers. Underwood’s Deviled Ham was one of the many products that benefited from this technological advancement.

The Enduring Appeal of Underwood’s Deviled Ham

Underwood’s Deviled Ham has endured for over a century due to several factors:

• Its unique and flavorful taste
• Its convenience and versatility
• Its strong brand recognition
• The company’s commitment to quality

Conclusion

Underwood’s Deviled Ham is a culinary icon, a testament to the enduring power of innovation and branding. Its trademark is a symbol of the history and evolution of the American food industry.

Trademarking the Unconventional: Hershey’s Chocolate Bar Design

After a legal battle, Hershey’s Chocolate and Confectionary Corporation secured a trademark for the physical design of their iconic chocolate bar. This victory sets a precedent for product designers, as it demonstrates that even subtle design nuances can be legally protected.

The Trademark Battle

Hershey’s trademark application was initially rejected by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) due to the functionality of the bar’s scored surface. However, Hershey’s successfully appealed by proving that consumers associated the unique design with their brand, even in the absence of the brand name.

The Distinctive Design

The USPTO ultimately granted Hershey’s trademark protection for twelve equally-sized recessed rectangular panels arranged in a four-panel-by-three-panel format. Each panel has a raised border within a larger rectangle. While individual design elements are often not protectable, the combination of these features created a distinctive topography that consumers recognize as Hershey’s.

The Significance of Subtle Nuances

Hershey’s victory highlights the importance of subtle design elements in branding. Although the individual ridges and troughs of the chocolate bar are functional, they also contribute to the brand’s identity. This case demonstrates that even seemingly minor design choices can have a significant impact on consumer perception.

Utility vs. Non-Functional Design Features

The USPTO distinguishes between utility and non-functional design features when considering trademark protection. Utility features are essential to the object’s function, while non-functional features serve primarily aesthetic or decorative purposes. Hershey’s chocolate bar design was deemed non-functional because it does not significantly enhance the bar’s functionality.

Brand Recognition and Consumer Association

Hershey’s strong brand recognition played a crucial role in their trademark victory. Consumers have come to associate the unique design of the chocolate bar with the Hershey’s brand. This association allowed Hershey’s to argue that the design itself had acquired distinctiveness, separate from its functionality.

Implications for Product Designers

The Hershey’s case serves as a cautionary tale for product designers. While functionality is important, incorporating distinctive design elements that consumers can associate with a brand can be essential for trademark protection.

The Influence of Design on Consumer Experience

The design of a product can significantly influence consumer experience. In the case of chocolate bars, the shape, texture, and even the sound of the snap can contribute to the overall enjoyment of the product. Hershey’s chocolate bar design is a testament to the power of thoughtful design in creating a memorable and satisfying experience for consumers.