In the end I agree, it can’t be enforced, but if it helps:
Trademark protects source indicators, for specific goods and services, so a phrase isn’t simply trademarkable or not on its own, it depends on what it is relating to.
There’s different levels of protectibility as well - but “generic” is a higher bar. If something is just “descriptive” then it’s really just describing the goods or services. Those can’t be trademarked unless there is “secondary meaning” which is established consumer association with using that phrase for a good or service. There’s also “suggestive” marks, which are less direct than descriptive, “arbitrary” marks which are words applied to unlike goods and services, and “fanciful” (edit: correction) marks which are totally made up words. All that goes in order of protectibility.
Basically, Crowder shouldn’t (IMHO) have gotten this mark for debate products/services, because it’s descriptive to what debate is. Somehow he did without the USPTO fighting back. Maybe USPTO was overworked and it slipped by.
Ultimately, though, an infringement would only succeed if another party used it in a way that caused confusion over the source/endorsement. Crowder would have to show people saw them say “change my mind” on CNN and thought Crowder was involved. If it was in the title of the show, a huge slim maybe. But in the full show, in a debate, with someone saying “change my mind,” it’s absurd to think Crowder has a case.
For the last couple of decades, USPTO has been handing out patents and trademarks on anything that pays them. I had a business for years, based on a culinary technique that’s been around for 150 years, and somehow some guy got a patent on it. It would literally be like getting a patent on scrambled eggs, or the club sandwich, it’s ridiculous.
Every now and then, the guy contacts me and demands $80K a month for a license, and I always tell him to go fuck himself. He always threatens to sue, but I already know of one case he’s lost, and I know he’s just bluffing. If he goes to court, he’ll just be spending a bunch of money to lose the case, lose his patent, and pay my legal bills.
In the end I agree, it can’t be enforced, but if it helps:
Trademark protects source indicators, for specific goods and services, so a phrase isn’t simply trademarkable or not on its own, it depends on what it is relating to.
There’s different levels of protectibility as well - but “generic” is a higher bar. If something is just “descriptive” then it’s really just describing the goods or services. Those can’t be trademarked unless there is “secondary meaning” which is established consumer association with using that phrase for a good or service. There’s also “suggestive” marks, which are less direct than descriptive, “arbitrary” marks which are words applied to unlike goods and services, and “fanciful” (edit: correction) marks which are totally made up words. All that goes in order of protectibility.
Basically, Crowder shouldn’t (IMHO) have gotten this mark for debate products/services, because it’s descriptive to what debate is. Somehow he did without the USPTO fighting back. Maybe USPTO was overworked and it slipped by.
Ultimately, though, an infringement would only succeed if another party used it in a way that caused confusion over the source/endorsement. Crowder would have to show people saw them say “change my mind” on CNN and thought Crowder was involved. If it was in the title of the show, a huge slim maybe. But in the full show, in a debate, with someone saying “change my mind,” it’s absurd to think Crowder has a case.
For the last couple of decades, USPTO has been handing out patents and trademarks on anything that pays them. I had a business for years, based on a culinary technique that’s been around for 150 years, and somehow some guy got a patent on it. It would literally be like getting a patent on scrambled eggs, or the club sandwich, it’s ridiculous.
Every now and then, the guy contacts me and demands $80K a month for a license, and I always tell him to go fuck himself. He always threatens to sue, but I already know of one case he’s lost, and I know he’s just bluffing. If he goes to court, he’ll just be spending a bunch of money to lose the case, lose his patent, and pay my legal bills.