I'm surprised to find that the Hull company appears to be independent. Hull is notable as the home of Reckitt and Coleman (now Reckitt BencKiser), surely the sworn enemies of P&G.
OMG! Battle looms over WTF! trademarks
Giant multinational Procter & Gamble has filed for trademarks incorporating internet slang abbreviations including LOL to appeal to younger consumers – but it can expect to face challenges from hundreds of companies who, er, already thought of the idea ages ago. P&G registered to use marks including "OMG", "LOL" and "WTF" …
COMMENTS
-
-
Friday 24th August 2018 17:08 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: WMUWIO
Sorry to tell you this ATC.
But it will never be over. Never I tell you!
As long as we have the pincers of evil (marketing and lawyers) we are all doomed to suffer this game being played out again and again.
The reason I'm sorry to tell you this?
You have just agreed to sleep until the heat death of the universe, just think of the life you could have led were you awake.
Oh, hang on, can I join you in blissful, ignorant slumber? No touching I promise, but at least I'll not have to listen to Brexiteers telling me how good things are going to be once the UK has fucked itself.
The last bit is personal opnion and I'm willing to admit I might be wrong. The other stuff, I think I've got that right.
-
-
Friday 24th August 2018 17:03 GMT mark l 2
I question why such commonly used terms such be allowed trademarks at all? What next trademark the word cleaning so no one else can use it on their products.
I also guess that those who proposed to trademark WTF don't really realise what the F stands for, as if they did they probably wouldn't want it associated with their products.
-
Friday 24th August 2018 17:40 GMT John Brown (no body)
"I question why such commonly used terms such be allowed trademarks at all? What next trademark the word cleaning so no one else can use it on their products."
A trademark is registered for specific use(s) as defined in the application and includes such things as colours, graphics and typeface as part of the definition. Just writing LOL is not a trademark infringement against any of those who have a registered trademark including the "word" LOL. It can make it difficult to decide where the line is drawn, as shown by the Aldi cases or the Apple/Samsung trade dress spat a few years ago.
-
Saturday 25th August 2018 13:18 GMT knottedhandkerchief
May...
"A trademark is registered for specific use(s) as defined in the application and includes such things as colours, graphics and typeface as part of the definition."
Recently I made a trademark application, and was granted it. I used a made up word only - without specifying any colours, graphics or typeface. That means for the specified uses, the word is trademarked regardless of appearance. So the above should read: "A trademark is registered for specific use(s) as defined in the application and may include such things as colours, graphics and typeface as part of the definition."
-
Sunday 26th August 2018 10:40 GMT John Brown (no body)
Re: May...
"So the above should read: "A trademark is registered for specific use(s) as defined in the application and may include such things as colours, graphics and typeface as part of the definition."
Yes, I should have been more clear in my definition. On the other hand, what do you think your result would have been if you used a dictionary word instead of a made up word? The trademark application and it's definition must be unique and not confuse people in it's design and area of use. It's all a bit of a swamp for lawyers to play in really.
-
-
-
-
-
Friday 24th August 2018 17:48 GMT Doctor Syntax
"corporate marketing"
It might be worse than that. The report on the Beeb suggests it could be the work of an activist investor who now has a seat on the board. Maybe the board decided the best way to deal with him was let him have his head and then when everyone was pointing and laughing at the result, give them a chance to fire him without comeback. (Ringing the BOFH for carpet & quicklime would finish the job nicely.)
-
-
-
Friday 24th August 2018 18:15 GMT Flakk
Re: Count Me Out
It could be amusing... providing that of every ten bottles, one contains a durable water repellent that makes clothes more stain resistant, and one contains an acid that burns holes in clothes. This would make the name of the product live up to the reaction of using the product.
You can have that one for free, P&G. YOLO, y'know?
-
-
Friday 24th August 2018 18:22 GMT Anonymous Coward
Which idiot at P&G decided they wanted to use OMG WTF and LOL? Who are they intending to market to? kids under 10 that haven't yet found out the worlds moved on? Emoji's will old hat soon when they run out of things to do, they only have poo with sunglasses on, vegan chicken and creepy kids tv presenter from the 80's to be do before it's all over.
-
-
Friday 24th August 2018 22:42 GMT Malcolm Weir
Possibly worth emphasizing that, as some noted earlier, that the trademark application won't impact the use of the words/acronyms in normal speech/text.
If it were not the case, we could never use the word to describe the person who monitors examination sessions, or a verb commonly used in place of "wager".
-
Saturday 25th August 2018 12:31 GMT Alan Brown
iThings
"several companies registered "iWatch" before Apple developed its wearable, which is may explain why the Apple Watch is called the Apple Watch"
That stems from "iPhone" - which was being marketed in several countries many years before Apple got into the game - Apple found its attempts to steamroller those existing trademarks didn't go well, or cheaply.
-
Monday 27th August 2018 05:32 GMT Oengus
Mac
I seem to remember that Apple had an issue in Australia with mac.com.au and the rights to the Mac name.
MAC was Mountain Apple Computers, a small computer retailer in the Blue Mountains just behind Sydney, and they registered the abbreviation MAC and traded under that name for years selling Apple products (even before the Mac existed). When the internet took off they started using mac.com.au as permitted by the .au domain rules. Apple wanted the name and expected MAC to hand it over. MAC refused. Apple stopped supplying computers to MAC. The result a hefty fine from the competition watchdog for restraint of trade and still no control of mac.com.au. Eventually Apple did buy the name but my understanding is it wasn't cheap.
-
-
Tuesday 28th August 2018 06:05 GMT Ken Moorhouse
Flash Update
£2 from Tesco.
"Hello … we all enjoy having visitors and I have up to 40,000 a week! This, and being open every day of the year, gives me a big cleaning problem … so I’m very keen to see how Flash compares with washing powder in this floor-cleaning demonstration."*
"Oh, it looks like all my guests have become infected with some deadly virus."
*http://www.headington.org.uk/adverts/cleaners_washingpowders.htm