X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Some ideas are so lowdown awful, criticism is not enough. One needs to seize the offending notion by the scruff of the neck, shove it into a corner, and stand over and scold it: “Bad idea! Bad, bad idea!” The recent trademark application filed by New York City to monopolize the phrase “The World’s Second Home” for a wide range of products � from paperweights to baby bibs to temporary tattoos to fanny packs � is such a notion. It is not enough to discredit the idea. Someone really needs to give New York a timeout. New York City wants to host the 2012 Olympics. To increase its chances among the five finalists, the city has filed a trademark application to register “The World’s Second Home” on an intent-to-use basis for scores of goods and services in eight different classes. The strategy, apparently, is to emphasize that New York is a city of immigrants, with citizens from all over the globe, and thus the logical locale for an international event such as the Olympics. There are obvious problems with the gambit, starting with the fact that New York is not the World’s Second Home. Granted, with 36 percent of its population foreign-born, New York is the second home for many, many people. But it lags behind Miami (with 51 percent of its population foreign-born), Los Angeles (41 percent), and even Vancouver (37 percent). New Yorkers might respond that Miami is the second home mainly to Cuban-Americans, and Los Angeles the second home mainly to Mexican-Americans, while New York’s second-homers come from many different places. But even in the category of second-home diversity, New York trails behind Toronto, which has been named by the United Nations as “the world’s most ethnically diverse city” five times in a row. But these are minor matters. The main problem with New York’s attempt to monopolize “The World’s Second Home” is the violence it does to bedrock principles of trademark law. SCRATCHED IN CLAY Since the dawn of recorded history � actually before the dawn � trademarks have served the function of distinguishing one party’s products from those of another. Paintings on the walls of the Lascaux caves in southern France show bison bearing marks that, scholars say, indicate ownership. The cavemen wanted to distinguish their bison from those of their prehistoric rivals. Ancient Egyptians, Greeks, and Chinese used seals and other markings to distinguish one party’s pottery from that of another. All these venerable trademark practitioners started with a product. Then they developed a mark to append to it. And so trademarks evolved through history. Antonio Stradivari crafted more than 1,100 violins and other musical instruments � and the “Stradivarius” mark emerged to identify his handiwork and models. Arthur Guinness first developed a remarkable stout in Dublin, and then attached the family name to distinguish it from his competitors’ beers. But now comes New York City reversing the process. First, officials developed the catchy if inaccurate slogan “The World’s Second Home.” Then they compiled the longest possible list of tchotchkes imaginable � including lawn signs, beanbag chairs, pencil sharpeners, key chains, sandals, rompers, and knickers (yes, knickers) � upon which to attach the mark. LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME! Why? Obviously, not for the traditional purpose of trademark law: to distinguish New York City’s products from those of other cities. Can anyone imagine a shopper searching the globe for knickers, until he finally finds a pair emblazoned with “The World’s Second Home,” and then exclaiming: “At last! Thanks to this slogan, I know I’ve finally found a pair of genuine knickers manufactured by the good people of New York City! Just what I’ve been looking for!” No, the knickers could (and probably will) come from Bangladesh, for all the shopper will care. It’s not the product New York will be selling, but the mark. New York wants to be known as the World’s Second Home. The plethora of cheap products will provide just so many tiny, portable billboards to advertise that aspiration. Of course, New York City is not alone in the campaign to stand trademark law on its head. That noted New Yorker, Donald Trump, no sooner had a hit TV show under his belt than he applied to register “You’re Fired” for games, playthings, pillows, alcoholic beverages, and men’s cologne. Jessie Conners, a failed contestant on the show, demonstrated her ability to learn from the master: After she was “fired,” she promptly filed to register “You’re Fired” for a line of clothing. Of course, no shopper is going to search for the mark “You’re Fired” on toys, pillows, or drinks to gain assurance that the products truly are made by Donald Trump or Jessie Conners. Trump and Conners do not intend to use the slogan to promote their products. They intend to use the slogan to promote themselves. RIVALS SHUT UP Aside from undermining the fundamentals of trademark law, what is wrong with this trend? Is it a crime for New York City to want the exclusive right to sell tote bags with the “World’s Second Home” slogan? Well, yes it is. And not just a crime against good taste. It is a crime against freedom of speech. Other cities may wish to vie with New York for the title of the World’s Second Home. But by the simple expedient of trademark registration, and the vagaries of the international classification system, New York City can effectively block its rivals from expressing that sentiment in just about any medium other than newsprint. Which is, of course, the whole point of the campaign. New York is not out to promote its tchotchke industry. That industry is already quite healthy, thank you. Rather, the campaign’s aim is to send a message and to prevent others from sending a competing message. This inversion of trademark law leads to perverse incentives. Rival cities, denied the right to use the “World’s Second Home” slogan on their own chazzerei, may rush to reserve “The World’s Third Home” or “The World’s Fourth Home.” Our trademark registration system allows anyone to file any number of intent-to-use applications. Once it’s approved, the applicant has up to three years to actually use the mark on a product. Thus, a crafty city might apply for, and so tie up for years, the slogans “World’s [Third], [Fourth], [Fifth], [and so on, up to 99th] Home.” BORN WHERE? I grew up in Marblehead, a small town north of Boston, where every schoolchild learns that his hometown is “The Birthplace of the American Navy.” Our claim was supported by the fact that the men rowing Washington’s army across the Delaware in Emanuel Leutze’s famous painting were Marblehead fishermen, one and all. For some unfathomable reason, the smaller town of Beverly, a few miles farther north, also laid claim to the title, and motorists could not enter the community without passing a billboard welcoming them to this other putative “Birthplace of the American Navy.” There was a fair amount of argument between the towns and petty vandalism of each other’s signs. But on the whole, the battle was waged ethically. It never occurred to anyone, in that quainter and more innocent age, to file trademark applications to obtain exclusive rights to use “The Birthplace of the American Navy” on electric light switch plates, tattoos, or beanbag chairs. We were fortunate. Since anyone can file an intent-to-use trademark application, Marblehead (and Beverly, too) might have lost out to Omaha, Neb., for exclusive rights to call itself “The Birthplace of the American Navy.” Lawrence J. Siskind is a partner in San Francisco’s Harvey Siskind Jacobs, specializing in intellectual property law. This article originally appeared in The Recorder , an ALM publication.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.