Comments on: No, I’ll Have an Arnold Palmer http://madisonian.net/2008/08/21/no-ill-have-an-arnold-palmer/ a blog about law, tech, culture, and related things Sat, 11 Feb 2012 02:59:42 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Zachary http://madisonian.net/2008/08/21/no-ill-have-an-arnold-palmer/comment-page-1/#comment-258684 Zachary Thu, 28 Aug 2008 05:36:14 +0000 http://madisonian.net/?p=1478#comment-258684 This fascination is inescapable. I am a law student on the IP track at Seton Hall University, and am also an Arnold Palmer beverage addict. I just learned today that SHU stocks Snapple "Half & Half", a blend far inferior to Arizona's formula. I proposed this question concerning Mr. Palmer's/Arizona's trademark rights at least two times today. It's good to see I'm thinking on the right track. This fascination is inescapable. I am a law student on the IP track at Seton Hall University, and am also an Arnold Palmer beverage addict. I just learned today that SHU stocks Snapple “Half & Half”, a blend far inferior to Arizona’s formula. I proposed this question concerning Mr. Palmer’s/Arizona’s trademark rights at least two times today. It’s good to see I’m thinking on the right track.

]]> By: greglas http://madisonian.net/2008/08/21/no-ill-have-an-arnold-palmer/comment-page-1/#comment-258066 greglas Fri, 22 Aug 2008 10:51:13 +0000 http://madisonian.net/?p=1478#comment-258066 p.s. Having now clicked the TESS button to look at the file, I see there was no back-and-forth. p.s. Having now clicked the TESS button to look at the file, I see there was no back-and-forth.

]]> By: greglas http://madisonian.net/2008/08/21/no-ill-have-an-arnold-palmer/comment-page-1/#comment-258052 greglas Fri, 22 Aug 2008 03:35:48 +0000 http://madisonian.net/?p=1478#comment-258052 Hey Mike -- I'm in TM mode too, starting on Monday too, so this is good exercise. It seems like a pretty clear lack of secondary meaning to me. AP himself isn't established as the sponsoring source of any drink called the AP -- at least not yet. In theory, I guess it is possible for a term to go from a generic term to one possessing 2M, but it seems like a long shot. Check out Wikipedia, the editors of which define this as a generic term: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Palmer_drink Check out Arnie's website, which also seems to acknowledge the term is being used in a generic sense: http://www.arnoldpalmertee.com/news.asp Btw, "Arnold Palmer Tee" is indeed a registered trademark -- ser. No. 78150585. However, I think it is important that they registered it as the design plus the whole word -- it would be interesting to look at the file and see if there was any back-and-forth. I'm curious as to how the right of publicity would play into this, which seems like a closer issue. I would still say no dice under applicable ROP laws, but your mileage may vary. Hey Mike — I’m in TM mode too, starting on Monday too, so this is good exercise.

It seems like a pretty clear lack of secondary meaning to me. AP himself isn’t established as the sponsoring source of any drink called the AP — at least not yet. In theory, I guess it is possible for a term to go from a generic term to one possessing 2M, but it seems like a long shot.

Check out Wikipedia, the editors of which define this as a generic term:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Palmer_drink

Check out Arnie’s website, which also seems to acknowledge the term is being used in a generic sense:
http://www.arnoldpalmertee.com/news.asp

Btw, “Arnold Palmer Tee” is indeed a registered trademark — ser. No. 78150585. However, I think it is important that they registered it as the design plus the whole word — it would be interesting to look at the file and see if there was any back-and-forth.

I’m curious as to how the right of publicity would play into this, which seems like a closer issue. I would still say no dice under applicable ROP laws, but your mileage may vary.

]]>