As briefly reported by this blog, a few weeks ago
Specsavers filed an application with the UK Intellectual
Property Office to have SHOULD'VE and SHOULDVE registered as trade marks in
Classes 9, 10, 16, 35, and 44 of the Nice Classification.
This move has attracted broad media coverage [eg here and here], and young IP enthusiast Kishan
Mathy has also explored the story at length.
Here's what Kishan writes:
"After winning a six-year IP
dispute with Asda in 2014 [here], Specsavers is making again trade mark
headlines as it continues to protect its brand.
On July 18 last Specsavers applied to
the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) to register single words “should’ve”
and “shouldve” as trade marks. This contraction derives from Specsavers
well-known catchphrase “should’ve gone to Specsavers”, which the optical
retail chain has been using since 2003 [the phrase has been a registered EU
trade mark since 2007]. The UK IPO has now approved the application by
Specsavers, which means that third parties have until 12 October to oppose the application.
A number of commentators has
criticised IPO’s prima facie approval of the application to ultimately provide
monopoly in single words, noting how this would prevent other companies from
using the words as registered. The IPO has also come under criticism on
consideration of the broad scope of the registration sought (five classes of
goods and services), also beyond the remit of optical services. For example,
one of the classes applied for concerns ‘Printed matter’ (Class 16), which
could potentially provide Specsavers with considerably clout over printed
retail services.
Nevertheless, this is not the first instance
where a company has registered a single word. In 1993 Carlsberg registered the
word PROBABLY under Class 32 (Lager; Beer) and extended protection in 2009
under Classes 33 (Alcoholic beverages) and 43 (Services for providing food and
drink). However, Carlsberg's registration differs from Specsavers's as
protection is limited to use for alcoholic beverages. Upon further perusal of
the IPO trade mark register there are other single words that are registered
such as ALWAYS and NEVER, however to a narrow list of classes.
Despite the legal and commercial
concerns, Specsavers's decision to register single words SHOULD'VE and SHOULDVE
should be recognised as intelligent business strategy, considering the
proliferation and potential of social media. The use of hashtags has become a
significant vehicle of marketing for businesses. Hashtags have the power not
only to categorise content but also to form trends and thus generate interest.
Therefore, registering a specific word will be integral for Specsavers in expanding
their marketing activities and driving future campaigns. For example, the
hashtag ‘#should’ve recently accompanied the full Specsavers catchphrase. It is
thus apparent that registration will help Specsavers to control use in the full
spectrum of social media.
Other businesses will most likely be
closely monitoring whether Specsavers will be successful in formally
registering these trade marks. In the event of successful registration we
should expect an increase in similar trade mark applications for single
words."
The story isn't explained in that much length... it completely omits the fact that 6 separate parties filed noticed of threatened oppositions against the application within 4 days of the application being published. There will almost certainly be opposition proceedings against the application, something that is certainly in the public interest.
ReplyDelete