EU Rejects Spam Maker's Trademark Bid

kog777 writes "The producer of the canned pork product Spam has lost a bid to claim the word as a trademark for unsolicited e-mails. EU trademark officials rejected Hormel Foods Corp.'s appeal, dealing the company another setback in its struggle to prevent software companies from using the word 'spam' in their products, a practice it argued was diluting its brand name. The European Office of Trade Marks and Designs, noting that the vast majority of the hits yielded by a Google search for the word made no reference to the food, said that 'the most evident meaning of the term SPAM for the consumers ... will certainly be unsolicited, usually commercial e-mail, rather than a designation for canned spicy ham.'"

Well....

[diersing (679767)]

Are we really using Google to decide such matters? What else could Google decide for us?

Re:Well....

[Sqwubbsy (723014)]

Presidential elections? [googlefight.com]

Re:

[just_another_sean (919159)]

Which meat product is more popular [googlefight.com]?

Re:

[just_another_sean (919159)]

And the winner is SPAM! By a landslide:

spam -email -filter: 233,000,000 results
hot dogs: 49,700,000 results

I love googlefight :-)

Re:Well....

[seanadams.com (463190)]

indeed, what an obviously self-selected sample set. Asking the _internet_ to tell you what spam is?

I reealize this was a European court and Spam is not popular over there, but imagine what you'd get if you asked, say 100 people as they walked through the canned meats section of a supermarket.

That's about as ridiculous as asking google to tell you what it means on the internet. It's all about context.

I don't think anyone would confuse spam with just email if you invited them over for a nice spam casserole. They'd just tell you they'd rather eat cat feces, which smells the same but tastes slightly better.

Re:Well....

[jimicus (737525)]

they'd rather eat cat feces, which smells the same but tastes slightly better.

How do you know?

Re:Well....

[thinsoldier (937530)]

i've had lots of cats in my life
I've seen them all eat poo on many occasions
i've also seen dogs digging in my trash to snack on used kitty litter

i tried feeding spam to 4 of my cats a few years ago, 3 didnt even bother to taste it
1 ate it but threw up about an hour later

Re:

[Lonewolf666 (259450)]

indeed, what an obviously self-selected sample set. Asking the _internet_ to tell you what spam is?

I reealize this was a European court and Spam is not popular over there, but imagine what you'd get if you asked, say 100 people as they walked through the canned meats section of a supermarket.

In an European supermarket?
Of course you would meet many people that way who are not familiar with internet spam, but the "Hormel spam" is not very well known over here. I guess the definition of spam as unsolicited bul

Re:

[walt-sjc (145127)]

X-windows existed well before Microsoft windows. Microsoft did NOT coin the term "windows" when refering to rectangular regions on a screen, or to a windowing system (The original Windows was not an OS, but just a GUI layer on top of DOS - much like X-windows is a GUI layer on Unix.

Re:

[theguyfromsaturn (802938)]

True, but I honestly had never heard of a canned meat named spam until a year and a half ago when I decide to find out where the name of SPAM (unsollicited e-mail) came from. Most of the people I know who never used the net, didn't know what SPAM was period.

Re:Well....

[Buran (150348)]

Doesn't really matter. This is an example of how language changes over time. A word with one meaning this decade can have an entirely different one in the next, and once the new meaning is as firmly entrenched as "spam = junk email" is, there's no going back. I don't know what the point is of all the moaning about this (on Hormel's part)... if they wanted to complain they should have done it a long, long time ago before the meaning change became entrenched.

Hormel, you're too late. About a decade too late. Stop trying to herd cats and spend your money on something that's actually achievable -- you certainly are not going to get anywhere here. The increasing backlash of corporatization of everything certainly won't help you either.

Re:

[Skreems (598317)]

That did strike me as a bit odd. It's sort of cherry picking your sample to do an internet search. Of course most web sites are going to use the junk email definition. A better question is, of the large number of people who don't have an internet connection, or even own a computer, how many would use the old definition and how many the new? Get away from the specialized audience and I bet your answer changes significantly.

Re:

[Yvan256 (722131)]

Not yet, it seems. The magic 8 ball is still more popular [googlefight.com].

Re:

[Yvan256 (722131)]

The parent said
"You would be surprised if I told you how many people I know that make decisions based on the result of a Google Fight."
not
"You would be surprised if I told you how many people I know that make decisions based on the result of a Google."

Poor Hormel. It's all the fault of those...

[just_another_sean (919159)]

...damn vikings [google.com].

Number One

[Billosaur (927319)]

The European Office of Trade Marks and Designs, noting that the vast majority of the hits yielded by a Google search for the word made no reference to the food...

SPAM search [google.com]

And what is the first item listed, you ask? Why WWW.SPAM.COM - From Hormel Foods Corporation. Includes history, fan club, and facts. [spam.com] I'm pretty sure Hormel has had to fork over a lot of money to keep them at the top of any search for SPAM, to keep the trademark from being wiped away.

Re:Number One

[k98sven (324383)]

Seems to me that would be a bad call for Hormel and the EU court, although I suspect the quote here has probably been taken out of context and given undue weight.

Thing is, I see no reason at all for how a trademark could become genericized merely by becoming a common word for something completely different. (Python reference intended)

The point, as I learned it, was that a trademark becomes generic when it becomes the generic term for that product. E.g. "Cola" is a generic term for a certain type of soft drink, but "Coca-Cola" is not.

"Yo-yo" used to be a trademark for a specific kind of spinning toy, but they lost it when it became the generic term for that kind of toy.

"Windows" is a generic term to begin with. But it wasn't (and still isn't) a generic term for operating system software.

Now "Spam" is indeed threatened as a trademark, since people indeed are referring canned corned beef in general as "Spam". But I can't see any relevance in whether people use the same term to refer to unsolicited email or not. It's not like there is any risk the two 'products' would ever be confused.

Re:Number One

[Tony Hoyle (11698)]

That's not what they were after.

Hormel already have the tradmark for spam the meat product. They wanted the trademark for spam as unsolicited email as well.. The EU courts said no, which seems reasonable to me - that meaning of spam is part of the common language.

It's the same as Microsoft asking a court to give them the trademark to 'Windows' meaning 'pieces of glass in the side of a house'. They wouldn't get it either (well, maybe in a US court, but not in an independent one).

Trademark defense

[marmoset (3738)]

The next time someone bitches about Apple protecting their iPod trademark, I'm just going to forward them a link to this article.

Re:

[oliverthered (187439)]

Their not trying to protect iPod their trying to to protect pod. Apple shouldn't have picked a common word to trademark in the first place.

ordering instructions, please

[revery (456516)]

the most evident meaning of the term SPAM for the consumers ... will certainly be unsolicited, usually commercial e-mail, rather than a designation for canned spicy ham.

I just want to know how to order breakfast correctly. The last time I asked for Spam spam spam spam spam spam ham eggs spam spam spam bacon and spam, I got 6 advertisements for Viagra and Cialis, 3 pleas for extraditing Nigerian capital, an offer to augment my anatomy and blueberry pancakes served with Raspberry syrup and 2 raw quail eggs.

Please help!!

Sincerely,

A Sad Spam Solicitor

Can you keep a worthless trademark?

[Chemisor (97276)]

This leads to the question of whether a company should continue to be allowed to claim a trademark word that everyone on the planet uses for something entirely unrelated to that company or its product.

Re:

[Billosaur (927319)]

I suspect Xerox(tm) and Kleenex(tm) would have something to say about it. For more information, try this little piece from Media Literacy Review [uoregon.edu]

Stupid question of the day

[Rik Sweeney (471717)]

"Ultimately, we are trying to avoid the day when the consuming public asks, 'Why would Hormel Foods name its product after junk e-mail?'"

These would be the same people that will ask why makers of glass-that-fits-into-buildings-to-allow-people-to- see-into-other-areas chose to name their product after Microsoft's Operating System?

Get a grip, Hormel.

Re:Stupid question of the day

[El Torico (732160)]

Here's another one, "Mercedes, that's an odd name. Why would anyone name their daughter after a car?"

Answer of the day

[hellfire (86129)]

Perhaps that's where their daughter was conceived?

Re:Stupid question of the day

[hotdiggitydawg (881316)]

Hang on let me get this straight, his daughter is "Mercedes" and his friends are "Google" and "Wikipedia"? What an odd bunch of people...

Re:

[Lazarian (906722)]

I kinda think that even though they lost the suit, it still might have inadvertantly been a way to promote Spam(TM). I cant remember the last time I've ever seen a commercial about it.

It's odd that one of the company's most famous products never seems to get advertised on tv.

(Obviously it'd be useless to get 180Solutions to help them promote it, although it'd be funny if they tried.)

Product name != term for everyday object

[Vellmont (569020)]

Spam is a product name, not a general term for something almost every single person has in their home. It's MUCH more common to refer to windows as the glass thing than the software thing. The opposite is true for spam. When was the last time that the spiced meat product usage came up in one of your conversations? When was the last time that the unwanted email usage came up in conversation? I don't eat the spiced meat product, and I don't know anyone that does. Nearly everyone that has an email addre

Did the EU really find...

[BlabberMouth (672282)]

that most people do not associate the term spam with the spicy canned meat? I think we are still far away from that actually occurring. They may have a point internationally. However, the term "spam" is still strongly associated with both unsolicited email and the ham product in most English speaking person's minds. That google has more hits for uncolicited email is irrelevant. Nevertheless, I do not think Hormel's mark has been diluted because this use is so completely different that has no real affect on its product.

Re:

[j00r0m4nc3r (959816)]

I thought trademarks were sort of industry-specific anyway. Like how there could be a cartoon called Thunderbirds, and a car called a Thunderbird. Maybe I just don't understand trademarks...

Re:

[ElleyKitten (715519)]

Wasn't that cartoon called Thunderhawks?

Re:

[MrMr (219533)]

is still strongly associated with both unsolicited email and the ham product in most English speaking person's minds
But that would be about 10% of the population of the EU. For the 90% living outside Britain I would guess that only Monty Python fans will be aware that there is another meaning for the word spam besides unsollicitated bulk email.

Re:

[GroeFaZ (850443)]

I feel a little uneasy pointing out the bleedingly obvious, but the vast majority of the EU does not speak native English and does not live in England which, according to wiki, is the main consument of spam in the EU. Or do you think it's coincidence that Monty Python, being British, invented the spam sketch? What the online "community" thinks about spam is made evident by a simple google search, and the result here seems very relevant because spam got its new meaning there.

Judges comments seemed odd?

[zippthorne (748122)]

Based on the judge's comments from the article, the reason Hormel is being denied its claim of trademark dilution is that their trademark is diluted?

Ugh

[by Anonymous Coward]

Hormal Foods created this word in 1937. This would be like telling Xerox that their name can be used somewhere else. While Xerox may be commonly used for any copy machine, Xerox still owns the trademark and other companies cannot put Xerox on their product. The same goes for Kleenex, Coca-Cola (in fact coke invented the word cola, and only lost the trademark due to failing to defend it). This is a crappy ruling.

Other brands

[Bog Standard (743863)]

Well I guess the Coca-Cola Corp now know where they stand should they wish to persue a line in "other" products called coke....

spicy ham???

[michael_allison (697265)]

since when did Spam become spicy? i've always been aware of its' tempting ham/chicken/various pork products goodness...and who can deny the succulent self juices that the log o' love is wallowing in? i'll never forget that summer when me and young becky atkins had our first taste of the forbidden half-ham/half-buffalo/half-emu pork product...the slimy, meat jello sliding down our chins in the summer sun... but i regress... spam is not spicy, unless you dress it up in something hot and sexy!

/. community the for big corporation?

[StateOfTheUnion (762194)]

Actually I think that this is inline with trademark law. Hormel did not act on the use of the word SPAM by the online community until well after the new meaning had become well established. One has to protect trademarks or show significant effort to do so, or the trademark may become public domain. One can argue that "Coke" or "McDonalds" or even "Mickey Mouse" may have more meanings than denoted by trademark, but I believe that these companies have more vigorously protected their trademarks.

Most telling

Re:

[camusflage (65105)]

What is unfortunate in this is that it punishes the company that "does the right thing", in allowing usage of the term to flourish as long as it was all lower case and in no way disparaged the fine products of the Hormel company. Now, they're at risk for losing their trademark for not "defending" it. This will simply encourage companies to go after Mike Rowe Soft, folks using keywords for PPC campaigns, and anything with the word "pod" in it. If you were Apple, and you saw this going down on Hormel, what wo

RTFA

[tygt (792974)]

I haven't seen a properly relevant posting here yet. From TFA:

"has lost a bid to claim the word as a trademark for unsolicited e-mails ... We do not object to use of this slang term to describe (unsolicited commercial e-mail)," the company said on its Web site, "although we do object to the use of the word "spam" as a trademark and to the use of our product image in association with that term."

They don't like the idea of anyone else having "spam" in a trademarked name; they were trying to assert trademark for unsolicited email (and thus be able to protect such a trademark). No doubt, they have a trademark for the (not-so) Spiced Ham, and the EU isn't questioning that. They just denied Spam's request for trademark over spam emails.

My New Software

[SafariShane (560870)]

I'm coding a gateway for bill payments. Once ubiquitous, someone we all know might be forced to change his name. I'm calling it, "Bills Gate".

Hey Hormel! Read THIS NOW!

[eno2001 (527078)]

I suggest that your product, no matter how you may percieve it has NEVER been a favorite. Why do you think that the term for unsolicited e-mail uses the "SPAM" name? BECAUSE NO ONE REALLY LIKES SPAM (both the canned meat product and the unsolicited e-mail) TO BEGIN WITH!!!! I would suggest that you consider renaming your product. Do some market studies and find out just how you can rethink things. Hell. Call Steve Jobs! He "thinks different", he could probably help you out of this scrape with insigni

Re:

[Banner (17158)]

I like Spam (the product not the email). Have you ever tried it? It's actually not bad. The term 'spam' for email has absolutely nothing to do with the taste of the product and whether or not people like it, (and from the number of sales and length of time on the market it is apparent that many people do like SPAM).

It has to everything do with the Monty Python skit however. They're the ones (if anyone can be blamed) most responsible for the coining of the phrase. When I first heard the comment 'Spam Email'

Trademarks

[debrain (29228)]

Trademarks are a form of consumer protection. They allow you to buy Kellogg's Corn Flakes and get the product you are expecting, from the maker you presume to make it. The only real corporate protection is relatively incidental, being that it prevents competing and equivalent products from imitating the genuine article. So you have two purposes at work: consumer protection from confusion, and corporate protection from unfair competition arising from imitation.

Does SPAM referring to "unsolicited email" confuse consumers, or misrepresent the corporate's product to unfairly compete? In this case the SPAM trademark applies to a canned meat product. The term is also in general use to refer to unsolicited email. They are separate industries, and consumers are unlikely to confuse unsolicited email with a canned meat product. Similarly, there are no concerns over unfair competition by imitation. Thus there is little harm to the consumer, nor a real concern to the corporation.

Further, the SPAM trademark owners let the term become diluted over the years to the point where it is commonly accepted; had they intervened a decade ago, their arguments would have been stronger. They are likely statutorily obligated to actively protect their trademark rights. Even if not a statutory obligation, failing to protect their rights is prejudicial in the eyes of most courts.

Simulated Pieces of Anonymous Mutants

[Irvu (248207)]

Hormel has made a point of suing many of the great defamers of their meat(ish) product. My personal favorite is when they sued Jim Henson for the character Spa'am leader of the Pig Pirates. The judge dismissed the case saying: "The American public can tell the difference between a puppet and a lunchmeat." (see Spam Bobbleheads [wikipedia.org], Spam Costumes [spamgift.com] and Spam Shorts [spamgift.com]. Spam Underwear has also been sold on occasion but I have yet to find any online.

You can understand why the company puts in so much effort to protect the good name though. After all Spam (Scattered Parts of Anonymous Mammals) is important to many people. Both Hawaii and Alaska [flybynightclub.com] love Spam. As has been noted about Alaska:

Spam® is like Alaska's only Congressman Don Young. Everyone makes fun of him, but he always wins by a landslide even though no one will ever admit voting for him. That's the story with Spam®. Nobody will admit eating it, but somebody is out there buying over 2,000 cans a day in Alaska.

For more tasty info on the Simulated Pieces of Appalling Mutants see The Amazing and Fabulous Spam Site [modernsurf.com] which includes a 300 DPI Scan of SPAM [modernsurf.com]

a href="

  It's funny to see how much effort the company puts into targeting the brand given that Spam is so important to

Re:

[El Torico (732160)]

Actually, Hormel should thank them. Monty Python and the first person to use the word "spam" to describe bulk e-mail probably did more to make Hormel's canned meat product known to the world than anyone else.

Re:

[omeomi (675045)]

Spam (the food) always gets a bad rap, but when cut into patties and fried, I think it's pretty tasty. Haven't had it in a long time, though...

Re:So, lemme get this straight . . .

[mwvdlee (775178)]

You've got a serious case of patent == copyright == trademark.

They are not all the same.

The SCO/IBM case is (mainly) about copyright.
The Transmeta/Intel case is about patents.
Hormel's case is about a trademark.

Besides, has Hormel really actively protected their trademark ever since people started using the word "Spam" for unsolicited e-mail? I've only heard about them doing so for the last two, or perhaps three, years.

Re:So, lemme get this straight . . .

[Absolut187 (816431)]

No, Hormel hasn't been told they "can't keep their name."
They get to keep their trademark on "Spam" as applied to spiced meat in a can.
They just don't get to extend their control to "Spam" as applied to software to stop junk email.
Big difference.

The producer of the canned pork product Spam has lost a bid to claim the word as a trademark for unsolicited e-mails.

Trademark rights are not absolute - you own a mark as applied to a particular type of good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark [wikipedia.org]