While the lucky amongst us were tucking into candlelit meals for two, or showering our loved ones with long-stemmed red roses, man-of-the-moment Julian Assange was celebrating Valentine’s Day with an application to trademark his own name.
The man known around the world for his extreme stance on freedom of information seeks to protect the use of his name for the purposes of (but not limited to) “news reporter services,” “journalism,” “publication of texts other than publicity texts” and “education services.” Wikileaks founder Assange, who is soon to be immortalised on the Silver Screen in a film named ‘The Most Dangerous Man In The World’ (‘Julian AssangeTM’ probably didn’t have the right ring to it) is by no means the first famous face to try to protect the use of their name.
In fact, the trend is growing at such an alarming rate that the Trade Marks Registry at the UK Patent Office has had to amend their guidelines to specifically cover the “names of famous people (living deceased).”
Sarah Palin attempted the same process for herself and daughter, Bristol, in an effort to protect their public speaking careers. But the former governor of Alaska, who likened Assange to the editor of an al Quaeda publication, probably would not appreciate the comparison.
Unfortunately, the Palin trademarks are still being processed, as there were certain issues with their applications that required clarification. Further evidence is required by the patent office with regards to the nature of the names’ commercial use. Also, both the Palins forgot to sign their forms.
Protecting a name isn’t new amongst the world’s most famous entertainers, but increasingly now political figures are getting in on the act. After a Russian Vodka company started printing bottle labels featuring a picture of Mikhail Gorbachev’s famous birthmark, the Former President of the Soviet Union realised he had to protect his most valuable asset, and filed to turn his birthmark into a trademark. Exactly why the advertising consultant thought a skin defect would sell vodka in the first place is unclear.
Applying to trade mark one’s own name is a complicated process that begins with selecting the fields and categories in which to seek protection. For example when Catherine Zeta-Jones registered her name in 2002, it covered a modest “entertainment services,” whereas Robbie Williams’ application encompassed video, sound and film recording, books, calendars and posters, articles of clothing (entrepreneurs around the world wept at not being able to splash his name across a sweet pair of jeans), and, bizarrely, paintbrushes.
Yet the humble star (who, on signing his record-breaking solo album deal reportedly screamed “I’m rich beyond my wildest dreams!”) is pipped at the post to the award for most surreal trade mark application by everyone’s favourite screw-up, Ms. Britney Spears. Whether by accident or intentionally, Spears inimitably (and inexplicably) registered her own attempt to trademark her name under the sole category of “inflatable furniture”.
LA Galaxy midfielder David Beckham has, unsurprisingly, one of the largest celebrity trademarks ever, covering everything from perfumes and football kits, to key rings and computer accessories; everything and anything that could be branded with Golden Balls’ name is protected by law.
His wife’s trademarking hasn’t been so simple, however, as she has clashed in the courtrooms on several occasions with the Peterborough United football club over the use of the word “posh,” which has been the club’s nickname for many years.
It seems the course of true celeb name protection does not always run true. Mrs. Beckham might find some sympathy in rapper 50 Cent who is embroiled in lengthy legal dispute with Taco Bell over a trademark infringement. After several hours examining the utterly impenetrable details of the case, it remains impossible for Vision to confirm or deny that the issue arose from Taco Bell charging 50 cents for a taco.
Post-mortem trademark applications can be just as problematic. The Presley family applied to have the name ‘Elvis Presley’ protected for the sale of memorabilia, but in 1997 a court ruled that it could not be registered, as neither the deceased singer nor his family exclusively owned the name, and that it was so well known as to no longer to be distinctive enough for trademark protection.
Our obsession with celebrity shows no sign of dissipating any time soon, and as long as our fascination with these individuals persists, the trademark applications will continue to pile up in some poor patent attorney’s in-tray.
But ‘celebrity’ existed long before anyone thought to take out a trademark on themselves. For it is not celebrity itself which caused this bizarre trend, but the emergence of the Celebrity Super Brand. Pioneered by the aforementioned Beckham union, it is no longer enough for a celebrity to be a performer or entertainer, they must be a Lifestyle. The fan doesn’t just want to watch them, they want to look like them, smell like them and, according to Robbie Williams, paint like them.
As long as there are little boys desperate to have the newest football shirt with Becks’ name on the back, and Jamie Oliver’s kitchen range sells like the hot cakes it helps the owner lovingly bake, the switched-on celebs will keep protecting their assets. That is, if they can remember to sign the paperwork.
And as the trend grows amongst the burgeoning super-celebrity community, it seems only a matter of time before someone (and my money is on Gwyneth Paltrow and Chris Martin) cuts out the middle man and names their child Trade Mark. But I warn you, that’s my idea, and it’s patent-pending.