Can you own (up to) being a GOLD DIGGER?

Bill Belichick’s girlfriend, Jordon Hudson, is making their relationship official. Well, at least the character of it. Hudson, who is 49 years Belichick’s junior, recently applied to register the trademark GOLD DIGGER (application #US99356462) in association with “Jewelry and Key chains.” Hudson is clearly owning the impressions her relationship and its stardom are giving people. If granted, she will also be successful in establishing this ownership legally… almost.

Indication of source, not goods and services

As many readers are likely aware, a trademark serves as an indication of source and cannot be merely descriptive of its corresponding goods and services. In addition to being cheeky, Hudson’s election to file for a GOLD DIGGER mark is clearly a nod to the public’s opinion on her relationship with Belichick. While no one can predict how an Examiner may construe the mark, for example, a disclaimer of the term GOLD may be necessary, it is not otherwise descriptive of the associated “Jewelry and Key chains” she is selling. So, the mark distinguishes between the identity of the business and the goods and services it provides. Additionally, it’s hard to imagine an Examiner opining that the market will be deceived into believing Hudson is selling gold-digging goods or services, let alone requiring evidence to demonstrate this. By focusing on her image and brand, Hudson is clearly seizing an opportunity to capitalize on the recognition her star-powered relationship provides. Owning her truth, even ironically, may not be a conventional method of capitalizing on acquired “goodwill” (or rather, “notoriety”), but hey, there is no such thing as bad publicity, right?

Our comment

When considering a trademark, this newsworthy event highlights the merits of choosing a trademark that represents the source of the associated goods and/or services and the identity of its owner. While the identity of the business is often inextricably wrapped up in the goods and services it provides, referencing such commercial offerings can lead to pitfalls barring registration. So, fanciful marks tend to be the most reliable and potentially only viable approach to registering a trademark. Wherever possible, however, selecting and using a trademark that says something about the character of the provider, distinct from the goods and services, can capture the value the provider brings to the table – and such value would effectively extend beyond both what the business sells and the inherent goodwill associated with the business itself. While this is not a function traditionally ascribed to trademarks, imbuing the trademark with additional purpose and marketing value is a great way to encourage owner investment in the mark and steer clear of the tendency to drift dangerously close to unregistrable descriptive marks.

← Back to News