Sadly, he does seem to have gotten it trademarked. That LLC owns a “Mug Club” which I presume is Crowder’s.
How this was trademarked, I have no idea, but if it’s used satirically (as in thrown back in his face) I don’t see how a lawsuit prevails - generally this is only merited if CNN started using it directly for a personality on their network or a show name, etc.
That’s insane. It’s just a basic concept of debate. An extremely generic phrase. It’s like trademarking “haha”. I suspect it will be tested more thoroughly in court than at the trademark office.
I don’t see how it prevails regardless. It’s generic when used for a debate, no reasonable consumer would assume it was a brand indicator at all, and even if they did no reasonable consumer would assume this debate was signed off on by him.
Sadly, he does seem to have gotten it trademarked. That LLC owns a “Mug Club” which I presume is Crowder’s.
How this was trademarked, I have no idea, but if it’s used satirically (as in thrown back in his face) I don’t see how a lawsuit prevails - generally this is only merited if CNN started using it directly for a personality on their network or a show name, etc.
That’s insane. It’s just a basic concept of debate. An extremely generic phrase. It’s like trademarking “haha”. I suspect it will be tested more thoroughly in court than at the trademark office.
I don’t see how it prevails regardless. It’s generic when used for a debate, no reasonable consumer would assume it was a brand indicator at all, and even if they did no reasonable consumer would assume this debate was signed off on by him.
They should push to overturn it.