Earlier this year, I posted about a dispute between candy company Mars Inc. and a small business based in Wisconsin, selling handmade fine chocolates under the mark CocoVaa.
In March, Mars Inc. filed a federal trademark infringement complaint in the Eastern District of Virginia, asserting that its registered CocoaVia® mark (Reg. No. 4179465), for
Sandwiched between 90 degree days in a Minnesota summer, the idea of Halloween wasn’t on my radar – until I learned about the latest dispute between candy giants Mars and Hershey’s.
Mars and its subsidiary own many well-known candy brands, including M&Ms, Snickers, Twix, Skittles, Life Savers, and others. Not to be outdone, Hershey
While browsing my daily trademark news and digesting some recent chocolate-related trademark litigation, to be discussed below, I happened upon some interesting discussions and histories of slogans for candy, including in particular, the MARS® chocolate bar.
Back in 1960, Mars Inc. debuted its slogan for the MARS® chocolate bar: “A Mars a Day, Helps You
-Martha Engel, Attorney
Marketing has always been an exercise in getting consumers to make a connection with a brand. As our friend Seth Godin once said “Marketing is no longer about the stuff that you make, but the story that you tell.” With the widespread use of social media like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, those
—Jason Voiovich, author of the “State of the Brand” & Vice-President of Marketing for AbleNet, Inc.
It sounds like something I’d get wrong in a game of "Trivial Pursuit".
Name the belated military attempt of King William I to restore his position as monarch over the Belgians. I might have guessed the delicious-sounding
.bmp)
You may recall about a year ago I did a post entitled "Delicious Trademarks: Candy Bar Cross-Section Trademarks?" I was reminded of this a couple of weeks ago when I snapped this photo, capturing what I believe to be the same point of sale display that inspired my original post:
A couple of months ago I saw in a convenience store a large Snickers point-of-sale floor-display depicting a prominent and attention-getting cross-section of a Snickers candy bar. Given Mars’ apparent interest in owning and creating non-traditional trademark rights surrounding the Snickers brand (revisit Dan’s post from earlier this year), it made me wonder whether Mars might view (and want consumers to view) the cross-section of the famous Snickers candy bar as a trademark too. After all, trademarks are one form of intellectual property that can last forever, so long as they continue to be used in commerce. In case you’re wondering, I couldn’t find any indication that Mars has sought to register any candy bar cross-sections as trademarks.
Now, keeping in mind, to be a non-traditional trademark, the symbol or device must (a) identify the goods, (b) distinguish the goods from those of others, and (c) indicate the source of the goods, there appears to be (at least) some potential for treating candy bar cross-sections as trademarks, provided the cross-sections actually are used as trademarks in commerce. In other words, it’s not enough that the bars could be sliced to view their otherwise purely internal cross-sections; depictions of the cross-sections would have to appear on packaging or at least point-of-sale materials (advertising alone won’t cut it).
So, to satisfy a court’s hunger for the "use in commerce" requirement, and if depicting the candy bar cross-section on packaging leads to a creative buzz-kill, then a prominent cross-section on point-of-sale displays should suffice. Having said that, given the non-traditional nature of a cross-sectional trademark, perhaps some "look-for" advertising might be just what the candy man ordered to help create the cross-section as a delicious new non-traditional trademark. The Candyblog certainly enjoys showing cross-sections of candy bars in discussing the pros and cons of the various goodies they review.
In case you’re wondering, I still see no sign that Mars is seeking federal trademark registration of any candy bar cross-section, but just days ago, in a different convenience store, I snapped yet another image of a more recent Snickers point of sale display, this one co-branding with the NFL’s Super Bowl XLV, to be played February 6, 2011, in Cowboys Stadium, located in Arlington, Texas.
Still no trademark application (at least, yet), but this more recent point of sale display actually shows a TM notice positioned next to the cross-section image, indicating Mars does, in fact, view the cross-section as a trademark, see the image below the jump, if you don’t believe me.Continue Reading Snickers Cross-Section Trademark Notice
What do you think, Mars M&M’s sporting some funky hats?Continue Reading MMMM . . . More MN State Fair
With more than a little help from Betty White and Abe Vigoda, Mars topped USA Today’s AdMeter for 2010 Super Bowl television advertisements.
For anyone out there who thought Abe Vigoda had passed on, and Mars’ ad was just another technological resurrection of a dead actor to sell products, like me, you’re operating on old
A couple of months ago I saw in a convenience store a large Snickers point-of-sale floor-display depicting a prominent and attention-getting cross-section of a Snickers candy bar. Given Mars’ apparent interest in owning and creating non-traditional trademark rights surrounding the Snickers brand (revisit Dan’s post from earlier this year), it made me wonder whether Mars might
My recent family road trip through the heartland had me spending more time than usual pumping gas and shopping in convenience stores, so a few chewing gum brands “gone single letter” caught my eye. As you may recall, I already have reported on Single Letter Envy in Hotel Branding. Well, it appears that the quest for single or one-letter brands is not limited to the hospitality industry (let alone others I’m sure to write about in the future), but has “stretched” to the confectionery industry too.
Turns out, both single letter gum brands that caught my eye are owned by the same company, Cadbury-Adams, part of “Cadbury plc – a leading global confectionery business with the number one or number two position in over 20 of the world’s 50 largest confectionery markets.”
Yes, Cadbury Adams has migrated from its long-lasting Bubblicious brand name (having equal style for each letter) to a differently styled beginning B in Bubblicious, and most recently, to the letter B, standing alone, front and center on packaging; fully-truncated to B, as shown above. So, in our ever-abbreviated and truncated branding world, where G now means Gatorade (among other things, as a previously blogged about here), B now apparently means Bubblicious, and S now means Stride (another Cadbury Adams chewing gum brand). Might care be in order to avoid having these two brands appear side by side on store shelves — at least in the order appearing above — to avoid some unintended combined meaning of the brands? Perhaps one of the “sticky” consequences of single letter brands is the temptation others may have to spell alternate and unfavorable words and acronyms with them.
As you might imagine, confronting these single letter brands raises a number of questions in need of some answers. For example, are single or one-letter brands for chewing and bubble gum, just the latest flavor trend, or are they here to stay? Why are they currently so appealing, at least to Cadbury Adams? Are there other single letter gum brands in the marketplace, or just B S? Lastly, what are some of the legal ramifications of branding single letters for confectioners?
I’ll leave the first two questions for others to chew on — especially marketers, but I’ll take a crack at the second two.Continue Reading Single Letter Chewing Gum Brands: A Lasting Flavor or Just B S?
