• Home
  • 1st Annual Symposium
  • About
  • Available Positions
  • Issues
    • Vol. 4 Issue 2
    • Vol. 4 Issue 1
    • Vol. 3 Issue 3
    • Vol. 3, Issue 2
    • Vol. 3, Issue 1
    • Vol. 2, Issue 3
    • Vol. 2, Issue 2
    • Vol. 2, Issue 1
    • Vol. 1, Issue 1
  • Staff
    • 2009-2010 Staff
    • 2010-2011 Staff
    • 2011-2012 Staff
    • 2012-2013 Staff
  • Submissions
  • Subscribe
Featured Article

A featured article from the current issue of the Intellectual Property Brief.

Daily Blog

A daily blog of IP-related news and issues

Articles

All of the Intellectual Property Brief’s published articles. All articles are hand-selected from outside submissions and from our very own IPB staff members.

Issues

PDF versions of each of the Intellectual Property Brief’s issues.

Short Circuit

Case-by-case summaries of intellectual property related opinions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Home » Daily Blog, Featured, Trademark

Top 1% Files for Trademark of “Occupy Wall Street”

Submitted by Seth Dennis on October 30, 2011 – 12:15 PM428810 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2011%2F10%2F30%2Ftop-1-files-for-trademark-of-%25e2%2580%259coccupy-wall-street%25e2%2580%259d%2FTop+1%25+Files+for+Trademark+of+%E2%80%9COccupy+Wall+Street%E2%80%9D2011-10-30+16%3A15%3A41Seth+Dennishttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D4288

Several trademark applications for OCCUPY WALL STREET and OCCUPY WALL ST. have recently been filed with the USPTO. The first application was mentioned in the news a few days ago, but the subsequent applications are where this story gets interesting. For those that missed the story on the first application, the brief version is that an application was filed on October 18, 2011 by a Long Island, NY couple, Diane and Robert Maresca. Their application was for use of OCCUPY WALL ST. on bags, clothing, stickers, etc. Maresca asserted that he supports the movement, and that he filed for the trademark as a preemptive move to keep somebody with less pure motives from filing for the mark. Maresca also maintained that his intentions were to have the OWS supporters get the maximum benefit possible, after any expenses of course; alternatively, Maresca said he was willing to sell the OWS mark to the groups’ members, provided they pay for his expenses in obtaining the mark. Perhaps Maresca does have good intentions, but offering to sell a mark belonging to a people’s movement back to those people smacks of hypocrisy.

After this story appeared in the news it likely triggered the two applications for the phrase OCCUPY WALL STREET. Both applications were filed on October 24, 2011. One of the applications was filed by Pete Dutro and Victoria Sobel, two OWS organizers that have been maintaining the finances for the group. Their significant involvement in the movement is demonstrative of their good intentions, and the move was most likely to prevent people like Maresca from trying to capitalize on OWS.

The questionable part of this story comes from the second application, filed by Fer-Eng Investments, LCC, an Arizona based corporation. Fer-Eng Investments appears to be a shell corporation with the only officer named as “The Ferraro-Eng Family Trust.” The names provided on the address refer to Vincent Ferraro and Wee Nah Eng. Interestingly enough, Ferraro, a Stanford Business School grad, is the former Vice-President of Worldwide Marketing for Hewlett-Packard, where he met his wife Wee Nah Eng. Ferraro now serves as the Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer of Global Marketing for Eastman Kodak, and also appears to hold several consulting positions. Now, I don’t know what type of compensation Ferraro receives, but based on his title, position, and impressive (publicly accessible) Linkedin resume, I would be willing to give anyone 10:1 odds that the Ferraro-Eng household is bringing in enough to meet the $380K a year threshold for the “top 1%.”

The irony would be palpable if Ferraro-Eng actually intends to sell the clothing, bags, footwear, etc. that the trademark application covers. If this scenario were in a book or movie script it would probably be rejected for being too obvious – somebody in the top 1% registers OCCUPY WALL STREET as a trademark so that they can make money off the 99% that protests against them.

To be fair though, I do not know what the Ferraro-Engs’ motivations are in registering OCCUPY WALL STREET as a trademark, and I am not aware of either party being affiliated with any particular political group. There are certainly those in the top 1% who support OWS, and would like to see changes made in this country. It is entirely possible that the Ferrero-Engs intended to register the mark to either donate it to the group or to prevent people like Maresca from attempting to exploit the movement. I am personally hoping that is the case – that the Ferrero-Engs are in the top 1%, but have a mindset more akin to Bill Gates than to Steve Jobs. Pending the outcome of the trademark applications, I guess we will find out soon enough.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare

About the Author:

Author: Seth Dennis

Seth Dennis is a 2L at Washington College of Law. He is interested in trademark law, copyright law, and business law. Seth is originally from North Carolina and attended Appalachian State University where he received a B.A. in Philosophy with a minor in Business.

Seth Dennis has written 17 posts for the IPB.

428810 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2011%2F10%2F30%2Ftop-1-files-for-trademark-of-%25e2%2580%259coccupy-wall-street%25e2%2580%259d%2FTop+1%25+Files+for+Trademark+of+%E2%80%9COccupy+Wall+Street%E2%80%9D2011-10-30+16%3A15%3A41Seth+Dennishttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D4288 »

  • NavyOne says:
    October 30, 2011 at 12:54 PM

    A naval officer’s (and former bike messenger’s) take: http://themellowjihadi.com/2011/10/30/york-city-s…

    Reply to this comment »
  • David Pardue (@georgiatriallaw) says:
    October 30, 2011 at 1:33 PM

    LOL Article Says Top 1% Applies for Trademark of "Occupy Wall Street" http://t.co/GrgSChaH

    Reply to this comment »
  • Fernando Torres MSc (@FTorresMSc) (@FTorresMSc) says:
    October 30, 2011 at 2:32 PM

    Top 1% Files for Trademark of “Occupy Wall Street”: Spurred by the trademark application for OCCUPY WALL ST,… http://t.co/ybDsbTSc #IP

    Reply to this comment »
  • @RRowleyTucson says:
    October 30, 2011 at 6:32 PM

    Top 1% Files for Trademark of #OccupyWallStreet http://t.co/B7wKyn18 #OWS #USDOR

    Reply to this comment »
  • clarese says:
    October 31, 2011 at 8:46 AM

    One can only imagine if the name “civil rights movement”had become a trademark how vile that would have been. This trademark application is further proof of the greed that is being protested against. Should they get the trademark rights, I fully intend to violate them, and that would be my civic duty.

    Reply to this comment »
  • southernwoman says:
    October 31, 2011 at 9:22 AM

    @ clarese, I agree with the times are different now and the USPTO is allowing Monstano to patent seeds. All I can say is it's why people are in the streets.

    Reply to this comment »
  • The Devil's Dilemma says:
    October 31, 2011 at 10:31 PM

    [...] Office last week for the phrase “Occupy Wall St” for their own business purposes. Additionally, Fer-Eng Investments, LCC filed an application with the USPTO  for Occupy Wall Street phrases. Fer-Eng trade is a sort of [...]

    Reply to this comment »
  • Intellogist (@Intellogist) (@Intellogist) says:
    November 1, 2011 at 8:35 AM

    Top 1% Files for #Trademark of “Occupy Wall Street” http://t.co/q36VT5bb

    Reply to this comment »
  • #OccupyWallStreet (TM) » Team Kenan says:
    November 9, 2011 at 12:19 PM

    [...] Office last week for the phrase “Occupy Wall St” for their own business purposes. Additionally, Fer-Eng Investments, LCC filed an application with the USPTO  for Occupy Wall Street phrases. Fer-Eng trade is a sort of [...]

    Reply to this comment »
  • Occupy Wallstreet Trademark Searches says:
    November 16, 2011 at 1:52 PM

    [...] is who might be filing these applications and when they’ve been filed.  According to an article from American University Washington College of Law’s Intellectual Property Brief, some [...]

    Reply to this comment »

Leave a comment!

Click here to cancel reply »

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.

Copyright »

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Mr. Brainwash’s works recently joined the increasing number of cases on appropriation art after photographer Dennis Morris sued the street artist for use of his 1977 picture of Sid Vicious.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Patents »

Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay

Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay

The Food and Drug Administration’s recent decision, which reasoned that the drug posed public health and safety concerns, creates serious patent implications with regard to generic drugs.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Trademark »

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme, one of the most coveted skate-inspired clothing brands, is suing women’s clothing brand Married to the Mob and its founder Leah McSweeney for trademark infringement to the tune of $10 million.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Facebook

Accepting Submissions

The IP Brief is currently accepting submissions. We are looking for papers that address a legal topic relating to any area of intellectual property. Please submit completed papers and a cover page with the name and title of the article to ipbrief [at] wcl.american.edu. Any questions can also be sent to this e-mail address.

Blogroll

  • American University Washington College of Law
  • Carrollogos
  • Copyright Blog
  • GamePolitics
  • Intellectual Property Watch
  • PatentlyO
  • Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property
  • Spicy IP
  • The TTABlog®
  • ©ollectanea

Tags

Archives

  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • January 2010

Random Posts

Fifty Shades of Grey Sues Smash Pictures over XXX Adaption of the Steamy Series Going “Up”? Utah Homebuilder Transports Residents to the Fantasy World of Disney’s “Up” Does Google Lie About Android's “Openness?” A Round V Loss to Charbucks Leaves Starbucks Feeling Bitter Village Person Holsters his Pistol and Dances into Court Copyright Law Keeping “Lost Era of Jazz History” Hidden Lamborghini vs. Dal Toro: A Battle of the Bull The Short Circuit: Brief Analyses of Recently Issued Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) Opinions
(refresh random posts)

Latest Video Post

Relatively New Anti-Piracy PSA: Another Analogy Comparison of Piracy to Stealing Cars or an Effective Message?

Recent Posts

  • Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million
  • Appropriating Sid Vicious
  • Chick-Fil-A’s ‘Eat Mor Chikin’ Trumps Kale-Promotion Slogan
  • Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay
  • Oh, That’s Different … Never mind: USPTO Withdraws Ruling that IPAD MINI is “Merely Descriptive”

Twitter

  • No public Twitter messages.
  • Copy / Paste
  • Site Search
  • Wikipedia
  • Google
  • Facts
  • Amazon
  • eBay
  • Outlook
  • Gmail
  • Y! Mail
  • Twitter
  • Search & Share
Powered by WordPress | Log in | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Arthemia Premium theme by Colorlabs Project
The American University Intellectual Property Brief is licensed by the staff of the American University Intellectual Property Brief under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. IPBrief.net is hosted by Dan Rosenthal. For technical queries, contact dan@danrosenthal.org

Creative Commons License