{"id":1560,"date":"2013-03-04T07:35:12","date_gmt":"2013-03-04T13:35:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/incongruentelements\/?p=1560"},"modified":"2013-03-04T07:35:12","modified_gmt":"2013-03-04T13:35:12","slug":"marketing-and-lawsuits-surrounding-the-word-jesus","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/incongruentelements\/2013\/03\/04\/marketing-and-lawsuits-surrounding-the-word-jesus\/","title":{"rendered":"Marketing (and lawsuits) surrounding the word &#8220;Jesus&#8221;"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Ever try to trademark the word, &#8220;Jesus?&#8221; Me neither. But this company did.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Inspired by his time leading a singles ministry in Virginia Beach, Va., Michael Julius Anton came up with an idea for a clothing line that he thought was catchy and unique\u2014&#8221;Jesus Surfed.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>He was on good ground with &#8220;Surfed.&#8221; But when he went to register the trademark, he found someone had beaten him to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In a branding coup of biblical proportions, an Italian jeans maker persuaded the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in 2007 to register the word &#8220;Jesus&#8221; as a trademark, giving the company exclusive rights in America to sell clothing bearing the name of Christianity&#8217;s central figure.<\/p>\n<p>Since then, the owner of the trademark, Jesus Jeans, has clamped down on Jesus-themed apparel, pitting its litigators against more than a dozen other startup clothing lines it claims appropriated &#8220;Jesus&#8221; without the company&#8217;s blessing. The company doesn&#8217;t have a trademark on images of Jesus, just the word.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>This could be interesting. So far, the patent applies to clothing.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Attorneys for Jesus Jeans say they are just trying to protect the value of their brand\u2014no different from <a href=\"http:\/\/online.wsj.com\/public\/quotes\/main.html?type=djn&amp;symbol=NKE\">Nike<\/a>&#8216;s claim over the winged goddess of victory.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;If somebody\u2014small church or even a big church\u2014wants to use &#8216;Jesus&#8217; for printing a few T-shirts, we don&#8217;t care,&#8221; said Domenico Sindico, the general counsel for intellectual property at <a href=\"http:\/\/online.wsj.com\/public\/quotes\/main.html?type=djn&amp;symbol=BAN.MI\">BasicNet<\/a> SpA, <a href=\"http:\/\/online.wsj.com\/public\/quotes\/main.html?type=djn&amp;symbol=BAN.MI?mod=inlineTicker\" target=\"\">BAN.MI\u00a0-3.25%<\/a> a publicly traded company based in Turin, Italy, that owns Jesus Jeans and the Kappa sportswear brand.<\/p>\n<p>But when companies like Mr. Anton&#8217;s seek to commercialize their products, &#8220;that&#8217;s a concern,&#8221; he said.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>I wonder how long it&#8217;ll take before the law applies to other markets such as book titles and general uses of the word. Imagine, someday the word &#8220;Jesus&#8221; could be followed by &#8220;TM&#8221; in new versions of the Bible. Bah, I&#8217;m just conjecturing.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Intellectual property lawyers say there is nothing in U.S. law that would prevent a company from claiming exclusive ownership of centuries-old names.<\/p>\n<p>Some are dubious about the likelihood of consumer confusion between companies like Jesus Surfed and Jesus Jeans, a brand little-known to Americans.<\/p>\n<p>But even if a company doesn&#8217;t want to back down, &#8220;it may not be worth the money to fight,&#8221; said Marc Reiner, an intellectual-property lawyer in New York.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>This could be interesting.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Said Mr. Lamont: &#8220;How anyone can claim the name Jesus for themselves and put a trademark on it is beyond me.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/online.wsj.com\/article\/SB10001424127887324432004578302060560501092.html\">Link<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>&nbsp; Ever try to trademark the word, &#8220;Jesus?&#8221; Me neither. But this company did. Inspired by his time leading a&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":24,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[22],"class_list":["post-1560","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-in-the-news","tag-in-the-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/incongruentelements\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1560","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/incongruentelements\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/incongruentelements\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/incongruentelements\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/24"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/incongruentelements\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1560"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/incongruentelements\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1560\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/incongruentelements\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1560"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/incongruentelements\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1560"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/incongruentelements\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1560"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}