View Print Friendly Version
Abercrombie Trademark Bully: Hollister vs. Hollister
© Cheryl Hodgson 2009 | Posted on April 27, 2009
Abercrombie has been threatening Hollister residents and users over use of their home town’s name on clothing for years now. This borders upon the absurd and takes our trademark bully pulpit to new heights. We may start our own Wall of Shame.
Welcome to Hollister, California. www.hollister.ca.gov. An idyllic town on the water’s edge of the azure Pacific, where every teenager is blond, fit and owns two surf boards which they load into the back of their glimmering new Volkswagen Beetles. Everyone looks perfect, and to be honest, in Hollister, California – life in general is just perfect!
Or is it? Everything isn’t always what it is cracked up to be in the world of trademarks, branding and monitoring of trademark rights. Doesn’t someone from Hollister have prior common rights for the name in clothing prior to use by Abercrombie? Seems hard to believe not.
Hollister, California is an agricultural town of about 36,000 people, nestled among the rolling hills of a lonely stretch of California Highway 25. The town isn’t even on the water. Local teenagers are most likely more attune with the hard work of farming, than with the intricacies of getting inside a gnarly curl.
The version of Hollister that harkens sun-drenched Barbies and Kens is a figment of the imagination of Abercrombie & Fitch marketing executives. The Ohio based apparel line started the surfer motif Hollister label in 2000. Since then the company has been trying to threaten locals of the REAL Hollister from using the brand on clothing.
“If they try, they would get a call and much more,” said David Cupps, general counsel for Abercrombie & Fitch.
It is understandable from a corporate standpoint that you would want to defend a trademark you have registered, and has begun to create a following among young consumers. However, agressive tactics should only be used against an adversary you think you have priority rights over.
Unlike Europe, the United States allows a “prior use” argument under Trademark Law of the national Lanham Act. This means that, although someone may have registered a name as a federal trademark, you can move to have their registration canceled if you can prove YOU used the mark in commerce prior to the registrant.
One could argue that Abercrombie & Fitch has only been using the name Hollister since launching the apparel line in 2000. Moreover, San Benito High School has been using the name “Hollister” on sweatshirts, team jersies, T-shirts, swimsuits, etc., for decades. Thus, the community of Hollister could potentially file to have the trademark “Hollister” canceled based on prior use. Subsequently, the town of Hollister could apply for the trademark themselves based on a 1a [use] filing.
Thus, be careful Abercrombie – don’t be the bully on the playground with nothing to back it up.
Oh – and one last thing. The San Benito High School mascot is the “Haybaler”. You can’t get much further from the “surfer dude” image than a “haybaler.”
GO HAYBALERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Technorati Tags: Abercrombie & Fitch, brand equity, brand management, brand protection, Branding, california, haybaler, Hollister, surfer, Trademarks
No Comments »