Marketing 1, trademark lawyers 0
Introducing JetBlue's new slogan: Happy Jetting! With website sections titled "Are you a flyer or a jetter?" "The Rise of Jetting," and statements like "JetBlue brings humanity back to the skies with a new form of aviation called 'jetting,'" "Explore the many ways of jetting," and a triumphant phallic-appearing announcement that "Today Jetting Rocks," JetBlue is clearly trying to generate enthusiasm in a hungry, thirsty, crowded, tired, smelly and overcharged flying public.
From a trademark perspective? Not so much. In fact, they've pretty much violated every rule in the Jessica Stone Levy book of trademark selection. JetBlue has: (a) taken a colloquial term used in the English language by consumers of the services; (b) defined their view of "jetting" exhaustively in marketing materials; and (c) used other formatives of the word (e.g., jetter). If, for example, a competitor were to use a slogan like "I jet around," or "Jetting off to Cabo was never easier," and JetBlue sued, I'd say those three actions above would be Exhibit A in that competitor's defense.
This campaign reeks of the trademark-antithetical "branding initiative," launched by marketers with little concern for the practical aspects of securing trademark registration and more importantly, of acquiring and enforcing trademark rights. Paradoxically, after reviewing Jet Blue's full website, I think the campaign is actually quite clever and entertaining, and if Jet Blue can be the rising tide to lift planes (?) in this horrible market, more power to them. Just don't think that you can then turn around and be a trademark bully with the trademark rights equivalent of a pair of batacas.
From a trademark perspective? Not so much. In fact, they've pretty much violated every rule in the Jessica Stone Levy book of trademark selection. JetBlue has: (a) taken a colloquial term used in the English language by consumers of the services; (b) defined their view of "jetting" exhaustively in marketing materials; and (c) used other formatives of the word (e.g., jetter). If, for example, a competitor were to use a slogan like "I jet around," or "Jetting off to Cabo was never easier," and JetBlue sued, I'd say those three actions above would be Exhibit A in that competitor's defense.
This campaign reeks of the trademark-antithetical "branding initiative," launched by marketers with little concern for the practical aspects of securing trademark registration and more importantly, of acquiring and enforcing trademark rights. Paradoxically, after reviewing Jet Blue's full website, I think the campaign is actually quite clever and entertaining, and if Jet Blue can be the rising tide to lift planes (?) in this horrible market, more power to them. Just don't think that you can then turn around and be a trademark bully with the trademark rights equivalent of a pair of batacas.
Posted by Jessica Stone Levy at 5/23/2008 12:36 PM 
Categories: Transportation,Trademark Lawyers,Trademarks
Categories: Transportation,Trademark Lawyers,Trademarks
What is that a picture of? Crayons? Chalk?
Reply to this
It's batacas, those fabric thingies that people punch each other with to get out their aggressions.
Reply to this
So what? Who says JetBlue is going to try to enforce any kind of exclusivity anyway? Just a short campaign slogan that's getting the punch the company want and marketing rightly "won."
Reply to this
I'm not saying that JetBlue is going to try to enforce it - just that if they do, it'd be difficult. And that this choice of slogan is emblematic to me of the struggles that often ensue between marketing and legal. Don't get me wrong - I think the slogan is quite cute.
Reply to this
JetBlue's creative team understands that: 1. you don't have to own it exclusively to be successful and profitable, 2. Owning it wouldn't make it any easier for their clients to swallow.
It is about time that we realize that HR683 is an abomination of a free market and absurd in a global marketplace. The only beneficiary of the goldrush of marks is the USPTO and the legal system that tries to deny the truth of genericide, and created the fiction of dilution,(one of the few valid arguments is the prevention of source deception.)
Reply to this
I agree about HR 683 completely. And again, I am impressed with JetBlue's creative team and their choice. My caution is just to the extent that a wily competitor nicks a variation of the term "jet" for its own campaign and JetBlue tries to enforce whatever rights it may have. Believe me, I am a firm proponent of advising clients to select non-protectable marks if the descriptive or generic term is what they want, because it saves time and money -- with the caveat, however, that the moneysaving also comes on the enforcement end.
Reply to this
They have done a great job creating a slogan and tag-line. Its the type of slogan lines that stays in the mid of the people.
Reply to this