Phantom Marks, The Twilight Zone of Intellectual Property

Es probable que las marcas fantasmas no sean tan espeluznantes como los propios espíritus que frecuentan cementerios o casas abandonadas; sin embargo, todavía causan que muchas oficinas de marcas se espanten y rechacen su solicitud de registro. Estas marcas contienen elementos «fantasma» o modificables en sus denominaciones, generalmente representados insertando un espacio en blanco (en marcas figurativas), o usando puntos, guiones, subrayado o una designación como «XXXX» (en marcas denominativas).

An overly known example of these, is the American trademark “----- For Dummies”, used in an extensive and varied set of self-help books, where the dashed lines represent different descriptive terms which vary according to the subject matter of the books e.g., Accounting For Dummies, French for Dummies, Online Dating For Dummies, and including Patents, Copyrights & Trademarks For Dummies.

Other examples include marks incorporating a date (usually a year), a geographic location, or a model number that is subject to change. While these are some of the most common examples of the types of elements involved, there are many variations.

Su uso fue originalmente reconocido en los Estados Unidos; sin embargo, a mediados de los ‘90s, la Oficina de Marcas y Patentes (PTO) de Estados Unidos se volvió más estricta al evaluar estas solicitudes, no dispuestas a otorgarlas bajo ninguna excepción y siguiendo las indicaciones de su manual para el procedimiento del examen marcario (TMO) el cual establece en su artículo Nro. 1214 “Cuando un solicitante solicita el registro de una marca con un elemento cambiante o «fantasma», el abogado examinador debe rechazar el registro en virtud de las secciones 1 y 45 de la Ley de Marcas, […], sobre la base de que la solicitud busca el registro de más de una marca».

Since then, the American PTO has denied many applications that included a “phantom” element based on the certainty that they contravened the golden rule of “one mark per application” as well as the main objective of a trademark registration which is to ensure the publicity of each mark in order to protect its unauthorized-use from third parties and to be easily found in case a third party searched for trademarks that are similar to the sign they intend to register. Many authors have agreed upon the fact that this type of trademark contradicts its reason for being and fails to “give adequate constructive notice to third-parties as to the nature of the mark and a thorough and effective search for conflicting marks is not possible”, as stated in their TMO.

A clear example of this inconvenience is the case of a New York corporation “International Flavors & Fragances Inc.) que solicitó registrar tres marcas: «LIVING XXXX FLAVORS» y «LIVING XXXX FLAVOR» como marcas que distinguen productos de la Clase internacional 3 y 30. Asimismo, «LIVING XXXX» pretendía distinguir su uso en sustancias y productos de la Clase 1 y 3.

In the first two applications, the "XXXX" served to denote "a specific herb, fruit, plant or vegetable" and in the last, to indicate "a botanical or extract thereof, to wit: 'flower', 'fruit', 'yellow sunset orchid', 'osmanthus', 'fragrance', 'raspberry' and the like."

As one can surely guess, the applications were denied under the review that the requested signs encompassed too many combinations and permutations to make a thorough and effective search possible. Thus, cannot provide proper notice to other trademark users, failing to help bring order to the marketplace and defeating one of the vital purposes of a trademark. Also, the trademark examining attorneys confessed that the core of the problem was that they could not allow registration of an unlimited and unknown number of elements in one mark.

Despite the disadvantages and valid arguments against its use, I believe in its utility and convenience for future applicants. Registering a phantom trademark would help applicants reduce their usual expenses when investing in various trademark registrations that vary in just one or two words since it would all be done in one application. These signs, though different, would have to be essentially the same since the purpose of this kind of trademark is to protect a single mark that may change over time (regarding years, months or volumes) or depend on certain circumstances (regarding location, subject matter, stage/level).

Aunque es cierto que las marcas fantasmas son usualmente negadas, en 2001 el Tribunal de Apelaciones del PTO emitió la resolución de la Junta de Juicio y Apelación de Marcas – TTAB, donde afirmó que en el caso de la solicitud de «(212) M-A-T-R-E-S-S» como una marca fantasma (solicitada por

), donde el «212» aparecía subrayada en líneas punteadas, este era el equivalente legal de la marca registrada «1-888-M-A-T-T-R-E-S-S»; y, por lo tanto, procedió a su registro. Su decisión fue definitiva basándose en que el elemento que variaba correspondía a una mnemónica telefónica que consistía en una combinación de tres dígitos, y el cambio dependería del código de área al cual se hacía alusión. Además, a diferencia de la marca considerada en
“[...] The missing information in the phantom telephone mnemonic mark is a series of numbers that are area codes. Area codes are devoid of source-identifying qualities, and the possible combinations are limited to what is offered by the phone companies. [...] The area code is just an indication that the mark is, in fact, a telephone mnemonic and not some other symbol.
Thus, a phantom area code mark has a quality that sets it apart from the mark considered in International Flavors. It is immediately apparent that the phantom portion consists of a three-number combination which is an area code. There is no ambiguity. It is a telephone mnemonic.”

In the same way, in a phantom mark in which the changeable elements are arbitrary or fanciful, it is correspondingly likely that the various permutations of the mark will result in different commercial impressions and therefore constitute different marks. By contrast, where the changeable elements are generic or merely descriptive, it is conceivable that the permutations of the mark may constitute a single mark. This seemed to be the case with the Dial-A-Mattress example in which the numbers 212 and 888 were merely generic area codes, thus not creating different commercial impressions. Dial-A-Mattress donde los números 212 y 888 eran simplemente códigos generales de área, y, por tanto, no creaban distintas impresiones comerciales.

In conclusion, it is safe to say that according to the previously mentioned case, it is clear that not all phantom marks are prohibited, per se, from registration. However, phantom marks will be denied if the Examining Attorneys should determine that they encompass too many permutations to make a thorough and effective search, making it impossible to meet with the requirement of providing proper notice to other trademark users; and moreover, if the difference is such that it generates the impression of a whole other trademark. One would only have to argue that the changeable element in the phantom mark is generic, and therefore would not create a different commercial impression on the mark. This type of mark is not regulated in our country but in my opinion, if we focused more on its utility, we could help incorporate it in our legislation, being necessary of course, to regulate detailed aspects to assure it does not interfere with our current norms.

A clear example of how we can take advantage of a phantom mark’s purpose is the registration of the famously known titles of EGACAL that begin with “El ABC del Derecho ...” and continue with different fields of law on the dotted lines. If phantom marks were permitted in Peru, this company would have been able to secure the ownership of those marks with just one application alleging that their changeable element would be limited by the different fields of the law, making those modifications predictable and limited; and therefore, would have no prohibition against its registration.

Author: Yesabel Cavero – Intellectual Property Specialist
Law Firm: OMC Abogados & Consultores