http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2003Jul1.html
Protecting Its Proprietary Pork
Hormel Files Complaints Against Software Firm Spam Arrest
By Jonathan Krim
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 1, 2003; Page E01
It seems the makers of Spam lunch meat are fed up.
For years, the Hormel Foods Corp. has watched as the name of its famous and popular product also has come to mean junk e-mail, a source of heartburn and anger for computer users everywhere.
Unable to stuff this problem back into the can, Hormel is instead doing what companies often do: asserting its trademark rights. Claiming dilution of the trademarked name Spam, the company has filed complaints against Spam Arrest LLC, a Seattle technology company that provides spam-blocking software for e-mail users.
The Minnesota-based food company, which as of a year ago had sold 6 billion cans of Spam since it was introduced in 1937, challenged Spam Arrest's applications to trademark its own company name.
In a filing with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Hormel argued that it has engendered "substantial goodwill and good reputation" in connection with its trademarked lunch meat and related products that would be damaged by Spam Arrest's use of the term. The company added that Spam Arrest's name so closely resembles that of its lunch meat that the public might become confused, or might think that Hormel endorses Spam Arrest's products.
The challenges involve two separate applications by Spam Arrest to trademark its name as both a software provider and a services vendor. One has been pending for several months, and the second was filed last week, according to Spam Arrest, which made available a copy of the original complaint. Both will be heard by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, though no date has been set. Hormel officials did not return several messages yesterday seeking comment.
On its Web site, the company states that it does not object to use of the word spam as a "slang term," as long as pictures of the meat are not used with such references.
Spam Arrest officials scoffed at Hormel's challenge. "Hormel is acting like a corporate crybaby and ought to can it," Brian Cartmell, Spam Arrest chief executive, said in a statement.
Trademark lawyers were skeptical that Hormel could prevail. "The problem that Hormel has is that the word has come to have a different meaning and has become adopted so widely that it is going to be difficult if not impossible for Hormel to prevail," said John W. Caldwell, a Philadelphia patent and trademark lawyer.
Caldwell cited other examples, such as cellophane and the countertop material Formica, that have become ubiquitous.
Early Internet users coined the term spam to describe junk e-mail after a skit by the comedy group Monty Python. In the routine, a group of patrons at a restaurant chant the word "spam" in louder and louder volume, drowning out other conversation.
Protecting Its Proprietary Pork
Hormel Files Complaints Against Software Firm Spam Arrest
By Jonathan Krim
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 1, 2003; Page E01
It seems the makers of Spam lunch meat are fed up.
For years, the Hormel Foods Corp. has watched as the name of its famous and popular product also has come to mean junk e-mail, a source of heartburn and anger for computer users everywhere.
Unable to stuff this problem back into the can, Hormel is instead doing what companies often do: asserting its trademark rights. Claiming dilution of the trademarked name Spam, the company has filed complaints against Spam Arrest LLC, a Seattle technology company that provides spam-blocking software for e-mail users.
The Minnesota-based food company, which as of a year ago had sold 6 billion cans of Spam since it was introduced in 1937, challenged Spam Arrest's applications to trademark its own company name.
In a filing with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Hormel argued that it has engendered "substantial goodwill and good reputation" in connection with its trademarked lunch meat and related products that would be damaged by Spam Arrest's use of the term. The company added that Spam Arrest's name so closely resembles that of its lunch meat that the public might become confused, or might think that Hormel endorses Spam Arrest's products.
The challenges involve two separate applications by Spam Arrest to trademark its name as both a software provider and a services vendor. One has been pending for several months, and the second was filed last week, according to Spam Arrest, which made available a copy of the original complaint. Both will be heard by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, though no date has been set. Hormel officials did not return several messages yesterday seeking comment.
On its Web site, the company states that it does not object to use of the word spam as a "slang term," as long as pictures of the meat are not used with such references.
Spam Arrest officials scoffed at Hormel's challenge. "Hormel is acting like a corporate crybaby and ought to can it," Brian Cartmell, Spam Arrest chief executive, said in a statement.
Trademark lawyers were skeptical that Hormel could prevail. "The problem that Hormel has is that the word has come to have a different meaning and has become adopted so widely that it is going to be difficult if not impossible for Hormel to prevail," said John W. Caldwell, a Philadelphia patent and trademark lawyer.
Caldwell cited other examples, such as cellophane and the countertop material Formica, that have become ubiquitous.
Early Internet users coined the term spam to describe junk e-mail after a skit by the comedy group Monty Python. In the routine, a group of patrons at a restaurant chant the word "spam" in louder and louder volume, drowning out other conversation.
Sell Patches & Pills 
Comment