Pillsbury has told a New York food co-op to stop using the phrase "bake-off" because they own it. Pillsbury coined the phrase back in 1949 (according to this unverifiable web source), and then trademarked it in the early 1970s (according to another). Now you know. (Thanks to Sarah!)
RELATED
"Group can't use the term 'bake off'"[News10Now]
Bake-Off official site
Post a comment
Comments:
Data from TESS:
Typed Drawing
Word Mark BAKE-OFF
Goods and Services IC 016. US 038. G & S: COOK BOOKS. FIRST USE: 19580000. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19580000
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 72283029
Filing Date October 20, 1967
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Registration Number 0871348
Registration Date June 17, 1969
Owner (REGISTRANT) PILLSBURY COMPANY, THE CORPORATION DELAWARE 1343 PILLSBURY BLDG. MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 55402
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Affidavit Text SECT 15.
Renewal 1ST RENEWAL 19890617
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
@cloudedice:
No one is doubting Pillsbury has registered Trademarked this term. The issue I bring up is the question of whether this term is generic. In other words a name for a thing can not be a trademark for a thing. How else is one supposed to describe a bake off except for to use the term "Bake Off". To be valid a Trademark must answer the questions "Who are you and Where do you come from?" If a mark simply tells one what the product is rather where it comes from it is generic. Under said test there is a very strong argument that even if the term "Bake Off" was once eligible for a TM (which is itself questionable as ZOUXOU notes) there is a good argument that the term today is generic and the registration should be cancelled.
@cloudedice: If this is right, isn't the mark only legally extended to cookbooks? No one could confuse a community "bake-off" event with pillsbury "bake-off" cook books, could they? As far as I can see, even IF it was a valid mark (it's probably too generic to be) it doesn't extend protection of the mark to the name of an event.
@timmus: Actually the E. Coli came from from the company that supplied the pepperoni topping. Yes it was ultimately incorporated into the product, but General Mills wasn't directly responsible for the contamination.
Pillsbury has a good argument that they coined the phrase "bake off" but they'll probably lose the case. "Bake-off" hasn't been vigorously defended and has become a generic term like "aspirin" or "kleenex".













I would say the only way to settle this and it is not in the courts.
"BAKE-OFF!" Winner take name.