I could have sworn I read an article that stated Trump’s attempt to trademark “you’re fired” was declined (for various reasons, one being it’s too short of a phrase). However, on last night’s Tonight Show, Trump claimed they he does in fact own the phrase. So what’s the straight dope?
Who knows until it is tried in court? I do know that “You’re fired” was used a long time ago in a Honeymooners episode.
Alice was busy in the apartment when Norton came in. Alice asked him how come he was home in the middle of the day.
Norton replied that he had a bad time with his boss and took the rest of the day off. He went on to complain, “After what he said to me I don’t know if I can ever work for him again.”
Alice: “What did he say, Ed?”
Ed: “You’re fired.”
Trump is only seeking the rights for very specific uses of the phrase. From CNN:
There is a woman who owns a ceramic studio in Chicago named “You’re Fired.” She has a local trademark (since 1997) on the phrase, and I believe she plans on suing Trump if he sells any “You’re Fired” items in Illinois. She was on Dateline (or maybe it was 60 minutes) last week. She didn’t file a patent application, so she does not have national rights to the phrase.
Here’s a link to a Forbes article about her:
http://www.forbes.com/reuters/newswire/2004/03/30/rtr1317251.html
Per the CNN link jovan gave, Trump will nto own the copyright to the phrase “You’re Fired”, but to articles of clothing with “You’re Fired” printed on them. If your boss decides to start announcing terminations by leaving T-shirts on ex-employees’ desks with “You’re Fired” written on them, he may be violating Trump’s copyright, but not if he uses the phrase any other way.
Actually, he may get in trouble if he decides to send them a keno machine with “You’re Fired” on it too.
Trump can only trademark “You’re Fired” for limited purposes. Not only is that the general principle for trademarked, service marked, etc. phrases that were previously in common use, but there are several businesses that have longstanding prior claim one the phrase for other uses. For example, there’s a do-it-yourself pottery shop called “You’re Fired” (a pun on kiln firing), in Manhattan not far from Trump Towers. It’s been in business under that name for years, and could arguably contest many uses Trump might plan to make of his catchphrase [Though I doubt it would do them much good]
While I rather like Trump, he is no angel, and is definitely not above overstating his case for purposes of negotiation, publicity or self-aggrandizement. He has a long history of this, and I’ll give him credit for doing it intentionally, rather than out of ignorance. A man who spent decades turning his name into a brand would have a pretty shrewd grasp of the limits of trademarks and related intellectual property.
I just went to the USPTO’s handy-dandy web site, and they’re showing 10 active trademarks for the phrase “You’re Fired”. These uses cover: Decorative pillows, wines & spirits, luggage, cologne, three different ones for clothing, miscellaneous promotional products, and television programs. The only one specifically owned by The Donald is for “games and playthings”; the others are owned by a bunch of different corporate entities (any of which could be owned by Trump).
In general, trademarks are approved for specific uses - for example, if I got a trademark for JerH® Beer, I’d have to submit a new application if I wanted to start selling JerH candles. Someone else could still sell JerH throat lozenges without violating my trademark; however, if they tried selling JerH hard cider, I’d have a case to stop them because of the similar market for the products.
Several years ago, there was an episode of The Simpsons wjhere Marge gets a job selling houses. IIRC when she gets the sack, her boss gives her a jacket with “fired” written on it. Maybe Matt Groening can sue Trump.