More than once I have used the most publicized annual roster of names in sports – the Kentucky Derby horses – to talk about trademarks and branding. There is a disappointing level of interesting names this year among the 20 listed entrants (no offense to the equines).
The closest to intriguing is “T O Password,” which at least to me sounds a bit mysterious and sort of 21st century, although in reality it seems to come from the name of the horse owner (Tomoya Ozasa). A little mystery is a good thing in a trademark. It’s not obvious, it keeps people guessing, and meanwhile, it is composed of a term that people can understand, but which has nothing to do with horses. A trademark which does not directly describe the object using it is a good thing.
But if this is the best name out of the gate, the rest of the names are, well, a little lame. Nonetheless, even this stable of names provides plenty of material for trademark discussions.
Typically, I have gone through the names one-by-one and offered a line or two about the connotations of the horses’ names, the meaning, and the potential value as trademarks. With this group, I am going to do something a little different, and talk about them in batches.
The favorite seems to be “Fierceness.” This is a name that speaks for itself, and as a horse name is probably just fine. But if you are branding a product, and you think the name should describe one of the desirable characteristics of that product, you may want to reconsider. Brand names, like so many of the horse names in this year’s field, are not particularly arbitrary, whimsical or highly creative. For a product, this can increase the challenge of enforcing legal protection.
Marketers always have to decide between listening to their lawyers about what are the best names legally, which sometimes goes hand-in-hand with what are the safest names, or least likely to conflict with someone else. On the other hand, brand owners have to weigh the value of a name which they are convinced will help identify and sell the product. Legal protection is secondary to them – until there is a conflict. That’s always the dilemma.
So, keep that in mind as we think about some common terms like the names given to Derby entrants “Stronghold,” “Resilience,” “Endlessly,” or “Forever Young.” Also “Domestic Product,” “Just a Touch,” and “Epic Ride.” These may not directly describe the horses’ characteristics. If these names were applied to products, they may well be protectable. But these names are such common terms that you would end up with a struggle to have people really remember them. In my view, it is a little hard for people to be captivated by any of these very common terms.
Then we have the next group – what I might call the “inside joke” names. Those names are “Mystik Dan,” and “Honor Marie.” We may not know who Dan and Marie are. They are fine as trademarks if they send an appealing image. Suggestion of meaning might be fine and is logically protectable, though marks including names are exceedingly plentiful, so be prepared to fight for them.
Next, we have the geographic names which consists of “Encino,” “West Saratoga,” “Sierra Leone,” and I’ll also add “Dornoch” to this group on the presumption that the name is meant to refer to a location in Scotland. People like to name things, including products, after a geographic location. Sometimes those can be good trademarks, but there can be legal challenges in some cases. Protection is difficult if the geographic name is the place from which the products originate. A geographic name can also be tricky if consumers would think the product comes from that place for some reason when it does not. This can cause confusion, which is one word you never want to be on the wrong side of in a trademark dispute. Probably none of those concerns apply to racehorses.
Some names are a bit more interesting, though maybe also a bit predictable. This group would include names like “Track Phanton” and “Society Man.” They are the types of terms that are often given to products and services and feel comfortable to consumers.
Then you get to what I think of are classic, thoroughbred names for Kentucky Derby contenders. This group includes “Grand Mo the First.” You know there’s got to be a story there, and you presume that the story relates to the owner, or maybe even a takeoff of the horse’s lineage. The name “Catalytic” suggests some kind of secret ingredient that will, like a catalyst, create a winning reaction to the horse out on the track. “Catching Freedom” suggests chasing the wind – if he’ll go where his jockey tells him to. All three of these would seem to make pretty good product names. That’s from a legal point of view. Marketers might want to sell a “Catalytic” candy bar. I am not sure how far they would want to go with “Grand MO the First” for cereal…but how about maybe beer?
To me, “Just Steel” really sounds like a thoroughbred, and even though he’s only a fairly long 20-1 shot as this is being written, the name has enough common elements to tell you what’s going on. But the combination of words is just distinctive enough to create a unique impression. Lawyers like that. And unless it was misdescriptive, perhaps a pretty strong product name.
Which is my favorite? Just based on the names, I’m going with the number one horse, “Dornoch,” which I prefer to think of as “door knock,” as in “knocking on the door of victory.”
