Entrepreneur Magazine – Trademark Bully?
Is “entrepreneur” a generic term or a trademark? That question presented itself to San Diego-based…what’s another word for entrepreneur?…Ray Hivoral, founder of the San Diego Entrepreneur Center and San Diego Entrepreneur Day. Mr. Hivoral recently received a cease and desist letter from attorneys representing Entrepreneur Media, Inc. (“EMI”), publishers of Entrepreneur Magazine, demanding that he stop using the word “Entrepreneur” in connection with his services.
Can Entrepreneur magazine really stop this entrepreneur? Read on…and yes, I’m already sick of typing “entrepreneur.”
EMI has long had an aggressive approach to protecting their “Entrepreneur” mark. For years, they have gone after users of the word via cease and desist letters, actions through the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and through Federal court litigation.
Mr. Hivoral founded the San Diego Entrepreneur Center “to stimulate and support innovation, ignite job creation and build a sense of community in a collaborative environment.” The first annual San Diego Entrepreneur Day was held in 2012; the second annual event is scheduled for September 27 and 28 of this year.
In 2012, EMI sued a similar organization, the Entrepreneur Center, a Nashville business incubator. The lawsuit between those parties is ongoing.
Bloomberg Businessweek has reported on EMI’s tactics several times. In May 2011, they published an article stating:
EMI goes after a broad spectrum of businesses, ranging from Internet startups to a fledgling clothing manufacturer. In 2001 it persuaded the nonprofit Donald H. Jones Center for Entrepreneurship at Carnegie Mellon University to change the title of its quarterly alumni newsletter, The Entrepreneur. In 2004 it stopped 3Entrepreneurs, a San Diego apparel company, from putting the phrase “Entrepreneur Generation” on T-shirts, sweaters, and hats. At present, EMI is skirmishing with the Entrepreneur Hall of Fame and Museum, a one-man website based in Glen Cove, N.Y., with aspirations of someday occupying a brick-and-mortar facility. “Entrepreneur is the enemy of entrepreneurs,” says the hall of fame’s proprietor, Mitch Schlimer, who began his career selling New York-style soft pretzels from a street cart with his grandfather.
EMI has claimed that the other users of the word are creating confusion the marketplace. This ties into the core trademark theory of “likelihood of confusion.” EMI believes that someone who encounters the San Diego Entrepreneur Center or Entrepreneur Day would be confused into thinking that they came from the same source as Entrepreneur Magazine and EMI’s other goods and services.
Hivoral, on the other hand, may argue that “entrepreneur” is a generic term for a business operator, and that there are only a limited number of ways within the English language to communicate to his audience that his services are aimed at those people.
It’s clear that EMI is comfortable with aggressive tactics and is not afraid of some resulting negative publicity. Until a court issues a definitive ruling on the matter, EMI will most likely continue to expend resources to defend and expand the scope of its trademark rights. We’ll see if Mr. Hivoral is the one to take the fight all the way and force a final resolution to this issue.
