Johnny Gaudreau files trademark on "Johnny Hockey™"

[Toxic0n]

Does that sound silly and unrealistic? Sure it does. But it has the potential to happen. And it has happened in the past. People have learned their lessons, and that's why trademarks exist in the first place. Better to snip at it now and risk the wrath of a couple faceless internet posters for a thread or 2, then to not do anything about it and be subject to scenarios like this 10 years down the road.

Care to provide some examples of these sex toys and child labour products that were sold because someone didn't trademark their nick name?

 

[1point21Gigawatts]

Might pay you off handsomely for the namesake!

.com's were bought with the sole purpose of selling it off. Twitter/social media is the same thing these days, so wouldn't be surprised.

Completely OT, but your profile picture is great!

 

[Anglesmith]

I play guitar, and there is a dude that owns a boutique guitar amp company. The name of the business is his last name LLC, and his amps have his last name on the face plate. He recently had to stop manufacturing amps with his name on them due to a trademark from an old Fender amp of the same name.

It's still a matter of making money off of the trademarked name, which is why Fender would have a right to ask him to stop. I think (and I'm really going out on a limb here) that the trademark can only be enforced if people might think that the mark refers to the same thing that the trademark refers to, and you're making money off of it. No one is obliged to stop using their own name if it's Johnny Hockey, but if you start putting "Johnny Hockey" on shirts with a hockey theme and selling them, you will likely get a letter in the mail.

 

[DanZ]

Well, you are comparing this ****** to Gretzky, you tell me wtf you were trying to say?

And yes, once you have actually proven something, then go for it. A rookie doing this is arrogant to me.

It's just an opinion, why so upset?

When did I ever compare Gretzky's accomplishments to Gaudreau's? Reread what I wrote, carefully... It's not that hard to understand.

Your arbitrary designation of when it is or isn't appropriate to trademark a name is kind of hilarious to me. One could say Gaudreau has accomplished more than 99% of all hockey players in history. Has he not proven he's a good hockey player yet? How much does he have to accomplish before he gets Toxic0n's approval for trademarking his nickname?

If there was a legitimate reason to criticize this move it wouldn't really matter to me. However, the criticism stems from an insane lack of financial/business knowledge and/or arbitrary limits on when it becomes ok for a player to trademark a nickname. Of course you can have an opinion. You can also have a ****** opinion.

 

[Anglesmith]

The notion that a player has to be at a certain level before he can protect his financial assets is itself ridiculous.

 

[Number8]

When did I ever compare Gretzky's accomplishments to Gaudreau's? Reread what I wrote, carefully... It's not that hard to understand.

Your arbitrary designation of when it is or isn't appropriate to trademark a name is kind of hilarious to me. One could say Gaudreau has accomplished more than 99% of all hockey players in history. Has he not proven he's a good hockey player yet? How much does he have to accomplish before he gets Toxic0n's approval for trademarking his nickname?

If there was a legitimate reason to criticize this move it wouldn't really matter to me. However, the criticism stems from an insane lack of financial/business knowledge and/or arbitrary limits on when it becomes ok for a player to trademark a nickname. Of course you can have an opinion. You can also have a ****** opinion.

Because you have used references to Hasek, Gretzky, and Howe many times when trying to say "other guys do it, you know". You've never once referenced a player of Gaudreau's calibre.

So when you say that Gaudreau should be cut slack because other players have done it -- and then only list HHOF players as those other examples -- you are by default putting him in their category. Dare I say the "Great One" is a touch more famous that "Johnny Hockey" is likely to be -- and rightly so.

It's very similar to understanding that Johnny Gaudreau is saying "I am Johnny Hockey" when he trademarks that brand, name, nickname or moniker. Regardless of whether he's doing it to protect his image, protect an asset, or make money. If he doesn't believe he is "Johnny Hockey" he'd not have the basis to make the TM claim, would he?

By the way, the fact that his agent thought it would be "cool" to do this when it originally came up means that at least he was thinking all along that this was about money and not some bs claim that they are protecting his "image" -- such as it is.

Poor John Tavares.......... better hockey player, just decided to lose the "ny" I guess.

It's not that hard to understand if you try -- assuming one is reasonably bright.

 

[Lord Flashheart]

Unoriginal, and lame.

 

[Toxic0n]

When did I ever compare Gretzky's accomplishments to Gaudreau's? Reread what I wrote, carefully... It's not that hard to understand.

Your arbitrary designation of when it is or isn't appropriate to trademark a name is kind of hilarious to me. One could say Gaudreau has accomplished more than 99% of all hockey players in history. Has he not proven he's a good hockey player yet? How much does he have to accomplish before he gets Toxic0n's approval for trademarking his nickname?

If there was a legitimate reason to criticize this move it wouldn't really matter to me. However, the criticism stems from an insane lack of financial/business knowledge and/or arbitrary limits on when it becomes ok for a player to trademark a nickname. Of course you can have an opinion. You can also have a ****** opinion.

Knock off the petty insults

I understood what you wrote perfectly fine. Essentially, you said if Gretzky and Hasek can do it, why not Johhny.

I maintain that he has to maybe play more than one year in the NHL before he can try to make money off his name like Gretzky. I said the same thing about Cody Hodgon's clothing line. Arbitrary limit? Sure, but it seems reasonable to me. Would you be ok with Connor McDavid starting a clothing line today called "The Next Great One" ? After all, it's just a smart business move and there's nothing arrogant about it, right?

"Insane lack of financial/business knowledge"? Well, just don't tell my boss, given that I work as a PM in the financial industry

Because you have used references to Hasek, Gretzky, and Howe many times when trying to say "other guys do it, you know". You've never once referenced a player of Gaudreau's calibre.

So when you say that Gaudreau should be cut slack because other players have done it -- and then only list HHOF players as those other examples -- you are by default putting him in their category. Dare I say the "Great One" is a touch more famous that "Johnny Hockey" is likely to be -- and rightly so.

It's very similar to understanding that Johnny Gaudreau is saying "I am Johnny Hockey" when he trademarks that brand, name, nickname or moniker. Regardless of whether he's doing it to protect his image, protect an asset, or make money. If he doesn't believe he is "Johnny Hockey" he'd not have the basis to make the TM claim, would he?

By the way, the fact that his agent thought it would be "cool" to do this when it originally came up means that at least he was thinking all along that this was about money and not some bs claim that they are protecting his "image" -- such as it is.

Poor John Tavares.......... better hockey player, just decided to lose the "ny" I guess.

It's not that hard to understand if you try -- assuming one is reasonably bright.

This.

 

[Number8]

The notion that a player has to be at a certain level before he can protect his financial assets is itself ridiculous.

No one is saying he doesn't have the right to protect a perceived asset -- nor that this is a stupid business move.

Some are simply suggesting this is also an arrogant and perhaps somewhat douchy move.

Of course some people around here seem to think that a smart business decision automatically means that something can't be arrogant or douchy.

I'll chuckle when some of them grow a bit older and get screwed on a contract because someone tries to slide in a slimy obtuse escape clause, that while legal, is er........ douchy. Trust me -- if you do enough business deals it will happen.

 

[frag2]

What if your actual name is Johnny Hockey?

Dunno but you can ask John Cena of WWE fame about how that works.

Apparently WWE owns the name "John Cena" for wrestling purposes and if he were to quit WWE and go Mexico, he'd have to use another name like "Juan Sena"

So I guess it depends on what Gaudreau's name is protected under

 

[Anglesmith]

It's very similar to understanding that Johnny Gaudreau is saying "I am Johnny Hockey" when he trademarks that brand, name, nickname or moniker. Regardless of whether he's doing it to protect his image, protect an asset, or make money. If he doesn't believe he is "Johnny Hockey" he'd not have the basis to make the TM claim, would he?

This is the greatest issue I have with the many arguments you've tried to make. I don't expect to change your mind at this point, but no, this move does not in any way equate to a statement of "I am Johnny Hockey." If anything, it can be construed as a statement of "people are calling me Johnny Hockey." Whether by his choice or not, when people say "Johnny Hockey," they are referring to Gaudreau.

You're claiming that this shows him to be arrogant, but arrogance has no effect on this. Let's suppose that Gaudreau is not arrogant, and is a humble, hard-working young man. Is it impossible that people might give him a nickname that sticks in the public? No. Is it impossible that people might keep calling him that even with no input from himself? No. Is it impossible that people might start making merchandise to capitalize on the success and popularity of the nickname? No. Is it impossible that Gaudreau and his agent might have a problem with merchandise other people are making that monetizes his success? No. Therefore, is any of this dependent on him being arrogant? Absolutely not. Arrogance is something that you've assumed from the beginning, and so you're trying to bend everything to fit that narrative.

By the way, the fact that his agent thought it would be "cool" to do this when it originally came up means that at least he was thinking all along that this was about money and not some bs claim that they are protecting his "image" -- such as it is.

Indeed, his agent likely was influenced by Johnny Manziel, OEL and others who have made money selling their own line of clothing, and asked Johnny if he wanted to do so himself. That's the agent's job, though. I don't really care to protect the agent in this matter; he's doing his job to try to make Johnny and himself the most money possible. The agent's motives say nothing about Johnny; however, Johnny's reaction to his agent's idea- notably that he didn't proceed with the idea- does.

It's not that hard to understand if you try -- assuming one is reasonably bright.

 

[The Cheat]

How long before Sid the Kid and Ovie (or something along those lines) follow suit?

Once Crosby turns 18 he's not a kid anymore

 

[DanZ]

Because you have used references to Hasek, Gretzky, and Howe many times when trying to say "other guys do it, you know". You've never once referenced a player of Gaudreau's calibre.

So when you say that Gaudreau should be cut slack because other players have done it -- and then only list HHOF players as those other examples -- you are by default putting him in their category. Dare I say the "Great One" is a touch more famous that "Johnny Hockey" is likely to be -- and rightly so.

It's very similar to understanding that Johnny Gaudreau is saying "I am Johnny Hockey" when he trademarks that brand, name, nickname or moniker. Regardless of whether he's doing it to protect his image, protect an asset, or make money. If he doesn't believe he is "Johnny Hockey" he'd not have the basis to make the TM claim, would he?

By the way, the fact that his agent thought it would be "cool" to do this when it originally came up means that at least he was thinking all along that this was about money and not some bs claim that they are protecting his "image" -- such as it is.

Poor John Tavares.......... better hockey player, just decided to lose the "ny" I guess.

It's not that hard to understand if you try -- assuming one is reasonably bright.

I'm putting them in the same category of hockey players that have trademarked their nicknames. I never even once compared their accomplishments. OEL and Hodgson are two other young players that have trademarked their names. Pretty sure Tatar has his own clothing line. It's incredibly common. Do some research.

Poor John Tavares? If people called him Johnny Hockey he would have trademarked it too.

Knock off the petty insults

I understood what you wrote perfectly fine. Essentially, you said if Gretzky and Hasek can do it, why not Johhny.

I maintain that he has to maybe play more than one year in the NHL before he can try to make money off his name like Gretzky. I said the same thing about Cody Hodgon's clothing line. Arbitrary limit? Sure, but it seems reasonable to me. Would you be ok with Connor McDavid starting a clothing line today called "The Next Great One" ? After all, it's just a smart business move and there's nothing arrogant about it, right?

"Insane lack of financial/business knowledge"? Well, just don't tell my boss, given that I work as a PM in the financial industry

I think there's a significant difference in arrogance to calling yourself "The Next Great One" when no one refers to you as such and Gaudreau embracing "Johnny Hockey," something his fans have called him for years. Pretty bad comparison. Gaudreau didn't choose his nickname. His fans did.

I maintain that if your name has value and you can make money off it, there's nothing wrong with doing so. If his brand fizzles and doesn't make any money for him, who cares, it was worth a shot. It's about as low risk a business move as one can make.

There's nothing arrogant about registering a trademark. He hasn't done anything with it yet. He may wait several years before doing something with it. Why not protect your assets and get it out of the way? What's the point of waiting?

 

[DanZ]

No one is saying he doesn't have the right to protect a perceived asset -- nor that this is a stupid business move.

Some are simply suggesting this is also an arrogant and perhaps somewhat douchy move.

Of course some people around here seem to think that a smart business decision automatically means that something can't be arrogant or douchy.

I'll chuckle when some of them grow a bit older and get screwed on a contract because someone tries to slide in a slimy obtuse escape clause, that while legal, is er........ douchy. Trust me -- if you do enough business deals it will happen.

How does this trademark affect anyone negatively? Who is getting screwed here? Comparing this move to someone getting screwed out of a contract is completely hilarious.

 

[Toxic0n]

I think there's a significant difference in arrogance to calling yourself "The Next Great One" when no one refers to you as such and Gaudreau embracing "Johnny Hockey," something his fans have called him for years. Pretty bad comparison. Gaudreau didn't choose his nickname. His fans did.

People and the media call McDavid "The Next Great One" all the time. So you agree it would be arrogant for him to register that as a trademark? If yes, you're also creating an arbitrary limit while slamming me for it. Seems hypocritical.

I maintain that if your name has value and you can make money off it, there's nothing wrong with doing so. If his brand fizzles and doesn't make any money for him, who cares, it was worth a shot. It's about as low risk a business move as one can make.

Not sure what you are trying to argue here. I never said it was a bad business move. Arrogant, yes. They are not mutually exclusive.

How does this trademark affect anyone negatively? Who is getting screwed here? Comparing this move to someone getting screwed out of a contract is completely hilarious.

He did not say someone's getting screwed here. He said "some people around here seem to think that a smart business decision automatically means that something can't be arrogant or douchy."
Then, he provided a personal anecdote of things that were both smart business moves and douchy at the same time.

It's not that hard to understand.

 

[RedHot]

There sure are alot of people in this thread who haven't seen or heard Johnny's comments on the trademark.

 

[hockeybama]

Indeed, his agent likely was influenced by Johnny Manziel, OEL and others who have made money selling their own line of clothing, and asked Johnny if he wanted to do so himself. That's the agent's job, though. I don't really care to protect the agent in this matter; he's doing his job to try to make Johnny and himself the most money possible. The agent's motives say nothing about Johnny; however, Johnny's reaction to his agent's idea- notably that he didn't proceed with the idea- does.

This. For some reason people are not seeing this. He didn't proceed. The fact that people are attacking his character for no reason tells me they want to be him or just can't understand that people have values and don't want to be associated with profanity. Sorry folks, Johnny is not arrogant, douchey, a money grabber or whatever you want to call him. He's a hockey player and a very good one.

 

[YEM]

rumor has it that Gretzky's lawyers have already drawn up the paperwork to cede the rights to The Great One™ to JohnnyHockey™ whenever he wants it

 

[hockeybama]

There sure are alot of people in this thread who haven't seen or heard Johnny's comments on the trademark.

A lot have seen it but are ignoring most of it.

 

[DanZ]

People and the media call McDavid "The Next Great One" all the time. So you agree it would be arrogant for him to register that as a trademark? If yes, you're also creating an arbitrary limit while slamming me for it. Seems hypocritical.

I have not even once heard McDavid referred to as "The Next Great One." It certainly isn't a nickname on the same level as "Johnny Hockey," where you'd be hard pressed to find someone in hockey circles that doesn't know who that is referring to.

And no, it wouldn't be arrogant of McDavid to register a trademark if people legitimately call him that. Maybe to come out with a clothing line would be a bit over the top before even entering the NHL, but he hasn't done that, and neither has Gaudreau.

Not sure what you are trying to argue here. I never said it was a bad business move. Arrogant, yes. They are not mutually exclusive. Your personal finances are no one else's business. Managing your money effectively isn't arrogant.

If you're business decisions aren't affecting anyone other than yourself, yes, in my opinion they are mutually exclusive. Properly managing your own personal financial assets is not douchey, it's smart.

He did not say someone's getting screwed here. He said "some people around here seem to think that a smart business decision automatically means that something can't be arrogant or douchy."
Then, he provided a personal anecdote of things that were both smart business moves and douchy at the same time.

It's not that hard to understand.

He's providing a personal anecdote that doesn't relate to this situation in the slightest. It literally has zero relevance.

What is hard to understand is how you people think a 21 year old kid properly managing his finances, literally affecting no one other than himself, his agent, and maybe some people close to him, could possibly in the slightest way be considered arrogant. That's just hilarious to me.

With the amount of NFL players that go bankrupt within a few years of retirement it's nice to see athletes that are actually intelligent with their finances. But no, financially-savvy atheletes are ******-bags now.

 

[Anglesmith]

People and the media call McDavid "The Next Great One" all the time. So you agree it would be arrogant for him to register that as a trademark? If yes, you're also creating an arbitrary limit while slamming me for it. Seems hypocritical.

In order for the two situations to be comparable, it would actually have to be a nickname. "The Next Great One" isn't a nickname, it's a title, and it's temporary, because as soon as he's in the NHL he won't be "the next" anything. It's like saying "top scorer in the NHL" is Jakub Voracek's nickname because everyone's calling him that.

Anyway, in order for the two situations to be comparable, it would first of all need to be a nickname you're talking about, it would need to have sufficient traction that it would be trademarkable (I don't think you even could trademark "Next Great One" because it's actually in reference to something else that is trademarked) and it would need to be popular enough that people were selling merchandise with it.

Not sure what you are trying to argue here. I never said it was a bad business move. Arrogant, yes. They are not mutually exclusive.

You haven't once provided reasonable support for it being arrogant other than simply saying it isn't mutually exclusive with being arrogant. Great. It's not mutually exclusive with being humble either.

He did not say someone's getting screwed here. He said "some people around here seem to think that a smart business decision automatically means that something can't be arrogant or douchy."

That's not the point, though. People were saying it was explainable only through being arrogant, and others argued that no, it is sufficiently explained as a smart business move. Because Johnny doesn't need to be arrogant in order to make a smart business move, the concept that he is arrogant comes about entirely because of your (and others') predisposition.

 

[Number8]

How does this trademark affect anyone negatively? Who is getting screwed here? Comparing this move to someone getting screwed out of a contract is completely hilarious.

You missed the point -- my point was for those who naively think that because something represents a "good business decision" there are no other factors worth considering before actually acting on any such decision.

There are several in this thread who have repeatedly rejected the notion that this is arrogant based solely on the notion that it is a "smart business decision" -- as if the two are somehow mutually exclusive.

Smart business does not necessarily, in an of itself, equate to character.

In this case Johnny has made a move that makes some people think he's arrogant -- even if he's not. Nothing that you or anyone else can do about that.

Opinions are like anuses...... everybody has one. You may just have to accept the fact that some people think Johnny comes out looking like an anus on this one.

 

[DanZ]

You missed the point -- my point was for those who naively think that because something represents a "good business decision" there are no other factors worth considering before actually acting on any such decision.

There are several in this thread who have repeatedly rejected the notion that this is arrogant based solely on the notion that it is a "smart business decision" -- as if the two are somehow mutually exclusive.

Smart business does not necessarily, in an of itself, equate to character.

In this case Johnny has made a move that makes some people think he's arrogant -- even if he's not. Nothing that you or anyone else can do about that.

Opinions are like anuses...... everybody has one. You may just have to accept the fact that some people think Johnny comes out looking like an anus on this one.

Ok. I don't think any reasonable person would agree that smart business decisions and arrogance are mutually exclusive. You have, however, not provided one legitimate reason as to why this is arrogant. Just repeating something over and over doesn't make it true. You've only provided some random evidence that business decisions are sometimes slimey. How does that relate to this situation? How is Gaudreau arrogant for making a personal financial decision that numerous athletes across every sport also make. Yes, even at Gaudreau's age.

What legitimate reason is there for Gaudreau to put off trademarking his nickname until he becomes more accomplished? The couple hundred bucks it cost him? His reputation among a select group of internet nerds?

Provide a legitimate reason for Gaudreau not trademarking his nickname now, if it's theoretically OK for him to do it once he crosses that arbitrary limit of accomplishment designated by Toxic0n and Number8, at which point it magically becomes void of arrogance and self-centeredness.

 

[Anglesmith]

You missed the point -- my point was for those who naively think that because something represents a "good business decision" there are no other factors worth considering before actually acting on any such decision.

There are several in this thread who have repeatedly rejected the notion that this is arrogant based solely on the notion that it is a "smart business decision" -- as if the two are somehow mutually exclusive.

That's not the point, though. This is almost becoming a "burden of proof" argument. But it has actually gone something like this:

Person A: "This move means that Johnny is arrogant!" (ie in order to make this move, he has to be arrogant)

Person B: "Actually, it's just a smart business move!" (ie he doesn't have to be arrogant to make this move, because being smart financially sufficiently explains it)

Person C: "He can still also be arrogant at the same time, though!" (ie something that is beside the point)

Of course Johnny can still be arrogant and make smart business decisions. But because you can explain this as a smart business decision, it means it cannot alone be used as the basis to call him arrogant. Otherwise, you are implying that smart business decisions logically imply arrogance. You aren't simply claiming that they're not mutually exclusive, but rather swinging completely the other way. And conversely it's not that we're arguing that they're mutually exclusive, but rather that one does not necessitate the other.

So I think there is every justification to challenge people who are calling him arrogant, because it has nothing to do with this story and this topic.

 

[OMGaudreau]

Just keep proving them all wrong Johnny!