Barack the Builder??

I dont have to look at the links, i already know.
Evidently you don't given the crap you're posting.

But since i just looked at them:
I added the emphasis because that is important.:)
And?
It says they were granted.
So what? Was it contested by the original owner? If not that would have eased the case. If it had been contested would it have been allowed?
 
Obviously you are learning this as you go along.
I can see why you'd say that.
It's because I have consistently shown your uninformed opinion and hand-waving to be incorrect.
On the bright side at least I have learned something and shown that I'm capable of doing so.
You, on the other hand...
 
I don't think you can trademark "yes we can", it's too common a phrase.
Er... are you sure?
:p
This trademark is owned by AUDIGIER BRAND MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLC., Culver City, CA 90232. The USPTO has given the YES WE CAN trademark serial number of 77607424.
But no mention of poor old Bob. As usual the British workman gets shafted. Never mind Bob, old mate, you and Pilchard make a brew, put your feet up and forget about it.

As I showed in an earlier post even "That's hot" isn't too short or common to be trademarked.
 
Yeah having kids, my wife and I had a laugh about Barack's use of it...I can't remember if there was a reference that framed what "we could do".
Fix it...I guess.

Do you get Bob with an American accent? While we used to get what sounded like english and australian supporting cast, Bob was always an American voice..They've now changed Bob's voice to something sounding american but...well, less masculine. Like Bob the hair dresser or something.
 
So, we've established that 'Yes we can' is trademarkable.
We've established that 'Yes we can' forms a significant recognizable part of the Bob the Builder franchise.
We've established that it is the name of the theme song.

So then we come back to the question in the opening post - should the Obama administration have paid some sort of royalties or licensing fee?
 
Back
Top