How Kentucky Derby Horse Names Fare As Trademarks

Ranking Kentucky Derby horse names has itself become popular sport since I first did it back in 2014.

What if the horse names in the Kentucky Derby were trademarks? Obviously, the horses aren’t selling products in the Derby. But what if they were? Choosing a name is always a big issue for any business owner and certainly for entrepreneurs. It is an interesting exercise to look at the names out of context and ask: “would this be good,” or “this one seems really unoriginal.”

Let’s start with Luxor Café. Luxor is a geographic name. Is Luxor really known for cafés? If it’s not, then it’s sort of a creative combination of words. As long as you’re not using this term to sell cafés, it would be a pretty good mark to register in the Trademark Office. (Also, if I’m grading this as a horse name, I’ll give it an A-.)

American Promise. “American Promise” is not very strong just because both words are common. If this were the name of a motor oil, it would be a little stronger. But using a location-identifying name like American is always going to be a bit weak. (By the way – horse name grade: B.)

Burnham Square. This sounds like a geographic place, but if it is, it’s probably pretty remote and may not be well known. At least it’s not to me. That makes it a pretty good trademark. (As a horse name: B+.)

Journalism. “Journalism” is probably a pretty good trademark for anything that’s not related to actual journalism. If it is used for journalism, then you’ll never get it registered because it’s just a generic term. No one can own exclusive rights in a generic term. (As a horse name: B+.)

Publisher. Ditto.

Grande. As long as you’re not using “Grande” as a trademark on something that’s really large – which would make the name descriptive – this too is a pretty good trademark. But if you’re trying to select a brand name like “Grande,” you have to bear mind that terms like “Grande,” “Grand,” or “Big” are very common, and when it’s a crowded field, you may run into others who got there before you did. From a trademark registration standpoint, that’s a no-no. (As a horse name: B-.)

Admire Daytona. This sounds like a tag line from the Daytona, Florida Chamber of Commerce. It has the same weaknesses as other geographic names. If you use “Admire Daytona” to sell something that does not originate from the city of Daytona, then it’s actually a good, strong trademark. (As a horse name: B.)

Flying Mohawk. This makes the mind create an incongruous image, one which would easily lend itself to a very interesting and creative logo. Unless there are third parties out there with a similar mark, I think the Trademark Office will look favorably upon this one. (As a horse name: A-.)

East Avenue. “East Avenue” does not seem to create a really clear image (though no doubt there’s sure to be some story behind this particular East Avenue), so it’s probably registerable…but may run into problems with other marks using these words in one way or another. (As a horse name: B.)

Tiztastic. There are a couple of types of terms which make the strongest trademarks and the best to register generally. One type is called arbitrary, which is taking a word like “apple” and applying it to something like a computer to which it has no basic relationship (though perhaps there’s a suggestion of an interesting origin story). The other type is considered a fanciful trademark name, which is what happens when you just make up a word. As far as I know, “Tiztastic” is a made-up word, and the Trademark Office is happy to register this type of term, because nobody else has gotten to it before you, or it’s not very similar to others, or it’s not some other commonly used term in the product’s industry. Of course, “Tiztastic” is like “fantastic,” so that’s likely to put you in a category with a bunch of other users. (As a horse name: B.)

Render Judgment. Putting aside the question of what product or service you would actually try to sell under this mark, it’s pretty sound. For a common word like “judgment,” you may find lots of other users, so, coincidentally (or not), if someone else has a similar term to “Render” with their “Judgment” mark, you may run into an obstacle. (Horse name grade: B+.)

Coal Battle. This is also pretty good. This is another example of how a term which is just a little difficult to understand in any context makes a really strong trademark. Trademark lawyers love names that don’t seem to have any clear, immediate meaning, because they end up being easier to protect and get stronger over time. (As a horse name: A-.)

Sandman. Taken away from some sort of sleep aid product, “Sandman” might be good. On the other hand, “Sandman” is a somewhat common and familiar idea for memes, and so if this were on the top of your list to name your product, you might want to have a back-up in mind. (As a horse name: B.)

Sovereignty. While it is a fairly common word in general, this can be a pretty strong mark for lots of products or services. (As a horse name: B+.)

Chunk of Gold. “Gold” is no doubt part of thousands of registered trademarks. Combining it with “Chunk of” may not be as common. “Chunk of Gold,” probably has a pretty good chance of registration for a lawnmower; for jewelry or anything else tending to be associated with the color gold, it becomes problematic. (As a horse name: B.)

Citizen Bull. This is a pretty good juxtaposition of words which might be incongruous. If it creates an image in your mind, it is (probably) some sort of crazy image. It’s a fairly fanciful term. (As a horse name: A-.)

Asmussen. If this is a surname, the Trademark Office is not going to necessarily be happy about granting registration. If it is a very rare surname, as it may well be, then it stands a better chance. (As a horse name: B+.)

Owen Almighty. This sounds like a made-up term, and even though “Owen” and “Almighty” probably each have their share of registrations, “Owen Almighty” generally passes muster in the Trademark Office. (Horse name grade: A-.)

Final Gambit. This one suggests a pretty easily recognizable meaning. But, in principle, unless you’re trying to register it for something related to a chess move, “Final Gambit” may be a good bet. (As a horse name: B-.)

Baeza. This seems to be either a surname or a place name. If it’s a place name and you’re selling something that comes from that place, the Trademark Office may say no to your registration. If it’s a surname, they may also say no. Surnames always tend to raise these possible issues. (As a horse name: B+.)

Neoequos. This seems to be a made-up term. The significance from interpretation and translation seems to be pretty clear. “Equos,” “Equus,” “Horse” and similar words are probably registered in fairly large numbers, so some types of products and services may have a lot of registrations with these terms. (As a horse name, I’ll give Neoequos a gentleman’s C.)

The thing about trademarks is that the power and the legal strength of a mark is virtually always tied to the type of product the mark is used on. “Sudzy” for dish soap? That might not be very high on the creativity scale, and as a result, may not be very easy to legally protect. “Sudzy” for golf shoes? Now you’ve got me thinking. That would probably make a strong trademark. But still, some names sound good right out of the gate while others – regardless of the product – trail the field.