{"contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"lisa-green"}

Would you buy Octomom diapers?

News Type: Event — Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:51 AM EDT

The Smoking Gun website reports that Nadya Suleman, who famously gave birth to eight babies earlier this year, has filed two government applications to trademark the word "Octomom." Her applications, filed April 10, are for "dresses, pants, shirts, textile diapers" and for "entertainment in the nature of on-going television programs in the field of varity [sic]." But what about Super Happy Fun Fun Inc.? The Texas company filed its own trademark application a full month earlier to use "Octomom" for computer games, toys, playthings and entertainment services.

Which filer will secure the word "Octomom" for commercial use? The actual Octomom, or the company that got to the government first?

A prominent intellectual property lawyer I consulted notes that neither Ms. Suleman nor the Happy Fun Fun company has any trademark rights until they start using "Octomom" on products or services. Right now, it's just a widely used term. While there are cases where words gained fame in public before companies trademarked them -- the Volkswagen "bug" and "beetle" are examples -- they need a product or service connection to qualify for trademarks.

While Ms. Suleman's advantage is that the term refers to her -- she has some disadvantage as the second in line for trademark protection. Who will win? Remains to be seen -- but watch store shelves or your TV set for clues.

And if you want to search for other trademark applications, look here

{"contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"lisa-green"}

Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
Share

Published to:

lisa-green's Column, All of Newsvine
Groups: none
Regions: none

{"commentId":6521515,"authorDomain":"laschulz0309"}

LS-415070

NOt only no, but hell no, I wouldn't buy anything with this woman's name on it. Nor will I buy anything that supportsthis clown. Isn't she done yet? Why is she still news? She's not a mother, a parent, nor a very nice human. Let her take care of her litter the way she's said from day one that she wants too. Ok, fine, just don't do it on my dime!

{"commentId":6521515,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"laschulz0309"}

4 votes

#1 - Thu Apr 16, 2009 12:49 PM EDT

{"commentId":6539001,"authorDomain":"debbie-richardson1"}

Deb-401914

No I would not buy her one diaper...She needs to give those kids to people who want some and can not have them and can afford to take care of them...I think she is the worse person in the world...I feel sorry for those kids to have a mom like her...

{"commentId":6539001,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"debbie-richardson1"}

4 votes

#1.1 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:39 AM EDT

{"commentId":6524027,"authorDomain":"char-4"}

OhGoshDarn

No I wouldn't buy anything from that lady. I also would not support anything that she does. She spent money getting impregnanted and her lips done when she should have been taking care of her other children. She is a poor excuse for a mother. She is only sponging off society. We have enough diaper companies, we don't need her.

{"commentId":6524027,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"char-4"}

4 votes

#2 - Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:30 PM EDT

{"commentId":6531644,"authorDomain":"sickofthis"}

Whatever_41

NO!

Those children never should have been released to her care. She is no "Mother", just an incubator...

CPS where are you?!?!

{"commentId":6531644,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"sickofthis"}

5 votes

#3 - Thu Apr 16, 2009 9:20 PM EDT

{"commentId":6531983,"authorDomain":"megamomm1"}

MEL F.

i'd buy one diaper, fill it full of @!$%# and send it back to her

{"commentId":6531983,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"megamomm1"}

4 votes

#4 - Thu Apr 16, 2009 9:45 PM EDT

{"commentId":6535033,"authorDomain":"patricolsen"}

Hekofawoman

Mel - Crack me the hell up!!!

{"commentId":6535033,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"patricolsen"}

3 votes

#4.1 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 3:32 AM EDT

{"commentId":6535421,"authorDomain":"angelbronze"}

Barbara-978677

Would you buy Octomom diapers? does SHE need them? (not for the kids)

{"commentId":6535421,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"angelbronze"}

2 votes

#5 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:39 AM EDT

{"commentId":6535672,"authorDomain":"RuthyJObservations"}

RuthyJObservations

No, to the question. "Does she need them?", probably yes for all the little ones. Maybe a "chastity belt" for her...oh oh...that's right these new kids were implanted. But, you know what? Who cares! There's so many other things in life that are a whole lot more interesting to think about, and she has her hands full with the choices she has made and will have to live with them. GG

{"commentId":6535672,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"RuthyJObservations"}

4 votes

#5.1 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:43 AM EDT

{"commentId":6535840,"authorDomain":"fullershaven"}

Proud American-252641

she has her hands full with the choices she has made and will have to live with them.

I agree with this GG, but I feel sad for the babies who didn't choose but will have to live with her choices.

{"commentId":6535840,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"fullershaven"}

2 votes

#5.2 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 7:14 AM EDT

{"commentId":6537980,"authorDomain":"danields"}

JubalUSA

If it is Marketing and sales, in a word No.

If it is a trust held by and administered by a local Credit Union with the children as equal beneficiaries with monthly disbursements based upon receipts of monies directly spent on and for the children, Yes.

{"commentId":6537980,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"danields"}

3 votes

#5.3 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:58 AM EDT

{"commentId":6538480,"authorDomain":"sorrelen"}

sorrelen

Along PaladinUSA's point there needs to be a clause that states she can't use the money for any more IVF treatments!

{"commentId":6538480,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"sorrelen"}

3 votes

#5.4 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:18 AM EDT

{"commentId":6539849,"authorDomain":"laschulz0309"}

LS-415070

Ok, ok, no more IVF treatments, but I can have more lip implants, french manis (don't forget my pedi's) tummy tucks, and Starbucks...at least twice a day!! Right??!! Signed, Octomom

{"commentId":6539849,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"laschulz0309"}

3 votes

#5.5 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 11:12 AM EDT

{"commentId":6542100,"authorDomain":"sorrelen"}

sorrelen

Ok, ok, no more IVF treatments, but I can have more lip implants, french manis (don't forget my pedi's) tummy tucks, and Starbucks...at least twice a day!! Right??!! Signed, Octomom

Ha ha :)

{"commentId":6542100,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"sorrelen"}

3 votes

#5.6 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:34 PM EDT

{"commentId":6537579,"authorDomain":"sorrelen"}

sorrelen

Definitely not. She adamantly objected to the use of the word Octomom on her reality show bid and now that a company filed a patent she then follows suit. So if she didn't want anyone to refer to her as that then why all of sudden does she have a change of heart? Oh yeah money the whole reason she had a litter to begin with.

Poor children they have no choice in the matter...

{"commentId":6537579,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"sorrelen"}

6 votes

#6 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:38 AM EDT

{"commentId":6539728,"authorDomain":"angelbronze"}

Barbara-978677

Her attorney had to have convinced her to now embrace the name the public and media slapped on her-if you can't beat em, join em, make a lemon into lemonade etc. but Nadya can have the profits from the lemonade stand to share with her attorney.

Just shows you more of- how unstable she is-how "double minded" and how her head turns every direction the wind blows.

{"commentId":6539728,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"angelbronze"}

4 votes

#6.1 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 11:07 AM EDT

{"commentId":6542082,"authorDomain":"sorrelen"}

sorrelen

*Sigh* this woman just confounds me....

{"commentId":6542082,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"sorrelen"}

2 votes

#6.2 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:34 PM EDT

{"commentId":6544067,"authorDomain":"hmcd23"}

runner23

Thank god I have Susan Boyle to follow now and not octomom. My answer is no, I would not buy anything Nadya Suleman markets.

{"commentId":6544067,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"hmcd23"}

4 votes

#7 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:48 PM EDT

{"commentId":6544896,"authorDomain":"hmcd23"}

runner23

Thank god I have Susan Boyle to follow now and not octomom. My answer is no, I would not buy anything Nadya Suleman markets.

{"commentId":6544896,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"hmcd23"}

2 votes

#8 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:21 PM EDT

{"commentId":6555813,"authorDomain":"darkdingo"}

Uncle Nick

Hell, not only would I not buy any product associated with her, I would find out what company manufactured that product and boycott the company's entire line of products... Now on the other hand, I'd buy a Susan Boyle lunchpail and teacozy...

{"commentId":6555813,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"darkdingo"}

6 votes

#8.1 - Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:31 AM EDT

{"commentId":6548054,"authorDomain":"angelbronze"}

Barbara-978677

A big yes to the Susan Boyle story. Who needs Nadya's crap?

{"commentId":6548054,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"angelbronze"}

3 votes

#9 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:39 PM EDT

{"commentId":6549069,"authorDomain":"krisl"}

TexasMomma

Make that a BIG BIG YES to Susan Boyle ... isn't that just one of the most awesome, inspiring things you've EVER seen ??!!

I teared up when I first saw the video, it just absolutely floored me - and I can't wait to buy her first CD !!

{"commentId":6549069,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"krisl"}

3 votes

#9.1 - Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:30 PM EDT

{"commentId":6556826,"authorDomain":"mbanneh"}

Mary from FLA

I had to stop and rethink the late couple of post.....ha ha ha

I agree yes to susan to No to Nadya!

The sad part of the whole Octomom BS is she is getting what she wanted. She is becoming famous and making a very handsome payday from her 8 little bags of gold. (maybe not famous for a good reason but she is definaltly extending her 15 minutes of fame)

{"commentId":6556826,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"mbanneh"}

3 votes

#10 - Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:17 AM EDT

{"commentId":6558636,"authorDomain":"gjones9133"}

amother

NO .......

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/stop-companies-from-giving-to-nadya-suleman.

{"commentId":6558636,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"gjones9133"}

1 vote

#11 - Sat Apr 18, 2009 11:08 AM EDT

{"commentId":6590783,"authorDomain":"factcheckme"}

factcheckme

will we be able to get past our judgement of the woman, and realize that these babies (as US citizens) are legally our collective responsibility, from now until their deaths if they are disabled, so its in OUR collective best interests to care for and about them? stay tuned....(my guess is, NO, judging from our general response to families on social services programs).

{"commentId":6590783,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"factcheckme"}

3 votes

#12 - Mon Apr 20, 2009 4:00 PM EDT

{"commentId":6591847,"authorDomain":"puckishpixie"}

Apples

It's not in our collective interest to care for and about them, it's our tax dollars that will pay for their life and care. Fortunately as a person of free will I can choose to give this leech and her group of leeches only what the law entitles them to and no more. I wouldn't buy anything that this woman is affiliated with, even water in the desert.

{"commentId":6591847,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"puckishpixie"}

2 votes

#12.1 - Mon Apr 20, 2009 4:42 PM EDT

{"commentId":6591896,"authorDomain":"factcheckme"}

factcheckme

I wouldn't buy anything that this woman is affiliated with, even water in the desert.

then your own biases will literally be your downfall.

my point was that it is ALWAYS better to care for US citizens when they are infants, or in the womb, than to neglect them because they only get more expensive, later on. and yes, its our tax dollars that are already earmarked for these kids' care, for life, for many of them. why not intervene early, and make sure they are as least-likely as possible to need even more expensive intervention later on down the road?

or, is someone who literally would not buy water from nadia suleman if they were dying in the desert, completely uninterested in either logic, or self-preservation?

{"commentId":6591896,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"factcheckme"}

2 votes

#12.2 - Mon Apr 20, 2009 4:44 PM EDT

{"commentId":6594513,"authorDomain":"puckishpixie"}

Apples

The problem is that there is no way the guarentee that any of the Octomom profits would be used to actually care for these children. I find it more likely that this woman is mental-desturbed and cannot be trusted with having the best interest of her young in mind. Thus, any tax money used to treat these babies will continue to be used so that this ameobic leech can cotninue to suck this country dry.

I think death would be preferable to constantly taking care of these leeches. At least then I can die before all the work I put into raising more tax dollars for her and her brood kills me.

{"commentId":6594513,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"puckishpixie"}

2 votes

#12.3 - Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:04 PM EDT

{"commentId":6594741,"authorDomain":"gjones9133"}

amother

Most of the people do care about the children and that is the point here! Show me how Nadya has spent money on the kids???? How about the first six she didn't feed but spent money for IVF. If Nadya gets money she has shown that the best interest of her kids does not come first. How much has she received already and is thinking about going on WIC? Where does all the money go to??? I am fine with my tax dollars helping the children, but I am not an idiot ... Any money in Nadya's hands will go to Nadya .. factcheckme .. you buy the products and diapers .. hell just give Nadya a check so she can do this all again or maybe buy more nannies or a bigger house. Where is the intervention early? What are you talking about? There is none at this point .. it is gone now ... please explain. Buying something from Nadya is by far no intervention for these kids ... huh? Some people do not want to contribute to HER!!!! Simple

{"commentId":6594741,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"gjones9133"}

2 votes

#12.4 - Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:18 PM EDT

{"commentId":6599203,"authorDomain":"patricolsen"}

Hekofawoman

factcheckme - I understand your point exactly. Basically, the damage is done. Now we must deal with the reality of these poor babies. I don't truly believe anyone would ever deny these children what is due them for "their" care. It's the anger and resentment that is being projected towards the irresponsible decisions this woman. to put these babies in. Soon, before we know it they will be teens, then adults with God knows what type of ailments to come. I hope and pray that they are physically and mentally well...and that they have a fair chance at a decent life like we all want for our children. I feel many are still outraged towards her in her most ridiculous efforts to seek her fame and fortune. It's sad, because on one hand, I'm sure she's probably most willing to do about anything she has to, to care for them, but on the flip side, her choices make her "seem" selfish. Which one is she...not sure yet. But time will bring that out. While I hate what she has done, without forethought, without means, without anything, she decided to go have a liter, I do want to see what is done in the "best" interest of those future adults, so as not to have them continue on the system and never be productive members of society. Hell, when they are old enough to read about their "mom", that alone could be and most probably would be damaging. How embarrassing that I should discover my mother to be known as "Octopussy", Octomom...etc. How, embarrassing to have a mom, who acted as the circus Queen...to the world. We all need to be careful now what we say that these lttle ones will eventually hear.

{"commentId":6599203,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"patricolsen"}

1 vote

#12.5 - Tue Apr 21, 2009 1:11 AM EDT

{"commentId":6595088,"authorDomain":"angelbronze"}

Barbara-978677

Calling tax experts: I read on another blog where someone calling himself "TaxPro" the Attorney Czech will be setting up a "foundation" to divert any tax liability and still allow her to collect government benefits for the children. She can be named as a board member or trustee and it is all a legal scam. Is this true that a foundation would exempt and allow continued benefits even though in California if someone on Medi-cal, SSI, foodstamps has to disclose on applications ALL OTHER SOURCES OF INCOME, INCLUDING TRUSTS, gifts of other sources??? Can a foundation "Trump" the system? I realize the "gifts" could be tax exempt but they should still disqualify from "benefits" wouldn't they?

{"commentId":6595088,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"angelbronze"}

#13 - Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:39 PM EDT

{"commentId":6597802,"authorDomain":"gjones9133"}

amother

In a perferct world maybe Barbara ... most of us don't learn the system and feed off it. Most of us want to excel and be self sufficent. A foundation can TRUMP the system ... thats how Nadya payed for her house but put it in her dads name ... so she didn't have to claim the asset thus still qualifies for aide for her children. Her own dad said he only had $100 in his account but than legally bought her a house a week later.. They have been playing the system for along time ... you can even go back to the other homes owned and how they changed the titles frequently ...... pre-octuplets ...

{"commentId":6597802,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"gjones9133"}

#14 - Mon Apr 20, 2009 10:49 PM EDT

{"commentId":6598915,"authorDomain":"angelbronze"}

Barbara-978677

On the forms you have to fill out for assistance you also have to put the owner's name of the home you reside in and if it is owned by a relative. I know this because I just had to help a relative filling out these very specific forms. This is not the first time the government has run across this game and why they must ask those particular questions and I'm sure they are able to connect the dots especially since this is such a publicized case. Suleman is not really hiding anything, it's all in plain sight. I'm just not sure a "foundation" is viewed any differently by the system than say a "trust" (which is counted) since the don't overlook all other sources of "income" when they consider eligibility. The government has also really been cracking down on Swiss Bank accounts people have been hiding assets in for years and the Swiss Banks are cooperating with our government. I'm trying to be optimistic that this blantant of an abuse of the system can't really go uncontested.

{"commentId":6598915,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"angelbronze"}

2 votes

#14.1 - Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:29 AM EDT

{"commentId":6599017,"authorDomain":"angelbronze"}

Barbara-978677

To amom,

sorry.. blatant abuse ...

You are allowed to own a home according to their rules-but if you received income to purchase it- that must be reported) Whatever amount was made as a down payment ($100,000?) would disqualify from assistance at least the month of the house "purchase" even if the money source is is in a trust. The government needs to really monitor their reporting knowing these things and that they are playing them because it is setting a horrible precedence and others will quickly follow suit... Not that it doesn't happen already on a smaller scale with individuals but it's opening the flood gates even more. The government must be aware of the danger of what the Sulemans are doing.

{"commentId":6599017,"threadId":"555653","contentId":"2691335","authorDomain":"angelbronze"}