• Dogecoin Foundation’s trademark application has been rejected by the USPTO on multiple grounds. 

• According to the statement, the applied-for mark is a universal symbol and does not function as a trademark or service mark. 

In the wake of the recent growth and popularity of Dogecoin (Doge), the Dogecoin Foundation filed an application to trademark the “gold circular medallion” that features the letter “D” and the Shiba Inu dog. According to the latest report, this application has been rejected by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Per the details, Dogecoin Foundation attempted to register this mark for most of its services.

Multiple reasons have been cited by USPTO for the refusal and this includes “Failure to Function.” According to them, the “applied-for” mark appears as a universal symbol. In this case, it can not in any way function as a trademark or service mark. The USPTO statement further explains that consumers are likely to perceive it as the conveying of information about the service rather than being a unique identifier of the source. 

Another reason for rejection is the descriptive nature. USPTO explains that the “applied-for” mark only represents the description of the applicant’s services. It is important to understand that the application captured the broader aspect of its services ranging from educational conferences in blockchain technology to software development. 

USPTO also cited “generic for the applicant’s services” as a reason to reject it. In this case, the mark cannot be trademarked even if it achieves widespread recognition as long as it is classified as “generic”.

Generic terms cannot be rescued by proof of distinctiveness or secondary meaning no matter how voluminous the proffered evidence may be.

More Reasons for the Dogecoin Foundation’s Trademark Application Rejection

The issue of “Evidence Of Acquired Distinctiveness” was also cited. Dogecoin Foundation provided evidence which includes a declaration by the president. However, the provided evidence was found to be insufficient. According to the USPTO, a more descriptive term must be accompanied by substantial evidence.

Another interesting observation is that Dogecoin Foundation used Ethereum in its argument, stating that the stance of USPTO remains questionable with the existence of Ethereum as a registered mark. In response, the Trademark Office stated that Ethereum has a consistent owner from the beginning, unlike Dogecoin. 

The decision to reject the Trademark application has been lauded by Dogecoin and the crypto community at large. The reason is that Dogecoin would maintain its decentralised nature and prevent single entities from claiming exclusive rights over symbols within the ecosystem. A Twitter (X) user identified as” Mishaboar” shared an interesting comment on this development.

There is a response (non-final, but still important)  by the examiner of the @uspto to the application of the Dogecoin Foundation for the #Dogecoin trademark. The examiner rejects the application because the “applied mark is generic”. Some highlights from the document that caught my eye. Closing comments here so you can comment in the original thread by @RichDevX, who is following the trademark issue closely for a long time.

It is worth noting that the Dogecoin Foundation can still respond to the refusal with compelling evidence or a better argument for the registration. 

Dogecoin currently has a bearish market sentiment and has fallen by 0.6 percent in the last seven days, and 1.8 percent in the last 24 hours to trade at $0.062322. 

Recommended for you:

• Buy Dogecoin Guide
• Dogecoin Wallet Tutorial
• Check 24-hour Dogecoin Price
• More Dogecoin News
• What is Dogecoin?