Are You About to Lose the Right to Call Your Work ‘SEO’?
Tuesday, April 8th, 2008;
-- Jordan McCollum |
UPDATE, 11 April 2008: Gambert has responded to the community. He wants to use the SEO mark to enforce standards on the industry. We disagree.
Do you use the word “SEO” to describe what you do? Look out: an “enterprising” marketer (both of those words are used euphemistically) has set his sights on taking your livelihood—or at least your right to use that acronym. As SEOmoz’s Sarah Bird reports, one Jason Gambert has filed an application to trademark the acronym SEO.
Sarah has documented the ridiculous history of his application, begun almost a year ago, well. Among the highlights:
Jason Gambert applied for registration of the mark “SEO.” He described the relevant goods and services as: “Search Engine Optimization, Hosting, Webdesign, Software, Hosting, Domain Name, Software Development, All Computer Related Development and Marketing plus what is listed; Computer Software, Computer Hardware, “SEO” Letters to be trademarked in “All” Computer related areas.”
The application asks when the first use of the term occurred anywhere. What does he say? “At least as early as 02/14/2007.”
After several rejections, appeals and reapplications, it appears that Jason finally found someone at the Trademark office willing to hear his case—or so confused her with incoherent, not-actually-legal-speak ramblings that she despaired of ever understanding his case without extensive paperwork (the remedy for all bureaucrats, of course). Some of his logic (spelling and grammar errors in original, my comments in square brackets):
The applicant has considered attorneys arguments for refusal carefully and found the arguments are not congruent to the arguments of registration. The applicant has provided substantive evidence with simply the lack of it. There is no evidence that has any realistic credible value as “SEO” having anything to do with a service. SEO is the known acronym for “Search Engine Optimization [which he repeats more than once in his letter] and after a careful break down of the root words that SEO consist of, they do have realistic official English linguistic value. What they do not have however is any definition describing “Search Engine Optimization” as having anything to do with a service.” . . .
In addition to being not merely descriptive, the proposed mark is exclusive because of the absence of any connection with being a service. [So it's not a service.] Therefore it is wonderfully capable of functioning as a source identifier of applicants’ services. [So it is a service.] “SEO” is a process not a service. . . . [Could the 'process' happen to be a 'service,' too?]
In addition to the above mentioned “SEO” has been in use and affiliated with applicant for over 5 years acting for additional grounds for registration. [End of letter]
Have a headache yet? Or are you wondering why you’ve never heard of the father of not-a-service-but-a-process-SEO? A few enterprising commenters at SEOmoz tracked down his actual site, which, oddly enough, is extremely difficult to do, even using Google. However, I suspect that he’s not actually the inventor of SEO as a process or service. (In fact, we have to wonder about the quality of his services process if his site is that difficult to find.)
More importantly, what can you do to stop him? Well, if you have an extra $300 lying around, you can file Notice of Opposition. Sarah has already done so and promises to tell us more about the application process today. However, her synopsis from a comment yesterday:
You can do most of it online at the Electronic Filing Office.You also need to create a short and plain statement about why you are opposing the registration. Finally, there is a substantial filing fee, $300, in order to file a Notice of Opposition.
Failing that (or lacking $300), you can wait and hope that enough other people file notice of opposition. Or you can get to work on your trademark application for PPC, SEM, ROI, FIFO, GIGO or anything else that you want.
** Andy Beal is hosting the first ever online reputation management workshop. Register today and save $200!! **
Category: Legal, SEM Industry
Forward: Email This Post

















April 8th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
You’re right about a confusing paragraph! Isn’t anyone original anymore? He’s trying to piggy back a successful term and change it’s context. Hope this hullabaloo gets shut down quick!
April 8th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Yea, that is crazy. If he wins, I think I am going to trademark “www.”
April 8th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
it’s kind like Trump trying to trademark the phrase “you’re fired!”. Ridiculous!
April 8th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Pft… yea right. I discussed SEO as a process and a service in my 2002 eBook Clickin’ it Rich. I guess that gives me prior art and some really big checks if he’s successful huh?
April 8th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
I’m far too modest to ever have used SEO anyway - I prefer to call it “trial and lots of error” !
April 9th, 2008 at 6:53 am
His description of the service looks like keyword stuffing!
April 9th, 2008 at 10:31 am
Let’s get 300 people together, each contributing $1, and file a joint Notice of Opposition.
April 9th, 2008 at 10:52 am
The folks at SEO Inc. tried to trademark SEO some time ago and were rejected. This too shall pass. Sarah, if you want any support, send me an email. I’ve dealt with the USPTO a few times.
April 9th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
How ridiculous is that!?! The person willing to hear his case that works for the trademark office probably doesn’t even own a laptop, have internet, or even use Google or Yahoo. Thanks for the laugh!
April 11th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
He has an official response…
jasongambert.com
April 11th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
[...] titled SEO Trademarker Responds: Community Standards , a follow on from an earlier post this week Are You About To Lose The Right To Call Your Work SEO, by the same [...]
April 14th, 2008 at 9:58 am
@Hold On - heres my official response to his official response http://www.seomoz.org/blog/pulling-a-fast-one-a-clever-internet-market er-is-trying-to-trademark-seo#jtc54852
May 1st, 2008 at 9:05 am
[...] Trademark discovery by Sarah. For extensive coverage of the news, read discussions on WebProNews, Marketing Pilgrim, WebmasterRadio and [...]