Maybe That Whole 'Money Honey' Thing Was Trickier Than We Thought : Planet Money A lawyer says we "lied" on our application for the "Money Honey" trademark. It was an honest mistake!
NPR logo Maybe That Whole 'Money Honey' Thing Was Trickier Than We Thought

Maybe That Whole 'Money Honey' Thing Was Trickier Than We Thought

Yesterday's podcast was about all about our "Money Honey" saga. We applied to trademark the phrase, with big dreams of selling Planet Money Money Honey visors, then had our dreams crushed.

The part about actually filling out the trademark application was relatively minor — or so we thought.

Ben Snitkoff, a lawyer who contributes to the blog Technically Legal, says we messed up on the application.

Under a rather unsettling headline — Planet Money Committing Fraud on the USPTO? — Snitkoff writes:

...it doesn't look like they filed an "Intent to Use" application. Rather, they filed an application where they must have represented that they already sold a hat or visor in commerce marked with the Money Honey brand.

It was a mistake! An honest mistake!

Snitkoff continues:

Since they admitted in the podcast that they haven't made or sold any yet, they must have lied to the Patent and Trademark Office when they said that they had sold it in commerce.

"Lied" is such an ugly word...

Snitkoff closes:

Please Note: This was done as an intellectual exercise. I harbor no ill will toward Planet Money, and do like their program a great deal.

Cold comfort.