Addendum to Paper: LATHER THE F@#K UP

In the course of researching my paper on s 9(1)(j) of the Trademarks Act I searched for various “dirty words” on the Trademark registry database. The majority of instances of applications featuring the word “fuck” were either pending or abandoned. There were only two with decisions: FITASFUK, which was registered, and LATHER THE F@#K UP, which was rejected. I reached out to the owner of LTFU, a small soap company, on Facebook to inquire if the reason for her rejection was the use of a euphemism for “fuck”. She didn’t respond until today (while I was writing our exam, in fact). She shared her documents from CIPO with me, which confirmed that, yes, the examiner rejected her mark because the word “fuck” violates s 9(1)(j).

Lather’s counsel asked for a reconsideration, pointing out that the word “fuck” wasn’t actually used in the mark, but CIPO upheld the decision, saying that “F@#K…so nearly resembles” the word “fuck” that people would confuse it for the offensive term. According to the owner, the whole process was drawn out and demoralizing, and she eventually gave up on her business.

In my opinion, this rejection is arbitrary and unfair. It seems contradictory that FITASFUK would be registrable but LATHER THE F@#K UP wouldn’t be. Likewise, the mark of famous fashion brand FCUK is just as likely to be confused for the f-word–possibly more so, given that all the requisite letters are actually on display. As a side note, if you search “FUCK” on the registry database, FCUK comes up in the results, so CIPO is clearly aware of the similarity.

Unfortunately, a small soap company run by a single woman out of her home isn’t likely to have the resources to launch a court challenge against this decision. S 9(1)(j) will continue to stand and be arbitrarily applied, it seems.