Velcro has begun a campaign to combat misappropriation of their trademarked name to non-Velcro fasteners and adhesive products. The company's immense popularity has led to an intellectual property quandary that is unique to a handful of household brand-names like Clorox, Band-Aid and Kleenex. The ultimate plea from Velcro's lawyers, is if consumers continue misusing the brand's name, their “trademark will go away.”

Inside Counsel recently sat down with Matthew Nelles, partner with Berger Singerman, to shed light on the Velcro brand's inventive, but vague campaign. Nelles is an IP and commercial litigator, with a great deal of experience in patent, copyright, trademark, trade secret and Internet liability cases. He shared the validity of Velcro's claim that continued misuse of its name will void their trademark, the legal steps Velcro can take to better protect their IP, and the outcomes of similar trademark disputes involving other household brand-names.

Today, trademarks represent the source of a product or origin. For example, according to Nelles, when we hear the term “Home Depot,” we immediately associate that mark with a source, i.e. the large, warehouse-like hardware and appliance store that uses the color orange. There is a concept in trademark law referred to as “genericide” where a trademark that once represented the source of a product becomes so popular that it loses its ability to represent a particular source for a product or service.