Patent Lawyers Make Their Case on YouTube #DontSayVelcro
“Don't say Velcro” gets the point across better than any legal brief—while making fun of same. “You call it Velcro, but we're begging you. This is (bleeping) hook and loop."
December 01, 2017 at 10:04 AM
6 minute read
![Don't say Velcro video](http://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/404/2017/12/Velcro-Article-201712011451.jpg)
Yes, the Velcro Cos.' legal team litigated for years and won a weeklong trial in federal court this month defending their brand. But a two-minute video that's had nearly a half-million views on YouTube explains their patent protecting mission.
“Don't say Velcro” gets the point across better than any legal brief—while making fun of same. “You call it Velcro, but we're begging you. This is (bleeping) hook and loop,” lawyers sing in the short film.
The patent lawyer humor extends to Kleenex and Clorox and Band-Aid—brands that are so successful people begin using them the wrong way. Like as verbs or nouns instead of adjectives.
Here's the long version of the explanation of the problem, taken from a news release for the Fish & Richardson lawyers, who tried the case for the Velcro Companies in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia:
Note to editors:
“At Velcro Companies, we are proud that VELCRO® brand products have become a part of everyday life, but that ubiquity sometimes produces confusion. The VELCRO® trademark should be used only when referring to genuine VELCRO® brand fasteners. Non-VELCRO® brand products should be identified by their functional terms, such as 'hook and loop,' 'self-adhesive straps,' and so forth. The VELCRO® mark should always be used as an adjective and never as a noun or a verb. The term 'Velcro Companies' should be used when referring to our company and its executives.
“The proper use of the VELCRO® trademark assists us in safeguarding the integrity of the VELCRO® brand, and helps to protect consumers from products incorrectly sold as VELCRO® brand products. For further information on the proper use of the VELCRO® trademark, please see the guidelines on our website.”
For the short—and much funnier—version, just watch “Don't say Velcro.”
![Don't say Velcro video](http://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/404/2017/12/Velcro-Article-201712011451.jpg)
Yes, the Velcro Cos.' legal team litigated for years and won a weeklong trial in federal court this month defending their brand. But a two-minute video that's had nearly a half-million views on YouTube explains their patent protecting mission.
“Don't say Velcro” gets the point across better than any legal brief—while making fun of same. “You call it Velcro, but we're begging you. This is (bleeping) hook and loop,” lawyers sing in the short film.
The patent lawyer humor extends to Kleenex and Clorox and Band-Aid—brands that are so successful people begin using them the wrong way. Like as verbs or nouns instead of adjectives.
Here's the long version of the explanation of the problem, taken from a news release for the
Note to editors:
“At Velcro Companies, we are proud that VELCRO® brand products have become a part of everyday life, but that ubiquity sometimes produces confusion. The VELCRO® trademark should be used only when referring to genuine VELCRO® brand fasteners. Non-VELCRO® brand products should be identified by their functional terms, such as 'hook and loop,' 'self-adhesive straps,' and so forth. The VELCRO® mark should always be used as an adjective and never as a noun or a verb. The term 'Velcro Companies' should be used when referring to our company and its executives.
“The proper use of the VELCRO® trademark assists us in safeguarding the integrity of the VELCRO® brand, and helps to protect consumers from products incorrectly sold as VELCRO® brand products. For further information on the proper use of the VELCRO® trademark, please see the guidelines on our website.”
For the short—and much funnier—version, just watch “Don't say Velcro.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All![On The Move: Squire Patton Boggs, Akerman Among Four Firms Adding Atlanta Partners On The Move: Squire Patton Boggs, Akerman Among Four Firms Adding Atlanta Partners](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/b4/76/3db1a19e4d638d10ee312bb5bc46/2025-top-laterals-integration-767x633.jpg)
On The Move: Squire Patton Boggs, Akerman Among Four Firms Adding Atlanta Partners
7 minute read![Georgia's Next Judge? Sole Candidate Shortlisted to Rise to Bench Georgia's Next Judge? Sole Candidate Shortlisted to Rise to Bench](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/1e/b5/2781124b422ebb7cc232dd321e95/james-jay-crowe-jr-2-767x633.jpg)
![Justice 'Weaponization Working Group' Will Examine Officials Who Investigated Trump, US AG Bondi Says Justice 'Weaponization Working Group' Will Examine Officials Who Investigated Trump, US AG Bondi Says](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/aa/c6/cf82c06b4d7882a436520799935e/pam-bondi-2025-016-767x633.jpg)
Justice 'Weaponization Working Group' Will Examine Officials Who Investigated Trump, US AG Bondi Says
![New Atlanta Litigation Firm Breaks Away From Swift Currie New Atlanta Litigation Firm Breaks Away From Swift Currie](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/cf/2f/b8cd56764d9697ea8c49758144ae/marsh-atkinson-brantley-767x633.jpg)
Trending Stories
- 1Parties’ Reservation of Rights Defeats Attempt to Enforce Settlement in Principle
- 2ACC CLO Survey Waves Warning Flags for Boards
- 3States Accuse Trump of Thwarting Court's Funding Restoration Order
- 4Microsoft Becomes Latest Tech Company to Face Claims of Stealing Marketing Commissions From Influencers
- 5Coral Gables Attorney Busted for Stalking Lawyer
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250