Major League Baseball Properties, Inc.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Mar 2, 2005

No. 78183377 (T.T.A.B. Mar. 2, 2005)

Mailed: March 2, 2005
PTH

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
________

In re Major League Baseball Properties, Inc.
________

Serial No. 781833771
_______

Mary L. Kevlin and Heather L. Jensen of Cowan, Liebowitz &
Latman, P.C. for Major League Baseball Properties, Inc.

Scott Baldwin, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 112
(Janice O’Lear, Managing Attorney).
_______

Before Hanak, Hairston and Chapman, Administrative
Trademark Judges.

Opinion by Hairston, Administrative Trademark Judge:

An application has been filed by Major League Baseball
Properties, Inc. to register the mark MLB TV THE BASEBALL
CHANNEL on the Principal Register for services identified,
as amended, as follows:
telecommunication services, namely, broadcasting
services, namely, audio broadcasting, television
broadcasting, subscription television broadcasting,
cable television broadcasting, video broadcasting,

1 The Board notes that on February 10, 2005 a decision was issued
in related application Serial No. 78183353.
THIS DISPOSITION IS NOT
CITABLE AS PRECEDENT OF
THE TTAB
Ser No. 78183377
2
radio broadcasting, cable radio broadcasting,
broadcasting programs via a global computer
network; communication services, namely
transmitting streamed sound and audio-visual
recordings via the Internet, streaming of
audio material on the Internet, streaming of
video material on the Internet; electronic
mail services; electronic transmission of
messages and data; television transmission
services; cable television transmission
services; cable radio transmission; web casting
services; providing multiple-user access to a
global computer information network; providing
on-line chat rooms for transmission of messages
among computer users, providing on-line
electronic bulletin boards for transmission of
messages among computer users, and providing
on-line forums for transmission of messages
among computer users, all in the field of baseball.2

Applicant has disclaimed TV and BASEBALL apart from
the mark as shown.
Applicant has appealed the trademark examining
attorney’s final requirement that applicant disclaim THE
BASEBALL CHANNEL apart from the mark as shown, and his
final refusal to register absent compliance with the final
requirement. Section 6(a) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C.
1056(a).
Applicant and the examining attorney have filed
briefs. No oral hearing was requested.

2 Application Serial No. 78183377, filed November 8, 2002, based
on an allegation of a bona fide intention to use the mark in
commerce.
Ser No. 78183377
3
The basis of the disclaimer requirement is the
examining attorney’s contention that THE BASEBALL CHANNEL
is merely descriptive of applicant’s recited services under
Section 2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act.
In particular, the examining attorney contends that
the individual words “baseball” and “channel” are
descriptive of applicant’s television broadcasting services
and that “[t]he combined term ‘THE BASEBALL CHANNEL’ may be
used to describe a television channel about the game of
baseball or featuring baseball games. Therefore, the
broadcasting of television programs under the term ‘THE
BASEBALL CHANNEL’ is merely descriptive of a significant
feature, purpose or function of the applicant’s services.”
(Brief, p. 5).
The examining attorney made of record the following
definitions from The American Heritage Dictionary of the
English Language (4th ed. 2000):
baseball: A game played with a bat and ball by
two opposing teams of nine players, each team
playing alternately in the field and at bat,
the players at bat having to run a course of
four bases laid out in a diamond pattern in order
to score.

channel: A specified frequency band for the
transmission and reception of electromagnetic
signals, as for television signals.

Ser No. 78183377
4
Also, the examining attorney submitted copies of
sixteen third-party registrations of various “CHANNEL”
marks for television broadcasting services. Because all of
these registrations issued on the Supplemental Register,
the examining attorney argues that these registrations
support his position that THE BASEBALL CHANNEL is merely
descriptive.
Applicant, in urging reversal of the refusal, asserts
that the Patent and Trademark Office has registered many
“CHANNEL” marks on the Principal Register which are similar
to the phrase THE BASEBALL CHANNEL. In this regard,
applicant submitted copies of fifteen registrations of such
marks that cover television broadcasting services.
Applicant contends that THE BASEBALL CHANNEL is at most
suggestive because its services “are not a literal
channel,” and “there is no single channel that all
consumers could ‘tune’ to in order to locate applicant’s
services.” (Brief, pp. 4-5). Further, applicant argues
that the word “channel” has a number of meanings, including
“a means of communication or expression”; “a way, course or
direction of thought or action”; “a conduit”; and “to
direct toward or into some particular course.”3 In view of

3 Random House Unabridged Dictionary (2d ed. 1993); Merriam-
Webster Online; and Dictionary.com.
Ser No. 78183377
5
these meanings, applicant argues that THE BASEBALL CHANNEL
may suggest that its services are like a conduit of
baseball-related information and content or that through
the provision of applicant’s services, consumers are
directed toward or into a more heightened interest in the
sport of baseball.
A term is deemed to be merely descriptive of goods or
services, within the meaning of Section 2(e)(1) of the
Trademark Act, if it forthwith conveys an immediate idea of
an ingredient, quality, characteristic, feature, function,
purpose or use of the goods or services. In re Gyulay, 820
F.2d 1216, 3 USPQ 1009 (Fed. Cir. 1987) and In re Abcor
Development Corp., 588 F.2d 811, 200 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1978).
A term need not immediately convey an idea of each and
every specific feature of the applicant’s goods or services
in order to be considered merely descriptive; it is enough
that the term describes one significant attribute, function
or property of the goods or services. In re Venture
Lending Associates, 226 USPQ 285 (TTAB 1985). Further, it
is well-established that the determination of mere
descriptiveness must be made not in the abstract or on the
basis of guesswork, but in relation to the goods or
services for which registration is sought, the context in
which the term is used or is intended to be used, and the
Ser No. 78183377
6
impact that it is likely to make on the average purchaser
of such goods or services. In re Recovery, 196 USPQ 830
(TTAB 1977).
We agree with the examining attorney that THE BASEBALL
CHANNEL is merely descriptive of applicant’s television
broadcasting services. There is no dispute that the word
BASEBALL is descriptive of applicant’s services. Indeed,
it is clear from the recitation of services that
applicant’s television broadcasting services will be in the
“field of baseball.” Therefore, a significant and indeed
the key characteristic of applicant’s television
broadcasting services is that they will feature baseball
content.
The word CHANNEL is equally descriptive of applicant’s
television broadcasting services. CHANNEL merely describes
the vehicle by which the television broadcasting services
are transmitted and received. The dictionary excerpt
submitted by the examining attorney shows that a “channel”
is a frequency band for the transmission and reception of
television signals. In the context of applicant’s
Ser No. 78183377
7
television broadcasting services, it is this definition
which is relevant. The fact that “channel” might have
other meanings in other contexts is immaterial to our
Section 2(e)(1) analysis. In re Recovery, supra. Also,
the word “THE” has no source-indicating significance in
this case.
We also find that the composite phrase THE BASEBALL
CHANNEL is likewise merely descriptive. The phrase THE
BASEBALL CHANNEL, in the context of television broadcasting
services, has a plain and readily understood meaning
signifying that the chief aspect of applicant’s services is
the transmission of baseball-related programming. Neither
imagination nor thought is required for a purchaser or user
to arrive at this conclusion concerning the nature of the
services. We are not persuaded by applicant’s arguments to
the contrary.
Accordingly, because the phrase THE BASEBALL CHANNEL
conveys forthwith the primary characteristic of applicant’s
television broadcasting services, it is merely descriptive
thereof within the meaning of Section 2(e)(1). See, e.g.,
In re Weather Channel, 229 USPQ 854 (TTAB 1985) [THE
WEATHER CHANNEL is merely descriptive of “television
programming services, namely, preparation of weather
formats for use by television stations”].
Ser No. 78183377
8
As previously noted, both applicant and the examining
attorney submitted copies of third-party registrations of
marks that include the word CHANNEL for television
broadcasting services. The third-party registrations
submitted by the examining attorney, all of which issued on
the Supplemental Register, support the examining attorney’s
position that the Office has treated the “CHANNEL” marks
therein as merely descriptive.4 With respect to the third-
party registrations submitted by applicant, we note that
most of the marks in these registrations are unlike the
phrase THE BASEBALL CHANNEL. That is, the marks do not
consist of a word describing the programming content and
CHANNEL.5 In any event, each case must be decided on its
own merits, and neither the Board nor the examining
attorney is bound by prior actions of the Office. See In
re Nett Designs, Inc., 236 F.3d 1339, 57 USPQ2d 1564, 1566
(Fed. Cir. 2001)[“Even if some prior registrations had some
characteristics similar to [applicant’s] application, the
PTO’s allowance of such prior registrations does not bind
the Board or this court.”].

4 For example, among the marks are THE ANIMAL CHANNEL; THE
LEARNING CHANNEL; THE AUTO CHANNEL; and THE AFRICA CHANNEL.
5 For example, among the marks are CHANNEL YOUR BRAIN; THE
CHANNEL THAT CHANGES YOU; CLEAR CHANNEL TELEVISION; and ONE
WORLD, ONE CHANNEL.
Ser No. 78183377
9
In view of the foregoing, we find that the mark THE
BASEBALL CHANNEL, when used in connection with television
broadcasting services in the field of baseball, is merely
descriptive as contemplated under Section 2(e)(1) of the
Act. Thus, the examining attorney’s requirement for a
disclaimer of THE BASEBALL CHANNEL is proper.
Decision: The refusal of registration based on
applicant’s failure to disclaim THE BASEBALL CHANNEL is
affirmed. However, if applicant submits the required
disclaimer within thirty days of this decision, the refusal
of registration based on the disclaimer requirement will be
set aside. See Trademark Rule 2.142(g).