Why dat? Who dat? Wat?

When NBC fought over characters from Conan O’Brien’s now defunct show, I was surprised. To call characters such as Triumph the Insult Comic Dog and The Masturbating Bear intellectual property seems unintentionally humorous. That now pales in comparison to watching the NFL struggle over the copyright for the phrase “Who Dat.”

Wat?

While not originating in New Orleans, the phrase has become associated with support for the New Orleans Saints. The situation is akin to The Baha Men – they were certainly not the first to let the dogs out, but doing so became synonymous with them at the turn of millennium.

I used to think actions like these came around because companies’ legal departments were bored around the office, looking for something to do. In actuality, it seems closer to a need to push a company’s profit margins even higher while simultaneously keeping the same phrase or image they love so dearly from being used inappropriately. Disney has pushed the national copyright extension multiple times, knowing they need it to keep Mickey in good light. Without protection, one could publish a series of erotic adventures starring Mickey and the gang. I wonder if they know that I have bought this exact thing in Japan.

I can understand the need to protect a company’s image and trademark, but to trademark “Who dat?” not only encourages unhealthy grammar but makes little sense on what counts as property.

Paris Hilton tried to trademark the phrases “That’s hot” and “That’s huge,” explaining, “The way I say it, you can (own it)... Huge is good. It can never be bad. Huge is really hot.”

Fox News Channel attempted to own the phrase “fair and balanced,” and the Sci-Fi Channel recently changed its name to Syfy out of a need to completely own their company name.

Luckily, these cases have failed, and I hope the same fate befalls the NFL on this. Yes, I usually rally against the big companies. If you read my columns regularly, you’d start to assume a living embodiment of General Electric murdered my family one night outside a theater and that I’m just on a path of revenge. My concern, dear readers, is for the rights of words and phrases.

The sadness in all this is that these companies already own these phrases, just without legal contract. Let’s say McDonald’s  tries to own their slogan. There would be no need. Every time I say, “I’m loving it,” I think of Justin Timberlake and disgusting hamburgers, thanks to their marketing department. The only real issue for the NFL is worrying about missing out on a few local T-shirt sales. Mind you, this is the Saints, a team that was a laughingstock a few years ago. Instead of attacking the community that supports them, sit back and appreciate what they have.

If I’m wrong, and we start to place ownership on phrases, I call “shama lama ding dong”.


E-mail: cquandt@indiana.edu