The USPTO and PITORRO: Lessons in Branding Puerto Rican Rum

Home | HS Blog | The USPTO and PITORRO: Lessons in Branding Puerto Rican Rum Table of Contents Toggle Trademarking Pitorro: A Real-World Example I know from my LinkedIn feed that I'm not the only trademark lawyer who slips into Trademark Lawyer Mode™ while shopping or just driving around. Sometimes we wonder whether a particular mark is registered, or we instinctively spot potential issues that could arise if someone applied to register the mark, leading to a quick check of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) register. As a side benefit, these exercises sometimes yield good, easy-to-grasp examples of trademark law in action. Case in point: a recent conversation with my wife about pitorro, which is basically moonshine rum from Puerto Rico. The term might be getting a boost in visibility thanks to Bad Bunny’s hit PIToRRO DE COCO, which chronicles some heartbreak-driven coconut pitorro consumption (the spirit is versatile and can be infused with fruit and other flavors). The USPTO’s Initial Refusal A quick USPTO search turned up two registrations featuring the term "pitorro". One is for the word mark PITORRO, which instantly raises the question: How did that get registered? Wouldn't USPTO reject it for being merely descriptive or even generic, under Section 2(e)(1) of the United States Trademark Act (also known as the Lanham Act)? (If you're wondering, descriptive refers to a feature of the product (like "strong" or "aromatic" in reference to coffee), while generic means it’s the actual name commonly used for that type of product (in this case, "coffee")). The USPTO did initially reject the application to register PITORRO, on the grounds that the mark "merely describes a feature of the applicant’s goods … and appears to be generic." In other words, the USPTO considered "pitorro" to be a description of run, just like "spiced" or "aged". In support of its refusal, the USPTO provided this summary of what pitorro is: Pitorro is the popular word for Puerto Rican moonshine rum. … Pitorro is produced by distilling sugar cane. The resulting product is a clear liquid with a high alcohol content, generally higher than legal rum. … Production and sale of pitorro is penalized by Puerto Rican laws. Puerto Rico’s legally produced rums are sold worldwide. … The lesser-priced pitorro does not bring revenues to the government. Hence, pitorro producers are pursued by both the Puerto Rican police forces and special revenue agents from the Treasury Department. How the Applicant Fought Back The applicant fired back with a smart response, pointing out that, as the USPTO’s own description highlighted, pitorro was (back then) an illegal product. The applicant, however, had gone through a licensure process to produce rum legally (submitting copies of the different licenses obtained to the USPTO). By definition, the applicant argued, a legal rum such as theirs simply couldn’t be pitorro. That distinction, between legal rum and Boricua moonshine, was enough to overcome the USPTO refusal based on mere descriptiveness. The importance of this distinction was underscored by the USPTO's requirement that the applicant revise its goods description to "legally distilled Puerto Rican rum". Could the Outcome Be Different Today? It is now possible to legally distill pitorro in Puerto Rico, meaning that at least some Puerto Rico-made pitorro is legal. This in turn means that such pitorro would be covered by the goods description "legally distilled Puerto Rican rum". Were it considering the PITORRO application today, it is possible that the USPTO would reach a different result. As trademark law adapts to cultural shifts and product legalization, applicants targeting previously informal or regional goods (such as pitorro) should expect more rigorous scrutiny. The USPTO may lean toward treating such terms as generic or descriptive, especially when they begin appearing in mainstream commerce. This highlights the importance of understanding the trademark registration process early, crafting nuanced goods descriptions, and preparing for potential USPTO refusals grounded in genericness. For alcohol-related marks in particular, where traditional or colloquial terms often play a central role in branding, seeking counsel before filing is a smart move. LUGO’S CRAFT PITORRO and Genericness These shifts appear reflected in the USPTO's handling of an application filed for LUGO’S CRAFT PITORRO, nine years after the PITORRO application. The USPTO considered that "CRAFT PITORRO" was a generic term, only allowing the application to proceed after the applicant disclaimed any exclusive rights to use the term. This means they basically told the USPTO that they were not claiming to own the words "CRAFT PITORRO", and other companies can use those words too, as long as they are not using the name "LUGO'S" as well. If a competitor in the pitorro space decided to challenge the PITORRO trademark claim, not unlike Taco Bell did with a New Jersey restaurant's claim to TACO TUESDAY, they would likely be on solid legal footing. In that case, Taco Bell successfully argued that "Taco Tuesday" was too common for anyone to own exclusively. Two Takeaways for Brand Owners 1. Be cautious with descriptive or generic terms. They might seem like a great idea, but they’ll likely make your path to trademark protection a lot rockier. 2. Context matters. A term isn’t inherently generic or descriptive. Rather, it depends on what you’re selling. “PITORRO” might be generic for pitorro rum, but it’s totally fair game for, say, a line of baseball caps (unless there’s a language out there where “pitorro” means “hat” ... you never know). Whether you're looking to protect your amazing ron cañita (one of the many, sometimes poetic names for pitorro) or a slightly less intoxicating product, our trademark team is always ready to help you navigate the registration process and defend your brand. Check Out Our Practice Areas Share Twitter Facebook LinkedIn E-mail Comment Fred Rocafort Fred leads Harris Sliwoski’s intellectual property practice and is the coordinator of the firm’s international team. Much of Fred’s practice consists of helping cannabis businesses protect their brands. He also works with entrepreneurs and companies entering the Web3 space, a new frontier for IP law. Prior to joining Harris Sliwoski, Fred worked overseas for more than a decade, in both government and private sector roles. Fred is a regular contributor to the award-winning China Law Blog and Canna Law Blog. Fred began his career overseas as a U.S. consular officer in Guangzhou, China, where he advocated for fairer treatment of American companies and citizens in China and for stronger intellectual property rights enforcement. After entering the private sector, Fred worked at a Shanghai law firm as a foreign legal advisor and later joined one of the oldest American law firms in China, helping foreign companies navigate the Chinese legal environment. He also led the legal team at a Hong Kong-based brand protection consultancy, spending most of his time out in the field, protecting clients against counterfeiters and fraudsters in Greater China, Southeast Asia and Latin America. In addition to his IP work, as a native Spanish speaker, Fred works closely with different Harris Sliwoski teams on Latin America and Spain matters. Fred also provides advice to cannabis industry participants and other businesses on import and export transactions. Fred is an ardent supporter of FC Barcelona—and would be even in the absence of Catalan forebears who immigrated to Puerto Rico in the mid-1800s. Harris Sliwoski Attorney Read more posts [email protected] Read More Intellectual Property Law, Trademarks Related Posts August 10, 2026 Trademark Registration in Central America: How to Build a Country-by-Country Filing Strategy August 7, 2026 United States Trademark Ownership Errors: How Small Filing Mistakes Become Expensive Problems May 18, 2026 Registering a Trademark in Venezuela: What International Businesses Need to Know April 27, 2026 Deepfakes, Voice Cloning, and AI Impersonation: The Global Rules Are Already Here, and They Don't Agree April 23, 2026 DMCA Agent Requirements for Online Businesses April 21, 2026 Trade Secrets in the AI Economy: Why Businesses Need Stronger Protection Now March 31, 2026 Trademark Registration in Cuba: Why Companies Should Be Thinking Ahead March 18, 2026 Abandoned Trademark Blocking Your U.S. Trademark Application? Understanding TTAB Cancellations February 2, 2026 EU Expansion and the EUTM: Will Your EU Trademark Automatically Cover New Member States? December 22, 2025 How a Foreign Trademark Application or Registration Can Help You in the United States: Section 44(d) and Section 44(e) December 12, 2025 Registering a Trademark in Canada: What International Businesses Need to Know December 10, 2025 Negotiating Trademark Disputes: Protecting Your Brand Without Burning Cash December 8, 2025 Trade Secrets and How to Protect Your Most Valuable Information November 18, 2025 Ten IP Monetization Mistakes That Quietly Destroy Global Trademark Portfolio Value November 17, 2025 Registering Trademarks in Vietnam: What You Need to Know Leave a comment Cancel reply