What's in a name? For Sir Alex Ferguson, patently no money

Judge Charles Hamilton had been asked to examine whether Sir Alexander Chapman Ferguson may be registered as a trademark. A ruling in his favour would have meant his name could not be used without permission on goods and services from dolls and posters to pencil cases and even magazine articles.

In the case of posters and photographs and other written matter, the judge ruled that the 63-year-old has no right and his name should not be registered under the 1994 Trademarks Act. In a written judgment almost as opaque as one of the Scotsman's press conferences, the judge said that since Sir Alex's name was "devoid of any character", its use on printed material did not convey a sense of who produced the material and so did not enable that individual to capitalise financially from using the name. Rather, it was simply a means of identification. As such, it could not therefore be trademarked.

Various extracts from internet sites showed that the name Alex Ferguson was used to identify photo-graphs, posters and prints, the judge said. "These references underline the importance that in relation to certain goods, the mark should not be registered."

Manchester United has refused to say if Sir Alex will bring out a range of his own goods, so the man with the ordinary name is limited to his £4m-a-year salary.