Does someone have the right to ownership of a phrase or word? I don't believe so, but Mr. Ira Herbert believes his company had the right to the slogan "It's the Real Thing." Mr. Ira Herbert of Coca-Cola USA and Mr. Richard Seaver of Grove Press, Inc. debates their rights to use the slogan through using rhetorical devices. Richard Seaver's rebuttal letter was more persuasive.
Mr. Ira Herbert's letter used rhetorical devices to try and convince Grove Press, Inc. to use a different slogan. To state the reason for his letter Mr. Herbert uses the thesis, "Since our company has made use of "It's the Real Thing" to advertise Coca-Cola long prior to the publication of the book, we are writing to ask you to stop using this theme or slogan in connection with the book." Mr. Herbert next transitions from the thesis to consequences of an event and specious reasoning. Mr. Herbert states, "[With the] simultaneous use of "the real thing" There will always be likelihood of confusion as to the source or sponsorship of the goods, and the use by such prominent companies would dilute the distinctiveness of the trade slogan and diminish its effectiveness ad value as an advertising and merchandising tool." This was used to list the possible results of the slogan. If Mr. Herbert had thought this statement out, though he presents it as logical, he would have realized that it is quite unlikely that someone would confuse a book and a coke. Though Mr. Ira Herbert of Coca-Cola used several rhetorical devices to try to persuade the Grove Press, Inc., his devices weren't well developed or logical.
Richard Seaver like Mr. Herbert used many rhetorical strategies to defend his company's right to use the phrase "It's the Real Thing." Mr. Seaver reduced Mr. Herbert's specious reasoning to the absurd. Mr. Seaver said, "I can fully understand that the public might be confused by our use of the expression, and mistake a book by a Harlem schoolteacher for a six-pack of Coca-Cola.