| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/24 |
| 2004/2/12-13 [Computer/SW/OS/Windows, Computer/SW/Unix] UID:12232 Activity:low |
2/11 Are trademark and company names case sensitive?
\_ In what regard? Can you get sued if you sell something under the
name coca-cola instead of the properly capitalized Coca-Cola?
Hell yes. -dans
\_ On the other hand, I think trademarks only apply to a field and
are not a universal license to the word, so you could open a
"Coca-Cola Auto Mechanics" or something. You'd get sued but you
would win if you had enough lawyers.
\_ Yes, that is correct. Trademark exists to protect consumers
from someone trying to fraudulently market a different market
using a similar name or logo. For example, if you produced a
soft drink, and marketed it as Oca-Cola, using Coca-Cola's
signature red stripe or bottle (yes, they trademarked the
bottle), they could sue you into oblivion. -dans
\_ Coca-Cola is a "famous trademark". You cannot even use it
to name your auto repair shop, as of 1996:
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/matters/matters-9904.html
\_ What if I have a name first, then someone else comes along with
a name in different capitalization and I cannot afford a (good)
lawyer?
\_ Are you two in the same field? If so, you don't need a lot of
lawyers, as the case will be pretty cut-and-dry regardless of
capitalization.
\_ I want to know when I register whether I should care about the
capitalization, i.e. can I change the cases of certain letters
later in product/website/doc etc and still claim they are
mine without registering again. -- op
\_ I don't think it's a problem. Microsoft was MicroSoft and
Micro Soft before that...
\_ Will Mike Rowe Soft work?
\_ You could trademark Mike Rowe Soft if it was not doing
business that competed with MS in any way. Given their
diversification, that's getting harder to argue.
\_ Well my business would make innovative new computer
related products so that should be ok.
\_ If the trademark name is fairly obscure, you can get away
with it. Present it as logo variations if the question comes
up. If you're trying to use a minor variation of someone
else's trademarked, there could be trouble.
\_ What about symbols and abbreviations? Is 'and' == '&" ?
And plural vs. singular? What is the rule of this game
anyhow?
\_ Yes, but you should really talk to a lawyer. Asking the motd
for legal advice is beyond idiotic.
\_ Capitalization used to follow simple English rules until the dot-com
era.
\_ eMac, iMac, iPod, blame it on apple. Actually isnt' there a
conflict between eMac the computer and emacs the editor?
\_ MadeUpFactoid: e.e. cummings moonlighted as an EE developing
ARPAnet.
\_ And don't forget punctuation marks, as in "Yahoo!".
\_ There is a UNIX vs. Unix discussion.
\_ I'm naming my company "SuperCo, Whose Stock I Recommend,". |
| 5/24 |
|
| www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/matters/matters-9904.html The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society Federal Trademark Anti-Dilution Law--A Powerful New Tool for Owners of Famous Trademarks David V. President Bill Clinton signed into law the 1996 Federal Anti-Dilution Act. The existence of this act has given holders of famous trademarks another weapon in policing noncompetitive uses of their marks; The act has also been used extensively in internet domain name disputes. In order to understand dilution, one must understand basic trademark law. A trademark is a word, name, symbol, or device that is used to distinguish a person's goods or services from another's. Famous trademarks include "Coca-Cola" for use on a soft drink; These marks differentiate their owners' goods and services from other vendors' goods and services so that consumers can make informed choices as to which goods and services they will purchase. Trademark infringement occurs when a consumer is likely to be confused by the use of a similar or identical trademark by a third party of a trademark previously owned by another. For example, if my company manufactures film and I use the trademark "Kodiak," consumers may be confused into thinking that my film is made by the same company making the Kodak film. Trademark dilution under the new federal law can occur even when a famous trademark is used by another on noncompeting goods or can occur when there is no likelihood of confusion between the two uses of the mark. For example, if a company that makes motorcycles started using the mark Kodak to identify its motorcycles, consumers would probably not be confused into believing that the Kodak film people are now in the motorcycle business. Thus, trademark dilution under the new law is a powerful weapon where there is noncompeting goods or services or no likelihood of confusion between the uses of the marks. As can be imagined, the use of someone else's mark on noncompetitive goods can cause injury to the original owner of the mark. Broadly speaking, dilution is a weakening or reduction in the ability of a mark to clearly and unmistakably distinguish one source of a product/service from another. Consumers will see the original mark being used by others to identify other sources of noncompetitive goods and services; The Kodak motorcycles example is a classic case of blurring. Should the Kodak mark be allowed to be used on several different noncompeting products, the distinctive character of the mark will be reduced and weakened. This is when the use of the mark tarnishes, degrades, or brings ridicule to the distinctive quality of the mark. An example of tarnishment would be the unauthorized use of a famous mark to identify a pornographic magazine. Obviously, the original owner of the mark wants to stop this kind of usage of the mark and can use dilution statutes to do so. One of the requirements for proving dilution under the new federal act is that the mark must be famous. In order to determine whether a mark is famous, the new law lists eight factors, none of which are determinative, to guide the inquiry. These factors include the duration and extent of use of the mark; It is clear that well-known marks such as Coca-Cola, Kodak, and McDonald's are famous. What is not so clear is whether well-known marks in narrow fields of use, which are known only to a small amount of people, are famous, too. This determination must be made on a case-by-case basis, and there are no hard and fast rules to apply, just statutory guidelines. The other interesting requirement for proving dilution is that the defendant must make commercial use of the mark. The area where this commercial-use requirement has been hotly contested is in Internet domain name adoption and use. |