renosteinke
Senior Member
- Location
- NE Arkansas
It looks like a little primer is needed as to trademark law.
We follow practices based upon the traditions of the British Trademark Office. That's the root, and things are set up in a rather sensible way.
A name need not be identical to infringe upon a trademark. There are many factors that come into consideration, including the 'commonality' of the name, how well known it is, the market served, and how unique it is. Let me give a few examples:
"Acme Electric" is so general that a competitor would probably be allowed to use "Acme Electrical."
Joe Smith would probably not be able to block Joe E. Smith from setting up shop, but Digney Fibowitz could probably block Dagny Fibowitch from using his similar name in the same business.
Neither Bud Weiser nor Joe Gallo can get away with opening liquor brands under their names, but they're perfectly free to open Bud Weiser Plumbing or Gallo Electric. You laugh, but there was an attempt at another 'Gallo" wine, and Budweiser unsuccessfully claimed infringement by Bushmaster machetes. My firm uses a name that someone across the country started using first - but that's no issue, because the other guy is simply 'squatting' on the name, and cannot make the case for my actually infringing on his business. Another had registered the name with my county, but was also just 'squatting' and not in the business; he gained no priveledge there.
A name with great recognition gets greater protection. That's why you don't see Popsi Cola or Clean-Ex tissues.
Examples of unique names are Xerox, Exxon, and Kodak. You're not likely to be able to use anything even remotely similar for any business.
"Ownership" of the name can be a issue. McDonald's found this out when they tried to assert that THE McDonald, the actual Scottish laird, was 'infringing' on the name. Oops. Likewise, Burger King ran into trouble when they expanded to Florida and found another chain had a "Whaler" sandwich. Godfather Pizza, however, prevailed against a copy-cat when they expanded to Chicago.
Fulthrottle, you really need to chat with a lawyer familiar with this area of law to see if you have any recourse. The other name need not be identical.
We follow practices based upon the traditions of the British Trademark Office. That's the root, and things are set up in a rather sensible way.
A name need not be identical to infringe upon a trademark. There are many factors that come into consideration, including the 'commonality' of the name, how well known it is, the market served, and how unique it is. Let me give a few examples:
"Acme Electric" is so general that a competitor would probably be allowed to use "Acme Electrical."
Joe Smith would probably not be able to block Joe E. Smith from setting up shop, but Digney Fibowitz could probably block Dagny Fibowitch from using his similar name in the same business.
Neither Bud Weiser nor Joe Gallo can get away with opening liquor brands under their names, but they're perfectly free to open Bud Weiser Plumbing or Gallo Electric. You laugh, but there was an attempt at another 'Gallo" wine, and Budweiser unsuccessfully claimed infringement by Bushmaster machetes. My firm uses a name that someone across the country started using first - but that's no issue, because the other guy is simply 'squatting' on the name, and cannot make the case for my actually infringing on his business. Another had registered the name with my county, but was also just 'squatting' and not in the business; he gained no priveledge there.
A name with great recognition gets greater protection. That's why you don't see Popsi Cola or Clean-Ex tissues.
Examples of unique names are Xerox, Exxon, and Kodak. You're not likely to be able to use anything even remotely similar for any business.
"Ownership" of the name can be a issue. McDonald's found this out when they tried to assert that THE McDonald, the actual Scottish laird, was 'infringing' on the name. Oops. Likewise, Burger King ran into trouble when they expanded to Florida and found another chain had a "Whaler" sandwich. Godfather Pizza, however, prevailed against a copy-cat when they expanded to Chicago.
Fulthrottle, you really need to chat with a lawyer familiar with this area of law to see if you have any recourse. The other name need not be identical.
