Talk: Trademark
From open-encyclopedia.com - the free encyclopedia.
This is Americocentric. It implies that trademarks only exist in the US, which I assume is not true. Tuf-Kat ____________________
I agree with the above. Trademark laws have generic aspects which can be covered on the main page: the US law can go into a separate page (same as pages UK, Indian, PRC trademark law etc )
Unless anyone has an objection within the next week (by 30 April 2003), I'll hive off the US law into a separate page. - David Stewart
Can trademark images be included in Wikipedia? I mean, it's only logical to have a reproduction of the Coca Cola symbol in its page. -- Error
- In the US, I'd guess its fair use. But why run the risk? We'd be better off from an educational perspective having in large font or as an image the two symbols "R with a circle" and "TM", along with an explanation of their meaning. - David Stewart 04:16 14 Jul 2003 (UTC)
- Are you proposing that the Coca Cola article should have a big TM instead of a Coca Cola logo? -- Error
The new "Domain Names as Trademarks" section is largely redundant. I'm leaving it in for now, but I think it could probably just be made into one sentence in the tms as domain names section, stating that domain names themselves can also be registered. The reasons why you would register a domain name or what kinds of domain names can be registered are not unique to that issue, but discussed throughout the overall tm article. Postdlf 2:00 5 Apr 2004 EST
- The two sections are actually two different issues.
- One deals with the question of whether holders of a registered trademark are entitled to pry a domain name away from a holder of a name that is similar to or identical to their mark.
- "Domain Names as Trademarks" deals with the issue of whether Domain Names themselves can be trademarks (usually not).
Perhaps it needs some reworking, but these are two different things. Cecropia 06:06, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- I understand that they are two different things...that's why I put up the headers that I did on each. That's not what I was talking about in terms of redundancy--what I meant was that the issues involved in registering domain names as trademarks are pretty much the same as those involved in registering trademarks in general--i.e., the mark must actually identify the source, can't be generic or merely descriptive, etc. While I do agree it is necessary to point out that those elements are present as well for domain name TM registrations, as written now, the section simply duplicates that information already present throughout the article as if those are issues unique to domain names. I'm going to try a rewrite--hopefully my changes will show you what I meant.
- Speaking of which, I'm sensing a bit of POV (or at least incompleteness) in the new header you put on trademarks as domain names, especially based on your summary of it above. It isn't just about "prying a domain name" away from the holder, nor is it about "using" a TM to "obtain" a domain name, which implies that the TM was adopted purely to gain control over the domain name. Rather, the topic is about what happens when a domain name is registered that infringes someone else's preexisting trademark. Transferring ownership of the domain name from the domain name registrant to the trademark owner is the legal solution.
- I'm glad you included a link to passing off...I didn't even know there was a separate article for it. We need to try and think of a more obvious and central place in the article to point it out, though. Postdlf 5:18 5 Apr 2004 EST
- I see your point, now. I wasn't attempting POV in the header; I was trying to think of a header that would make the differene of the two paragraphs clearer when I was 75% asleep. Yours is much better.
- I am aware of a case in Europe (involving domain name METROPLA.NET) in which the long-term domain name registrant says he was pressured by Metro stores to not use his domain name, but in the U.S., it is not so easy for a trademark owner to prevail in getting an already registered trademark unless it is a "famous" trademark and even then they might not prevail unless the TM is a coined expression, like Exxon. AMAZON.COM is one of the few domain names that is a registered trademark, yet the company has neither AMAZON.NET or AMAZON.ORG. Ty (Beanie Babies®) tried to get TY.COM away from its holder, but ended up purchasing it for an undisclosed sum.
- I put in the Domain Names as Trademarks because it is a very common misconception that you can register a domain name as a trademark, but the rules make it much more difficult, at least in the U.S. Cecropia 16:46, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)
The ® symbol shows up as inline with text in the articles and in the edit box. Is this the way it is in most fonts? If so, should it be Superscripted®? It is that way in most logos, and it looks better to me just looking at it on this preview page. Could we also have a history or derivation of the symbol please? - Omegatron 23:40, Jun 22, 2004 (UTC)
For this reason, a generic term will not be protected (for example, "Apple" as used for apples), or, absent the development of public association with a particular source known as secondary meaning, marks that are merely descriptive of the goods concerned ("red" or "juicy" for apples), or those marks that are merely a surname or geographically descriptive.
How generic does the term have to be before it is covered by this? An American company has recently trademarked the term ugg boot, which is a generic Australian word for a sheepskin and fleece boot. thefamouseccles 10:03, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Ref thefamouseccles's message: What is the exact legal status of the tradename Viagra? The drug firm tried to pass it off as an invented word. But it is a somewhat misspelled form of the Sanskrit noun "vyāghra", which means "tiger". Anthony Appleyard 12:07, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
