Re: Hello Nathan Collier
 

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Jason Williams wrote:

> The word Jeeples once was used back in the 70's for a line of
> children's toys. They were little people characters. If it was used
> once before and the trademark expired, what was the big deal. Let's
> use that name.

Ah, well, there's an angle for you to pursue; The prior, unopposed use of
the name.


> I fully agree with with idea of protecting ones rights and once I
> contact the trademark department at DC, I'll see what my options are.

I wouldn't do that were I you. I'm thinking that your first call should
be to a trademark attorney. Have him evaluate your case and decide where
to go from there. The best that you can hope for by contacting DC
directly is for them to send you more "Go Back Now! Abandon All Hope!"
letters, or a demand for 25% of the list price of the items you sell.


> Do they want to work with me? I originally thought this would be
> treated like a club type of thing. Maybe trying to trademark the name
> is what took it too far. Hey, live and learn. Life is too short to
> not have some sort of trials and tribulations.

Naw, they would have found you eventually anyway, and demanded back
royalties, so it is better that this happened now. BTW, it isn't about
you or right and wrong or profit or even image, it is about a very narrow
business point of view concerned only about not allowing their
"intellectual property" to be diluted in any way or to fall into the
public domain. You probably would have gotten a similar notice had you
been a big fan of things made with a hook-and-loop fastening system and
had called your product "Velcroids".

Re: Hello Nathan Collier
 

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Jason Williams wrote:

> The word Jeeples once was used back in the 70's for a line of
> children's toys. They were little people characters. If it was used
> once before and the trademark expired, what was the big deal. Let's
> use that name.

Ah, well, there's an angle for you to pursue; The prior, unopposed use of
the name.


> I fully agree with with idea of protecting ones rights and once I
> contact the trademark department at DC, I'll see what my options are.

I wouldn't do that were I you. I'm thinking that your first call should
be to a trademark attorney. Have him evaluate your case and decide where
to go from there. The best that you can hope for by contacting DC
directly is for them to send you more "Go Back Now! Abandon All Hope!"
letters, or a demand for 25% of the list price of the items you sell.


> Do they want to work with me? I originally thought this would be
> treated like a club type of thing. Maybe trying to trademark the name
> is what took it too far. Hey, live and learn. Life is too short to
> not have some sort of trials and tribulations.

Naw, they would have found you eventually anyway, and demanded back
royalties, so it is better that this happened now. BTW, it isn't about
you or right and wrong or profit or even image, it is about a very narrow
business point of view concerned only about not allowing their
"intellectual property" to be diluted in any way or to fall into the
public domain. You probably would have gotten a similar notice had you
been a big fan of things made with a hook-and-loop fastening system and
had called your product "Velcroids".

Re: Hello Nathan Collier
 

Excellent advice.

>your first call should
>be to a trademark attorney. Have him evaluate your case and decide where
>to go from there. The best that you can hope for by contacting DC
>directly is for them to send you more "Go Back Now! Abandon All Hope!"
>letters, . . . .


Robert Bills
KG6LMV
Orange County CA

http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
http://www.RobertBills.com

Re: Hello Nathan Collier
 

Excellent advice.

>your first call should
>be to a trademark attorney. Have him evaluate your case and decide where
>to go from there. The best that you can hope for by contacting DC
>directly is for them to send you more "Go Back Now! Abandon All Hope!"
>letters, . . . .


Robert Bills
KG6LMV
Orange County CA

http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
http://www.RobertBills.com

Re: Hello Nathan Collier
 

Excellent advice.

>your first call should
>be to a trademark attorney. Have him evaluate your case and decide where
>to go from there. The best that you can hope for by contacting DC
>directly is for them to send you more "Go Back Now! Abandon All Hope!"
>letters, . . . .


Robert Bills
KG6LMV
Orange County CA

http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
http://www.RobertBills.com

Re: Hello Nathan Collier
 

....so eat some apples with every meal!

--
Jim

"DougW" <post.replies@invalid.address> wrote in message
news:XhqEb.7693$PK3.2047@okepread01...
> Lon Stowell did pass the time by typing:
> > Roughly 12/18/03 14:21, neojeep's monkeys randomly typed:
> >
> >> Only if Apples were the musical fruit.
> > ...the more you eat the more you toot.
>
> ...the more you toot the better you feel.
>
>

Re: Hello Nathan Collier
 

....so eat some apples with every meal!

--
Jim

"DougW" <post.replies@invalid.address> wrote in message
news:XhqEb.7693$PK3.2047@okepread01...
> Lon Stowell did pass the time by typing:
> > Roughly 12/18/03 14:21, neojeep's monkeys randomly typed:
> >
> >> Only if Apples were the musical fruit.
> > ...the more you eat the more you toot.
>
> ...the more you toot the better you feel.
>
>

Re: Hello Nathan Collier
 

....so eat some apples with every meal!

--
Jim

"DougW" <post.replies@invalid.address> wrote in message
news:XhqEb.7693$PK3.2047@okepread01...
> Lon Stowell did pass the time by typing:
> > Roughly 12/18/03 14:21, neojeep's monkeys randomly typed:
> >
> >> Only if Apples were the musical fruit.
> > ...the more you eat the more you toot.
>
> ...the more you toot the better you feel.
>
>

Re: Hello Nathan Collier
 

"DougW" <post.replies@invalid.address> wrote in message
news:nzPDb.4545$PK3.828@okepread01...
> Tirya did pass the time by typing:
> > Do any of you understand intellectual property rights and copyright law?
>
> Some do, some don't.
>
> FWIW, two companies can have a trademark on the same name
> providing there is no confusion to the consumer.
>
> Take for example Pinto. Someone could sell Pinto brand beans
> and not the Pinto automobile. (yea.. poor example but you see
> the point) Can't drive a bean and can't eat an automobile.
>

Better point, Chevy Berretta (cars of the 80s and early 90s) and the Baretta
handguns. Court threw out the case saying that Chevy had in no way confused
the handgun maker's idendity with their car models.

IP rights and copyright laws (and their practioners, as evidenced by these
couple of posts) are all about money, which is a shame. Honestly, the US is
too litigous for its own good and the reason is that college kids see law
school as an easy buck when they get out IMO. Sadly, they've made that an
accurate statement.

Funny how all these lawyers come out of the woodwork when a few bucks are at
stake and NO ONE did anything when Bill Gates and Paul Allen stole Windows
from Xerox. Justice Department couldn't even hurt them really when they do
use undue force to get their wares on every PC-compatible machine produced.
Moral, he who has the most money, has the lawyers' attention and loyalty.
And barristers wonder why they have such a bad rap, IMO, they've earned it.

Re: Hello Nathan Collier
 

"DougW" <post.replies@invalid.address> wrote in message
news:nzPDb.4545$PK3.828@okepread01...
> Tirya did pass the time by typing:
> > Do any of you understand intellectual property rights and copyright law?
>
> Some do, some don't.
>
> FWIW, two companies can have a trademark on the same name
> providing there is no confusion to the consumer.
>
> Take for example Pinto. Someone could sell Pinto brand beans
> and not the Pinto automobile. (yea.. poor example but you see
> the point) Can't drive a bean and can't eat an automobile.
>

Better point, Chevy Berretta (cars of the 80s and early 90s) and the Baretta
handguns. Court threw out the case saying that Chevy had in no way confused
the handgun maker's idendity with their car models.

IP rights and copyright laws (and their practioners, as evidenced by these
couple of posts) are all about money, which is a shame. Honestly, the US is
too litigous for its own good and the reason is that college kids see law
school as an easy buck when they get out IMO. Sadly, they've made that an
accurate statement.

Funny how all these lawyers come out of the woodwork when a few bucks are at
stake and NO ONE did anything when Bill Gates and Paul Allen stole Windows
from Xerox. Justice Department couldn't even hurt them really when they do
use undue force to get their wares on every PC-compatible machine produced.
Moral, he who has the most money, has the lawyers' attention and loyalty.
And barristers wonder why they have such a bad rap, IMO, they've earned it.