|
Re: Hello Nathan Collier
"Tirya" <Tirya@spamfree.addy> wrote in message
news:fgPDb.564005$HS4.4275726@attbi_s01... > Do any of you understand intellectual property rights and copyright law? intellectual property is a new frontier thats only beginning to be explored. there is very little existing case law on it because people like me fold and settle rather than risk everything fighting a corporate giant. -- Nathan W. Collier http://7SlotGrille.com http://UtilityOffRoad.com |
Re: Hello Nathan Collier
"Tirya" <Tirya@spamfree.addy> wrote in message
news:fgPDb.564005$HS4.4275726@attbi_s01... > Do any of you understand intellectual property rights and copyright law? intellectual property is a new frontier thats only beginning to be explored. there is very little existing case law on it because people like me fold and settle rather than risk everything fighting a corporate giant. -- Nathan W. Collier http://7SlotGrille.com http://UtilityOffRoad.com |
Re: Hello Nathan Collier
In article <bAODb.131090$Vu5.8141095@twister.southeast.rr.com >,
Nathan Collier <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> wrote: >"Jason Williams" <Jason90715@yahoo.com> wrote in message >news:c0500d7c.0312161554.2982a297@posting.google. com... >> "We are trademark counsel for DaimlerChrysler Corporation > >jason, >ouch. 3 to 1 we see "jeeples" used by daimler in the near future. sorry to >hear about your run in....sorry to see them yet again biting the hand that >feeds them. if youd care to compare notes, contact me at >http://tinyurl.com/amfi The "Jeeples" name is not exact and if it's a "coined" name, something you made up, you still have a chance. It sounds coined to me and therefore it is not two words but one. This means you have a chance and it is not exact but different. The only problem would be that you would be promoting their product on clothes therefore you are interfering with their mark and all would be lost. -- <html><form><input type crash></form></html> nospam@zero.com Replace nospam with jetta to reply via e-mail |
Re: Hello Nathan Collier
In article <bAODb.131090$Vu5.8141095@twister.southeast.rr.com >,
Nathan Collier <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> wrote: >"Jason Williams" <Jason90715@yahoo.com> wrote in message >news:c0500d7c.0312161554.2982a297@posting.google. com... >> "We are trademark counsel for DaimlerChrysler Corporation > >jason, >ouch. 3 to 1 we see "jeeples" used by daimler in the near future. sorry to >hear about your run in....sorry to see them yet again biting the hand that >feeds them. if youd care to compare notes, contact me at >http://tinyurl.com/amfi The "Jeeples" name is not exact and if it's a "coined" name, something you made up, you still have a chance. It sounds coined to me and therefore it is not two words but one. This means you have a chance and it is not exact but different. The only problem would be that you would be promoting their product on clothes therefore you are interfering with their mark and all would be lost. -- <html><form><input type crash></form></html> nospam@zero.com Replace nospam with jetta to reply via e-mail |
Re: Hello Nathan Collier
In article <bAODb.131090$Vu5.8141095@twister.southeast.rr.com >,
Nathan Collier <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> wrote: >"Jason Williams" <Jason90715@yahoo.com> wrote in message >news:c0500d7c.0312161554.2982a297@posting.google. com... >> "We are trademark counsel for DaimlerChrysler Corporation > >jason, >ouch. 3 to 1 we see "jeeples" used by daimler in the near future. sorry to >hear about your run in....sorry to see them yet again biting the hand that >feeds them. if youd care to compare notes, contact me at >http://tinyurl.com/amfi The "Jeeples" name is not exact and if it's a "coined" name, something you made up, you still have a chance. It sounds coined to me and therefore it is not two words but one. This means you have a chance and it is not exact but different. The only problem would be that you would be promoting their product on clothes therefore you are interfering with their mark and all would be lost. -- <html><form><input type crash></form></html> nospam@zero.com Replace nospam with jetta to reply via e-mail |
Re: Hello Nathan Collier
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. There are several situations in case law. McDonalds is one. They tried to lay claim to any Mc labeled restaurant including McChina and a McDonald's restaurant owned and operated by someone oddly enough named McDonald. The last one failed, don't know about the McChina, but it's out on google. In this case however, Jeep has a line of licensed goods including a real crappy radio and other branded stuff. The best non-lawyer suggestion I can give is ask what the license fee is for the Jeep trademark or get a good lawyer cause it's not gonna be pretty. -- DougW |
Re: Hello Nathan Collier
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. There are several situations in case law. McDonalds is one. They tried to lay claim to any Mc labeled restaurant including McChina and a McDonald's restaurant owned and operated by someone oddly enough named McDonald. The last one failed, don't know about the McChina, but it's out on google. In this case however, Jeep has a line of licensed goods including a real crappy radio and other branded stuff. The best non-lawyer suggestion I can give is ask what the license fee is for the Jeep trademark or get a good lawyer cause it's not gonna be pretty. -- DougW |
Re: Hello Nathan Collier
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. There are several situations in case law. McDonalds is one. They tried to lay claim to any Mc labeled restaurant including McChina and a McDonald's restaurant owned and operated by someone oddly enough named McDonald. The last one failed, don't know about the McChina, but it's out on google. In this case however, Jeep has a line of licensed goods including a real crappy radio and other branded stuff. The best non-lawyer suggestion I can give is ask what the license fee is for the Jeep trademark or get a good lawyer cause it's not gonna be pretty. -- DougW |
Re: Hello Nathan Collier
Why not offer to sell them the trademark and concepts for a couple mil?
"Jason Williams" <Jason90715@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:c0500d7c.0312161554.2982a297@posting.google.c om... > Nathan, > I have followed your past dealings with DC and I can now feel your > pain. My wife has always refered to me and my Jeep'n buddies as 'Jeep > Creeps'. What other group of people will waive at total strangers > just because of what they drive? She always, still does, when I > return or initiate a 'Jeep Wave'. she then started calling us > Jeeples. Well, she decided to start a business called Jeeples. With > a slogan of "A different kind of people". She applied for a trademark > of Jeeples. We just recieve this today. > > "We are trademark counsel for DaimlerChrysler Corporation. As you are > no > doubt aware, DaimlerChrysler Corporation is the owner of the JEEP > trademark. In addition to using JEEP to identify vehicles, > DaimlerChrysler > uses JEEP trademark in connection with other products including, but > not > limited to, clothing, baby carriages, and toys. By virtue of > DaimlerChrysler's long use of JEEP and extensive advertising, JEEP has > become a well known, if not famous, trademark entitled to a broad > scope of > protection or exclusivity of use. > > It has come to DaimlerChrysler's attention that your application for > the > mark JEEPLES for clothing was published in the November 25, 2003 issue > of > the Trademark Official Gazette. On December 8, 2003, we filed a > request > for an extension of time to file a Notice of Opposition. > > In our opinion, your JEEPLES trademark is confusingly similar to the > JEEP > trademark and likely to cause confusion. Accordingly, DaimlerChrysler > respectfully requests that you expressly abandon that application and > cease > any plans to use the mark. If you do not expressly abandon the > application, DaimlerChrysler will have no choice but file a Notice of > Opposition. Moreover, if you begin to use the mark on clothing, > DaimlerChrysler will not hesitate to assert its legal and equitable > rights. > > We hope that this issue may be resolved on an amicable basis. If you, > or > your legal counsel, have any questions, please do not hesitate to > contact > me." > > At least I'm not out too much money. > I didn't think we would worry them too much as we are promoting Jeeps > in a positive style. You know, responsible off roading. > Oh well. > Jason |
Re: Hello Nathan Collier
Why not offer to sell them the trademark and concepts for a couple mil?
"Jason Williams" <Jason90715@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:c0500d7c.0312161554.2982a297@posting.google.c om... > Nathan, > I have followed your past dealings with DC and I can now feel your > pain. My wife has always refered to me and my Jeep'n buddies as 'Jeep > Creeps'. What other group of people will waive at total strangers > just because of what they drive? She always, still does, when I > return or initiate a 'Jeep Wave'. she then started calling us > Jeeples. Well, she decided to start a business called Jeeples. With > a slogan of "A different kind of people". She applied for a trademark > of Jeeples. We just recieve this today. > > "We are trademark counsel for DaimlerChrysler Corporation. As you are > no > doubt aware, DaimlerChrysler Corporation is the owner of the JEEP > trademark. In addition to using JEEP to identify vehicles, > DaimlerChrysler > uses JEEP trademark in connection with other products including, but > not > limited to, clothing, baby carriages, and toys. By virtue of > DaimlerChrysler's long use of JEEP and extensive advertising, JEEP has > become a well known, if not famous, trademark entitled to a broad > scope of > protection or exclusivity of use. > > It has come to DaimlerChrysler's attention that your application for > the > mark JEEPLES for clothing was published in the November 25, 2003 issue > of > the Trademark Official Gazette. On December 8, 2003, we filed a > request > for an extension of time to file a Notice of Opposition. > > In our opinion, your JEEPLES trademark is confusingly similar to the > JEEP > trademark and likely to cause confusion. Accordingly, DaimlerChrysler > respectfully requests that you expressly abandon that application and > cease > any plans to use the mark. If you do not expressly abandon the > application, DaimlerChrysler will have no choice but file a Notice of > Opposition. Moreover, if you begin to use the mark on clothing, > DaimlerChrysler will not hesitate to assert its legal and equitable > rights. > > We hope that this issue may be resolved on an amicable basis. If you, > or > your legal counsel, have any questions, please do not hesitate to > contact > me." > > At least I'm not out too much money. > I didn't think we would worry them too much as we are promoting Jeeps > in a positive style. You know, responsible off roading. > Oh well. > Jason |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:27 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands