I'm trying to understand the following: No claim is made to the exclusive right to use "Word1 Word2" apart from the mark as shown. Considering Word1 Word2 is the name of the business, what exactly would be the trademark if they required that disclaimer? In other words, what would be the point of the trademark if you don't have exclusive rights to your name? I can see if they required only Word1 or only Word2, but both? I haven't had much luck finding any info on this. Any insight would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!
Sometimes the mark may be included in other marks and they are merely saying that they are not saying anyone else can't use that part. Here is one example: Typed Drawing [B]Word Mark AVE MARIA SCHOOL OF LAW[/B] Goods and Services (CANCELLED) IC 016. US 002 005 022 023 029 037 038 050. G & S: printed materials and publications, namely, printed instructional and educational materials, in the field of religion. FIRST USE: 20000223. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20000223 IC 025. US 022 039. G & S: clothing, namely, T-shirts, sweatshirts and caps. FIRST USE: 20000223. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20000223 IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: educational services, namely, providing courses of instruction at the graduate level. FIRST USE: 20000223. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20000223 Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING Serial Number 75664852 Filing Date March 19, 1999 Current Filing Basis 1A Original Filing Basis 1B Published for Opposition November 2, 1999 Change In Registration CHANGE IN REGISTRATION HAS OCCURRED Registration Number 2553185 Registration Date March 26, 2002 Owner (REGISTRANT) AVE MARIA SCHOOL OF LAW CORPORATION MICHIGAN 3475 PLYMOUTH ROAD ANN ARBOR MICHIGAN 48105 Assignment Recorded ASSIGNMENT RECORDED Attorney of Record PAUL R. FRANSWAY Disclaimer [B]NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "SCHOOL OF LAW" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN[/B] Type of Mark TRADEMARK. SERVICE MARK Register PRINCIPAL Affidavit Text SECT 15. SECT 8 (6-YR). Live/Dead Indicator LIVE Code (markup): As you can see, they are making no claim to the word "school of law" except as it is part of "AVE MARIA SCHOOL OF LAW". The other thing is that some trademarks on based on the stylized graphics and not on just the word. So I have a fancy way of writing "ICE CREAM" I could trademark that logo, but make no claim on the words "ICE CREAM".
Yeah..that's what I figured. Unfortunately, in my case, it kind of defeats the purpose of a trademark. This two word phrase (my business name) can actually describe multiple things, so I'm not sure why they wouldn't allow it for my business. I can only assume that because it's a general description...they won't allow it...who knows! Alright, thanks for the reply.
you could just put a word in here and we could tell you if its trademark. Trademarks are invented words by companies, they cant use trademark on words that have common meaning. As well there is an trademark search website which i unfortunately forgot now. But google it, you find it and you can search your word there.
a trademark is what makes you different from your opponents - so generic names cannot be a trademark if they are used in the same area - for example you cannot trademark "grocery store" if you own such a store or "computer games" to sell games - but you could trademark that for a music band or for a newspaper name but if you come with something like "Xtyzerd grocery store" now that's a different story because it makes you different from the other grocery stores available. hope that helps.
Shell. Tide. Head and Shoulders. They're words that have common meanings. Yet they're also trademarks. Unless you meant something else?
Thanks for the input! Actually, I did already register for the mark, so I'm good thanks. Even if the generic phrase can be used to describe many different products/services..not just the one I've applied for? I'm pretty sure this is the reason that the disclaimer that was required, but wanted to get some other input. That's what I'm trying to avoid from happening all together! LOL I think what he was saying was common meanings for the business and/or service. For example, Shell could not be trademarked for: "an enclosing case or cover." I wonder if I would have any luck disputing the required disclaimer, since this two word phrase can have multiple definitions/meanings?
Sounds like a question for a lawyer, but I'd imagine that "Office Depot" could be trademarked in a way that limits competitors from using the same name in the same line of business. I'd also guess it doesn't preclude "Office Max" from operating in that line of business.
Yeah..I think your right about that! I've never done this and don't really don't know much about trademark law. That disclaimer is what is really throwing me off! What I meant to say earlier was: This two word phrase (my business name) can actually describe multiple things, so I'm not sure why they wouldn't allow "exclusive rights" for my business. I thought that was the whole point of a trademark? I'm still wondering though, with that disclaimer in place...what am I actually trademarking? Can a competing business still use that two word phrase? I don't care if a non-competing business uses that term (my business name), for an unrelated product....and I just assumed that was the purpose of a trademark.
I would have assumed that Office Depot would have been required to put a disclaimer: No claim is made to the exclusive right to use "Office" apart from the mark as shown. Same with Office Max.... Interesting...I just checked and there is no disclaimer for their mark. Now, I'm even more confused.
Ok, I take it back..there are a couple registrations there. They do have this.. NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "OFFICE" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN Which brings me back to my original point of the post. I could understand if they asked me to add a disclaimer for 1 word, but both is what throws me off. I wonder how they were able to trademark Office Depot? Both are generic descriptive words.