company name

[Leatherman1998]

I am working on a website for my woodturning and the name that I have come up with is "Woodard Woodturningz". Are there any companies that use that name? If so could I get in legal trouble for using that name ?

 

[Fireengines]

Do a quick search using the following US Trademark and Copyright search links:

Trademark Electronic Search System (TESS)

http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=local&PAGE=First


If you can't find it, then use it.

On a side note that could keep you amused for a few hours. Go to the US Patent Office search link below:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html

Try searching for "Ballpoint Pen" or "Fountain Pen" under "Term1" and, using the dropdown menu under "Field1" choose title.

 

[DestinTurnings]

"Woodturningz" is definitely in use. I'm not sure if they would persue legal action against you. I used to have a website (cabochonrods.com) for my custom fishing rods. I was sent a cease and desist letter by the Diawa corporation because they had a fishing rod line called Cabo after Cabo San Lucas. Mine was "cabochon" because I put a cabochon in the butt of my rod as an ornamental item. Even after calling and explaining it to about 4 people, they held strong on the copyright infringement. It wasn't worth the legal battle to maintain my website so I just dropped it.

 

[nativewooder]

Why not just use "Levi Woodard Woodturning". As long as you use your legal name there's not much anyone can do about it. Most States don't require you to do the "ficticious name" business licensing rigamarole if you are using your legal name.

 

[frank123]

Why not just use "Levi Woodard Woodturning". As long as you use your legal name there's not much anyone can do about it. Most States don't require you to do the "ficticious name" business licensing rigamarole if you are using your legal name.

A technicality, but adding "Woodturning" to the name of the business makes it a fictitious name unless your last name is actually "Woodturning".

Probably the most problematic if you try to get a bank account in that name, but you could still use the term if the "Woodturning" part was a statement -a phrase- telling what the business does and not the proper name of the business (but you might have to trademark it to get protection of that phrase from someone else using it then).

BTW, for those unfamiliar with the term, a "fictitious name" is any name you use for business other than your own actual name and needs registration with your Secretary of State (or whatever your state uses for company registrations) if you aren't incorporated or in a LLC or some other defined entity that has its own name as part of its legal creation and registration.

 

[Jgrden]

Off your subject, but your user name/logo is "Leatherman". Do you work with leather or is this in relation to aviation.
John

 

[WWAtty]

Something like Woodard Woodturning might be better from an SEO standpoint. People are more likely to search for common words like "woodturning" than some mis-spelled version with a z.

OTOH, if you ever think you might like to register the name as a trademark, the more "fanciful" or "arbitrary" the name the better. The USPTO tends to reject registration applications for "generic" or mere "descriptive" names, unless that name has already established distinctiveness through widespread use.

There already is a company called Woodturningz, so you might want to steer away from any name comprising that. Their lawyers may frown on such shenanigans.

 

[Smitty37]

I am working on a website for my woodturning and the name that I have come up with is "Woodard Woodturningz". Are there any companies that use that name? If so could I get in legal trouble for using that name ?

Woodturnings you're ok it's already in dozens of other names. Woodturninz probably belongs to Woodturninz, Inc. and you'd be encroaching.

 

[NewLondon88]

I used to have a website (cabochonrods.com) for my custom fishing rods. I was sent a cease and desist letter by the Diawa corporation because they had a fishing rod line called Cabo after Cabo San Lucas. Mine was "cabochon" because I put a cabochon in the butt of my rod as an ornamental item. Even after calling and explaining it to about 4 people, they held strong on the copyright infringement. It wasn't worth the legal battle to maintain my website so I just dropped it.

Unless you tried to trade on their name or reputation by pretending
to be them or pretending your products were associated with theirs,
you were in the clear. Cabo San Lucas can't be trademarked by them,
and your use of "cabochon" has nothing to do with Cabo San Lucas.

They had nothing to lose by refusing to understand.. it cost them nothing
to threaten you. But had it gone anywhere near a courtroom (it never
would, and they had to know it) they would have gotten their butts
handed to them. In the end, they won by intimidating you. And
copyright would have nothing to do with this, it would be strictly
a trademark issue.

 

[WWAtty]

I used to have a website (cabochonrods.com) for my custom fishing rods. I was sent a cease and desist letter by the Diawa corporation because they had a fishing rod line called Cabo after Cabo San Lucas. Mine was "cabochon" because I put a cabochon in the butt of my rod as an ornamental item. Even after calling and explaining it to about 4 people, they held strong on the copyright infringement. It wasn't worth the legal battle to maintain my website so I just dropped it.

Unless you tried to trade on their name or reputation by pretending
to be them or pretending your products were associated with theirs,
you were in the clear. Cabo San Lucas can't be trademarked by them,
and your use of "cabochon" has nothing to do with Cabo San Lucas.

They had nothing to lose by refusing to understand.. it cost them nothing
to threaten you. But had it gone anywhere near a courtroom (it never
would, and they had to know it) they would have gotten their butts
handed to them. In the end, they won by intimidating you. And
copyright would have nothing to do with this, it would be strictly
a trademark issue.

This is bad, layman's advice. And untrue.

Engaging in a business that involves the same or similar goods AND incorporating part of their trademarked name ("Cabo"), means the trademark owner would likely prevail. Yes, they can (and apparently HAVE) trademarked "Cabo." Proper nouns are commonly registered as trademarks.

Steer clear of other trademarked names and avoid the legal headaches.

 

[Russianwolf]

since I now do more than woodwork, I am going through the process of changing everything to Michael T Shue Studios. I've registered it as my dba

people tend to see a "studio" as more artsy and "woodworks" as more craft. You decide for yourself.

 

[Smitty37]

I used to have a website (cabochonrods.com) for my custom fishing rods. I was sent a cease and desist letter by the Diawa corporation because they had a fishing rod line called Cabo after Cabo San Lucas. Mine was "cabochon" because I put a cabochon in the butt of my rod as an ornamental item. Even after calling and explaining it to about 4 people, they held strong on the copyright infringement. It wasn't worth the legal battle to maintain my website so I just dropped it.

Unless you tried to trade on their name or reputation by pretending
to be them or pretending your products were associated with theirs,
you were in the clear. Cabo San Lucas can't be trademarked by them,
and your use of "cabochon" has nothing to do with Cabo San Lucas.

They had nothing to lose by refusing to understand.. it cost them nothing
to threaten you. But had it gone anywhere near a courtroom (it never
would, and they had to know it) they would have gotten their butts
handed to them. In the end, they won by intimidating you. And
copyright would have nothing to do with this, it would be strictly
a trademark issue.

This is bad, layman's advice. And untrue.

Engaging in a business that involves the same or similar goods AND incorporating part of their trademarked name ("Cabo"), means the trademark owner would likely prevail. Yes, they can (and apparently HAVE) trademarked "Cabo." Proper nouns are commonly registered as trademarks.

Steer clear of other trademarked names and avoid the legal headaches.

I'd take bets they'd lose. By your reasoning I couldn't call a fishing pole website anything with the word caboose either.

cabochon, is also a noun in its own right, it is a gemstone and has nothing to do with the name Cabo. Cabochon rods would translate more to gemstone rods than Cabo San Lucas or Cabo. Additionally, a web search using "cabo" turns nothing related to any fishing tackle from anyone.....

 

[DestinTurnings]

I used to have a website (cabochonrods.com) for my custom fishing rods. I was sent a cease and desist letter by the Diawa corporation because they had a fishing rod line called Cabo after Cabo San Lucas. Mine was "cabochon" because I put a cabochon in the butt of my rod as an ornamental item. Even after calling and explaining it to about 4 people, they held strong on the copyright infringement. It wasn't worth the legal battle to maintain my website so I just dropped it.

Unless you tried to trade on their name or reputation by pretending
to be them or pretending your products were associated with theirs,
you were in the clear. Cabo San Lucas can't be trademarked by them,
and your use of "cabochon" has nothing to do with Cabo San Lucas.

They had nothing to lose by refusing to understand.. it cost them nothing
to threaten you. But had it gone anywhere near a courtroom (it never
would, and they had to know it) they would have gotten their butts
handed to them. In the end, they won by intimidating you. And
copyright would have nothing to do with this, it would be strictly
a trademark issue.

This is bad, layman's advice. And untrue.

Engaging in a business that involves the same or similar goods AND incorporating part of their trademarked name ("Cabo"), means the trademark owner would likely prevail. Yes, they can (and apparently HAVE) trademarked "Cabo." Proper nouns are commonly registered as trademarks.

Steer clear of other trademarked names and avoid the legal headaches.

I'd take bets they'd lose. By your reasoning I couldn't call a fishing pole website anything with the word caboose either.

cabochon, is also a noun in its own right, it is a gemstone and has nothing to do with the name Cabo. Cabochon rods would translate more to gemstone rods than Cabo San Lucas or Cabo. Additionally, a web search using "cabo" turns nothing related to any fishing tackle from anyone.....

To fight the issue would have cost me money I don't have and time that would be better spent with my family or doing something else productive. Plus when the letter first arrived, I was deployed to Afghanistan so getting into a legal battle was low on the priority list. I did talk to my neighbor, who is a lawyer, and while not his specialty, he did say it could go either way due to the fact that "Cabo" was in the name, they were both fishing rods, and for the most part geared towards saltwater anglers. It really is a moot point as I rarely make rods anymore. I appologize to the OP...didn't mean to hijack your thread.

You can see an example of my rods here:

Reversing Fade - RodBuilding.org

 

[WWAtty]

I used to have a website (cabochonrods.com) for my custom fishing rods. I was sent a cease and desist letter by the Diawa corporation because they had a fishing rod line called Cabo after Cabo San Lucas. Mine was "cabochon" because I put a cabochon in the butt of my rod as an ornamental item. Even after calling and explaining it to about 4 people, they held strong on the copyright infringement. It wasn't worth the legal battle to maintain my website so I just dropped it.

Unless you tried to trade on their name or reputation by pretending
to be them or pretending your products were associated with theirs,
you were in the clear. Cabo San Lucas can't be trademarked by them,
and your use of "cabochon" has nothing to do with Cabo San Lucas.

They had nothing to lose by refusing to understand.. it cost them nothing
to threaten you. But had it gone anywhere near a courtroom (it never
would, and they had to know it) they would have gotten their butts
handed to them. In the end, they won by intimidating you. And
copyright would have nothing to do with this, it would be strictly
a trademark issue.

This is bad, layman's advice. And untrue.

Engaging in a business that involves the same or similar goods AND incorporating part of their trademarked name ("Cabo"), means the trademark owner would likely prevail. Yes, they can (and apparently HAVE) trademarked "Cabo." Proper nouns are commonly registered as trademarks.

Steer clear of other trademarked names and avoid the legal headaches.

I'd take bets they'd lose. By your reasoning I couldn't call a fishing pole website anything with the word caboose either.

cabochon, is also a noun in its own right, it is a gemstone and has nothing to do with the name Cabo. Cabochon rods would translate more to gemstone rods than Cabo San Lucas or Cabo. Additionally, a web search using "cabo" turns nothing related to any fishing tackle from anyone.....

You would likely lose your bet. Your "caboose" analogy, while cute, isn't very compelling. Nice try, though. :tongue:

Drawing comparisons to "Cabo" and "caboose" is a much greater leap of faith than cabo vs. cabochon. It doesn't matter if the dictionary definition of cabochon is a gem or whatever--when it is used as a fanciful/arbitrary trademark, it takes on secondary meaning and the court will look at how that infringing mark appears or sounds like the plaintiff's superior (Cabo) mark. The court will look at the infringing mark as confusing the superior mark, or that it dilutes the superior mark Any first year law student could pick that apart. :biggrin:

I have seen many other non-attorneys try to be clever and make generalizations like that, with equally amusing results. But the analysis is just not that simple. Trademark law is all about splitting hairs with words. I have practiced in this area of law long enough and have seen many similar cases go in the plaintiff's favor, with some hefty damages awards to go with them.

The original poster wanted help with possible business names. I gave my advice. I will give it again: Do your due diligence and steer clear of registered or distinctive trademarks. A couple hours of Internet research can save you the hassle and expense of litigation later.

 

[NewLondon88]

Drawing comparisons to "Cabo" and "caboose" is a much greater leap of faith than cabo vs. cabochon. It doesn't matter if the dictionary definition of cabochon is a gem or whatever--when it is used as a fanciful/arbitrary trademark, it takes on secondary meaning and the court will look at how that infringing mark appears or sounds like the plaintiff's superior (Cabo) mark. The court will look at the infringing mark as confusing the superior mark, or that it dilutes the superior mark Any first year law student could pick that apart. :biggrin:

.. and this is how lawyers make sure that they're the only ones who
have any understanding of the laws that the rest of us are bound to
follow..

The Cabo/cabochon isn't merely a matter of the name. He uses a
cabochon in his rods. THAT'S his use of the word. He is not using the
word "Cabo" .. he is using "cabochon" By this logic, anyone who uses
a word that could be part of a larger word is in danger if violating some
trademark somewhere?

Clearly, the intent of the use is neither arbitrary nor fanciful. The word
"Cabochon" is already in use. So it does not meet the definition of
a fanciful mark. It also related directly to the product itself, so it does not
meet the definition of an arbitrary mark, either. It would only be an
arbitrary mark if there was no cabochon in his rods. There are.

 

[Smitty37]

I used to have a website (cabochonrods.com) for my custom fishing rods. I was sent a cease and desist letter by the Diawa corporation because they had a fishing rod line called Cabo after Cabo San Lucas. Mine was "cabochon" because I put a cabochon in the butt of my rod as an ornamental item. Even after calling and explaining it to about 4 people, they held strong on the copyright infringement. It wasn't worth the legal battle to maintain my website so I just dropped it.

Unless you tried to trade on their name or reputation by pretending
to be them or pretending your products were associated with theirs,
you were in the clear. Cabo San Lucas can't be trademarked by them,
and your use of "cabochon" has nothing to do with Cabo San Lucas.

They had nothing to lose by refusing to understand.. it cost them nothing
to threaten you. But had it gone anywhere near a courtroom (it never
would, and they had to know it) they would have gotten their butts
handed to them. In the end, they won by intimidating you. And
copyright would have nothing to do with this, it would be strictly
a trademark issue.

This is bad, layman's advice. And untrue.

Engaging in a business that involves the same or similar goods AND incorporating part of their trademarked name ("Cabo"), means the trademark owner would likely prevail. Yes, they can (and apparently HAVE) trademarked "Cabo." Proper nouns are commonly registered as trademarks.

Steer clear of other trademarked names and avoid the legal headaches.

I'd take bets they'd lose. By your reasoning I couldn't call a fishing pole website anything with the word caboose either.

cabochon, is also a noun in its own right, it is a gemstone and has nothing to do with the name Cabo. Cabochon rods would translate more to gemstone rods than Cabo San Lucas or Cabo. Additionally, a web search using "cabo" turns nothing related to any fishing tackle from anyone.....

You would likely lose your bet. Your "caboose" analogy, while cute, isn't very compelling. Nice try, though. :tongue:

Drawing comparisons to "Cabo" and "caboose" is a much greater leap of faith than cabo vs. cabochon. It doesn't matter if the dictionary definition of cabochon is a gem or whatever--when it is used as a fanciful/arbitrary trademark, it takes on secondary meaning and the court will look at how that infringing mark appears or sounds like the plaintiff's superior (Cabo) mark. The court will look at the infringing mark as confusing the superior mark, or that it dilutes the superior mark Any first year law student could pick that apart. :biggrin:

I have seen many other non-attorneys try to be clever and make generalizations like that, with equally amusing results. But the analysis is just not that simple. Trademark law is all about splitting hairs with words. I have practiced in this area of law long enough and have seen many similar cases go in the plaintiff's favor, with some hefty damages awards to go with them. The original poster wanted help with possible business names. I gave my advice. I will give it again: Do your due diligence and steer clear of registered or distinctive trademarks. A couple hours of Internet research can save you the hassle and expense of litigation later.

I think its identical. The use described is neither fanciful or arbitrary since is descriptive - the rods were made with that gem included.
A search on Cabo Fishing Rods reveals no indication that the 'trade mark'
claimed is registered. Qiamtum cabo fishing rods comes up often and by a lot of different sellers in none that I could find did the circled R appear indicating that it is registered.

If it's not then the "owner" would have to assert the claim under common law - a much more difficult undertaking since the plaintiff would have to prove their use of cabo was in fact a trade mark, which is at least questionable..

Lawyer/non-lawyer -- that's like saying engineer/non-engineer -- in most lawsuits there are lawyers on both sides - one side loses which means that lawyers are wrong about half the time. A couple of recent supreme court decisions attest to that - at least one of them I did not hear/read a single lawyer predict accurately what they ruled.....

I still think they would lose "cabo" itself is used too freely in business names.

But it's all moot.

 

[Russianwolf]

reality in this situation is the one with the deeper pockets usually wins.

Sometimes, you can even lose the right to use your name.

Go to Nissan.com and you will see the results of Nissan Motors trying to claim a trademark on the word Nissan against a man named Nissan who used it as part of his business names for more than a decade before Nissan Motors used the name in the states (before then it was Datsun).

Even though he won, he is still on the hook for around $3million in legal fees to defend it.

 

[WWAtty]

I used to have a website (cabochonrods.com) for my custom fishing rods. I was sent a cease and desist letter by the Diawa corporation because they had a fishing rod line called Cabo after Cabo San Lucas. Mine was "cabochon" because I put a cabochon in the butt of my rod as an ornamental item. Even after calling and explaining it to about 4 people, they held strong on the copyright infringement. It wasn't worth the legal battle to maintain my website so I just dropped it.

Unless you tried to trade on their name or reputation by pretending
to be them or pretending your products were associated with theirs,
you were in the clear. Cabo San Lucas can't be trademarked by them,
and your use of "cabochon" has nothing to do with Cabo San Lucas.

They had nothing to lose by refusing to understand.. it cost them nothing
to threaten you. But had it gone anywhere near a courtroom (it never
would, and they had to know it) they would have gotten their butts
handed to them. In the end, they won by intimidating you. And
copyright would have nothing to do with this, it would be strictly
a trademark issue.

This is bad, layman's advice. And untrue.

Engaging in a business that involves the same or similar goods AND incorporating part of their trademarked name ("Cabo"), means the trademark owner would likely prevail. Yes, they can (and apparently HAVE) trademarked "Cabo." Proper nouns are commonly registered as trademarks.

Steer clear of other trademarked names and avoid the legal headaches.

I'd take bets they'd lose. By your reasoning I couldn't call a fishing pole website anything with the word caboose either.

cabochon, is also a noun in its own right, it is a gemstone and has nothing to do with the name Cabo. Cabochon rods would translate more to gemstone rods than Cabo San Lucas or Cabo. Additionally, a web search using "cabo" turns nothing related to any fishing tackle from anyone.....

You would likely lose your bet. Your "caboose" analogy, while cute, isn't very compelling. Nice try, though. :tongue:

Drawing comparisons to "Cabo" and "caboose" is a much greater leap of faith than cabo vs. cabochon. It doesn't matter if the dictionary definition of cabochon is a gem or whatever--when it is used as a fanciful/arbitrary trademark, it takes on secondary meaning and the court will look at how that infringing mark appears or sounds like the plaintiff's superior (Cabo) mark. The court will look at the infringing mark as confusing the superior mark, or that it dilutes the superior mark Any first year law student could pick that apart. :biggrin:

I have seen many other non-attorneys try to be clever and make generalizations like that, with equally amusing results. But the analysis is just not that simple. Trademark law is all about splitting hairs with words. I have practiced in this area of law long enough and have seen many similar cases go in the plaintiff's favor, with some hefty damages awards to go with them. The original poster wanted help with possible business names. I gave my advice. I will give it again: Do your due diligence and steer clear of registered or distinctive trademarks. A couple hours of Internet research can save you the hassle and expense of litigation later.

I think its identical. The use described is neither fanciful or arbitrary since is descriptive - the rods were made with that gem included.
A search on Cabo Fishing Rods reveals no indication that the 'trade mark'
claimed is registered. Qiamtum cabo fishing rods comes up often and by a lot of different sellers in none that I could find did the circled R appear indicating that it is registered.

If it's not then the "owner" would have to assert the claim under common law - a much more difficult undertaking since the plaintiff would have to prove their use of cabo was in fact a trade mark, which is at least questionable..

Lawyer/non-lawyer -- that's like saying engineer/non-engineer -- in most lawsuits there are lawyers on both sides - one side loses which means that lawyers are wrong about half the time. A couple of recent supreme court decisions attest to that - at least one of them I did not hear/read a single lawyer predict accurately what they ruled.....

I still think they would lose "cabo" itself is used too freely in business names.

But it's all moot.

But would you be willing to bet your business on the 50/50 chance that your trademark is not infringing? Believe what you want to believe.

I love accepting fees from fools like you. It's job security for me.

 

[Lucky2]

WWAtty, I don't see any reason to be calling anybody a "fool", just because you may know more, or think that you know more in some cases. It may be your opinion of the person, but please, if it is, keep it to yourself, there's no need for name calling just because you disagree with a person.
Len

 

[Smitty37]

I used to have a website (cabochonrods.com) for my custom fishing rods. I was sent a cease and desist letter by the Diawa corporation because they had a fishing rod line called Cabo after Cabo San Lucas. Mine was "cabochon" because I put a cabochon in the butt of my rod as an ornamental item. Even after calling and explaining it to about 4 people, they held strong on the copyright infringement. It wasn't worth the legal battle to maintain my website so I just dropped it.

Unless you tried to trade on their name or reputation by pretending
to be them or pretending your products were associated with theirs,
you were in the clear. Cabo San Lucas can't be trademarked by them,
and your use of "cabochon" has nothing to do with Cabo San Lucas.

They had nothing to lose by refusing to understand.. it cost them nothing
to threaten you. But had it gone anywhere near a courtroom (it never
would, and they had to know it) they would have gotten their butts
handed to them. In the end, they won by intimidating you. And
copyright would have nothing to do with this, it would be strictly
a trademark issue.

This is bad, layman's advice. And untrue.

Engaging in a business that involves the same or similar goods AND incorporating part of their trademarked name ("Cabo"), means the trademark owner would likely prevail. Yes, they can (and apparently HAVE) trademarked "Cabo." Proper nouns are commonly registered as trademarks.

Steer clear of other trademarked names and avoid the legal headaches.

I'd take bets they'd lose. By your reasoning I couldn't call a fishing pole website anything with the word caboose either.

cabochon, is also a noun in its own right, it is a gemstone and has nothing to do with the name Cabo. Cabochon rods would translate more to gemstone rods than Cabo San Lucas or Cabo. Additionally, a web search using "cabo" turns nothing related to any fishing tackle from anyone.....

You would likely lose your bet. Your "caboose" analogy, while cute, isn't very compelling. Nice try, though. :tongue:

Drawing comparisons to "Cabo" and "caboose" is a much greater leap of faith than cabo vs. cabochon. It doesn't matter if the dictionary definition of cabochon is a gem or whatever--when it is used as a fanciful/arbitrary trademark, it takes on secondary meaning and the court will look at how that infringing mark appears or sounds like the plaintiff's superior (Cabo) mark. The court will look at the infringing mark as confusing the superior mark, or that it dilutes the superior mark Any first year law student could pick that apart. :biggrin:

I have seen many other non-attorneys try to be clever and make generalizations like that, with equally amusing results. But the analysis is just not that simple. Trademark law is all about splitting hairs with words. I have practiced in this area of law long enough and have seen many similar cases go in the plaintiff's favor, with some hefty damages awards to go with them. The original poster wanted help with possible business names. I gave my advice. I will give it again: Do your due diligence and steer clear of registered or distinctive trademarks. A couple hours of Internet research can save you the hassle and expense of litigation later.

I think its identical. The use described is neither fanciful or arbitrary since is descriptive - the rods were made with that gem included.
A search on Cabo Fishing Rods reveals no indication that the 'trade mark'
claimed is registered. Qiamtum cabo fishing rods comes up often and by a lot of different sellers in none that I could find did the circled R appear indicating that it is registered.

If it's not then the "owner" would have to assert the claim under common law - a much more difficult undertaking since the plaintiff would have to prove their use of cabo was in fact a trade mark, which is at least questionable..

Lawyer/non-lawyer -- that's like saying engineer/non-engineer -- in most lawsuits there are lawyers on both sides - one side loses which means that lawyers are wrong about half the time. A couple of recent supreme court decisions attest to that - at least one of them I did not hear/read a single lawyer predict accurately what they ruled.....

I still think they would lose "cabo" itself is used too freely in business names.

But it's all moot.

But would you be willing to bet your business on the 50/50 chance that your trademark is not infringing? Believe what you want to believe.

I love accepting fees from fools like you. It's job security for me.

I would expect that a super smart attorney such as yourself would be able to respond without getting personal. Lets settle out of court here - you don't call me a fool and I won't call you what you are.

I did, by the way, get approached by a company on that subject. As soon as I found it was not registered. I told them, as I would have in this case, that I thought the word they were claiming as a trade mark was in too common use for too many things for them to claim it under common law as a trade mark. They did not pursue the issue.

 

[keithbyrd]

I agree with Len on this - no reason not to extend professional courtesy.

 

[Russianwolf]

One company that comes to mind that bulls over everyone whether they have a right to a name or not is Apple.

Cisco owned the Iphone name when they bought a company that used it to market an internet phone. Iphone started talking to them about getting the name. Then went to market on the Iphone and had to come to a settlement on the trademark.

They also entered into an agreement with the Beatles record label regarding the right to the apple logo. the Label had the right for music related business and apple for non-music. Then comes the Ipod and Itunes, breaching the agreement. Apple won anyway.

Just because you are in the right, doesn't mean you will win.

 

[Smitty37]

One company that comes to mind that bulls over everyone whether they have a right to a name or not is Apple.

Cisco owned the Iphone name when they bought a company that used it to market an internet phone. Iphone started talking to them about getting the name. Then went to market on the Iphone and had to come to a settlement on the trademark.

They also entered into an agreement with the Beatles record label regarding the right to the apple logo. the Label had the right for music related business and apple for non-music. Then comes the Ipod and Itunes, breaching the agreement. Apple won anyway.

Just because you are in the right, doesn't mean you will win.

Diawa ain't Apple --- and probably don't have pockets near as deep as Apple.

 

[Leatherman1998]

Off your subject, but your user name/logo is "Leatherman". Do you work with leather or is this in relation to aviation.
John

The leatherman part is I used to do leather working and still do it on occasion but not as much as I use to. The 1998 is my birth year so that is my common screen name on forums, email and others. I don't see how leatherman1998 is related to aviation though,in a way I am involved with flying, the logo and my rank are in my signature.:usflag:

I have a few names I could use an some of them are from your ideas .
Woodard Woodturnings
South Dakota Woodworking or Woodturning
Woodard WoodStudio
I might have more later.

 

[NewLondon88]

I have a few names I could use an some of them are from your ideas .
Woodard Woodturnings
South Dakota Woodworking or Woodturning
Woodard WoodStudio
I might have more later.

I would just go with your name. It's simple, easy to remember and
it should make a great logo. You could call your pens :

LEVI'S
​