DSF

foot in mouth again
[url="http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/tm/t-formsfees.htm]http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/tm/t-formsfees.htm[/url]

it is £200.00 for a trademark

Precisely John, This is what we have seen on the IPO site,
:-
If I I think that someone else maybe infringing, what should I do?
Get legal advice as the most suitable course of action will depend on the particular circumstances of your case.

One potential option open to you is to write to the infringer. However you must be satisfied that the earlier trade mark that you own and the activities of the infringer justify this. This is because the law also protects traders from unjustifiable threats of trade mark infringement.

Perhaps the decent thing to do would have been to contact us primarily? I don't actually feel it was dealt with in the correct manner in fact I had told my partner it was quite odd and not very professional although he was legit from the TS Office.

Yes J it does say it is £200. for a trade mark plus an extra £50. per category it is listed in.
A mindfield !!
I think we should arrange a meeting to discuss this face to face with someone in order to get a better understanding.

Good luck with this one - think its hard to prove who had the original design.

Cheers john

Thanks John,

I don't know how far we will pursue this one, we are waiting for a call frm the TS office which will be up to 5 working days, it's not a huge concern about changing our design I suppose but my concern is where will he go next as I feel his complaint is a little petty (clearly not in his eyes though)

perhaps a solid heart in the design?

I will do as mrs maggot and the TS office have suggested and post all my designs to myself as soon as I can get round to it.

How many of us actually come up with an original design. Most of the time we get ideas from something else we see. I do various versions of t-shirts I've seen on the internet. I reckon you would have to go back a very long way to find the originals.

Did you get the idea of the offending design from somewhere else, how do you know he didn't ?

I just cooked up the idea myself, after all how many t shirt do we see saying" I Love Cornwall" etc using a heart instead of the word "love" you see them in many tourist places.
As you have said accdave we all see designs and we get thinking of new ideas.

I think it's all very odd, perhaps the Trading Standards Officer is familiar with the chap.

AJLA wrote:I think it's all very odd

I agree and I still question why Trading Standards are involved with this at all.

As I understand it, you couldn't copyright "I Cornwall" because it's a common phrase used by everyone from graffiti-artists to forum bloggers. Copyright doesn't require registration, and certainly not £200 worth. And you could never find the first person to use the phrase - remember that copyright is an automatic right of the originator, not of the "first person to register it".

I imagine that, in a particular style, it could be protected by trademark (which may be where the £200 comes into it). But a trademark needs to be quite specific. If you changed the font, the design of the heart, arranged the words differently, changed the "I" to a silhouette of an eye, changed the colour, made it 3D, or any one of a hundred things, then you (probably) wouldn't be infringing.

Also, a trademark is generally used for brand recognition - not for a generic phrase. It's for the protection of the business, which is why you see companies go out of their way to have stylised logos and trademark things that are pertinent to their business (the Coca-cola logo, the company not calling their drink simply "Cola" in the trademark, the shape of the bottle being specific, etc).

Take the case of the term "Super-hero" in the 3D logo you sometimes see on comic books. Although the 3D logo with the words "Super-hero" is trademarked, that doesn't mean you can't use the words "super-hero" in regular use. It's the logo that's trademarked, not the words. Likewise, the hyphen is important: "Super-hero" is different to "super hero" or "superhero".

Another example is "Google" - which, itself, was derived from the real word "Googol" but misspelled so it could be trademarked. You often hear cases of Google trying to prevent people from using the word in common speech - such as "I googled the web" - because, as soon as it becomes common speech, it becomes extremely difficult to protect the trademark.

It's the same with "Windows". Microsoft can't claim to own the word "Windows" because it's a common word, and this is why they insist that their operating system is always referred to as "Microsoft Windows" - because that phrase can be protected.

So I'm still puzzled as to what exactly your competitor is trying to protect and why Trading Standards are championing a rival business when their remit is to champion consumers. It sounds increasingly like big boots and heavy-stick waving with very little foundation.

Why not search for this person's alleged trademark at http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/tm/t-os/t-find.htm. I did a quick search for "Cornwall" and couldn't immediately find anything that looked like "I Cornwall".

JSR wrote:

AJLA wrote:I think it's all very odd

I agree and I still question why Trading Standards are involved with this at all.

It sounds increasingly like big boots and heavy-stick waving with very little foundation.

Why not search for this person's alleged trademark at http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/tm/t-os/t-find.htm. I did a quick search for "Cornwall" and couldn't immediately find anything that looked like "I Cornwall".

No it isn't easy to find without the reference number although the company name is easily found.

Just thought this may be of interest to you:


The Hearing Officer went on to discuss the status of slogans as trade marks. He pointed to the
fact that “the ECJ (has) confirmed that slogans may fall alongside other non-conventional trade
marks in being a category of mark that the relevant public is slower to recognise as indicating
the product of a single undertaking.” While accepting that slogans could function as trade marks,
he indicated that such use may not be so readily accepted by the general public as an indication
of trade origin as would more traditional signs. He also indicated that the acceptability of
slogans as trade marks was subject to the rule any promotional function should be secondary to its
trade mark function. He went on to refer to the guidance given by the UK trade mark office which
states that “Slogans such as ‘I [heart device] My Boy Friend or ‘Here Comes Trouble’ are often
used to decorate goods, particularly clothing – T-shirts, sweatshirts or baseball caps. In this
context, consumers are unlikely to perceive this type of slogan as a sign of trade origin. When
seen on the front of a T-shirt, a mug, a necklace or a key ring, for example, they are likely to
be seen as a personal statement by/about the wearer/user rather than indicating the trade origin
of the product. Slogans which are likely to be seen as such will therefore be open to objection
under Section 3(1)(b) of the Act.”

Taken from:
[url="http://www.lawdit.co.uk/reading_room/ro ... ustice.htm]http://www.lawdit.co.uk/reading_room/ro ... ustice.htm[/url]

John G wrote:Just thought this may be of interest to you:


The Hearing Officer went on to discuss the status of slogans as trade marks. He pointed to the
fact that “the ECJ (has) confirmed that slogans may fall alongside other non-conventional trade
marks in being a category of mark that the relevant public is slower to recognise as indicating
the product of a single undertaking.” While accepting that slogans could function as trade marks,
he indicated that such use may not be so readily accepted by the general public as an indication
of trade origin as would more traditional signs. He also indicated that the acceptability of
slogans as trade marks was subject to the rule any promotional function should be secondary to its
trade mark function. He went on to refer to the guidance given by the UK trade mark office which
states that “Slogans such as ‘I [heart device] My Boy Friend or ‘Here Comes Trouble’ are often
used to decorate goods, particularly clothing – T-shirts, sweatshirts or baseball caps. In this
context, consumers are unlikely to perceive this type of slogan as a sign of trade origin. When
seen on the front of a T-shirt, a mug, a necklace or a key ring, for example, they are likely to
be seen as a personal statement by/about the wearer/user rather than indicating the trade origin
of the product. Slogans which are likely to be seen as such will therefore be open to objection
under Section 3(1)(b) of the Act.”

Taken from:
[url="http://www.lawdit.co.uk/reading_room/ro ... ustice.htm]http://www.lawdit.co.uk/reading_room/ro ... ustice.htm[/url]

Good find! That kind of says it all.