The Intellectual Property Forum

I would be more cautious than Jim suggests.  I think knowingly linking to a known pirate site (even by more than one jump) could be considered contributory infringement. 

Search these forums for "likelihood of confusion" and you will see many discussions on registration of marks that are similar to other marks.

- Jeff

Sorry for the late reply, but I have to say, yes, if you want to have a law school, contracts 101 discussion, then there may be failure of consideration. 

In the real world, though, when someone says, "you have my permission" and then someone acts on that, there is permission.  We can (and do) call that permission "a licenses".  Whether the underlying legal theory is contract, detrimental reliance, estoppel, acquiescence or something else is really an academic discussion.

- Jeff

That's very well and good, but can't a verbal license be verbally revoked? That seems to be what happened here.

"Sure, use my lyrics."

Months later...

"I changed my mind, don't use them."

I mean, unless the original granting of the license contained a verbal clause that limited how it can be terminated, doesn't the verbal revocation of the license kind of end it?

Why would the terms of a verbal license be presumed revocable any more than they would be presumed irrevocable?

- Jeff

Smokin is right, Feta is wrong.  The question isn't really "ownership" (or even "authorship"), it's license, and a non-exclusive license can be oral and/or implied, as well as formally written.

- Jeff

In the end, the classification system is artificial and outdated.  Often the classification has to do with the material form which the goods are made.  It can be very frustrating.  In the end, though, on the enforcement side, as long as you describe the g/s accurately, enforcement is not affected.

- Jeff

Grayscale is no longer evil at the TM Office.  The 2 bit requirement was long ago removed, hence the not-so-new option to check the "this mark does not claim color".

There is no downside to checking that box, assuming you are not claiming color as a feature of the mark.  In fact, that is exactly what you should do.

As for the ID, the only downside to not using a canned ID is the extra $50 application fee.  Sometimes you get a rejection based on your chosen ID, but that can be fixed through conversation with the examiner pretty readily.  Bottom line, choose an ID that correctly describes your goods/services.

- Jeff

If the word has a translation to English, why not submit it?  Would it raise possible issues of descriptiveness?

As for the fee, I have seen that happen in my own applications, but not for quite some time.

- Jeff