Intellectual Property Forum The Intellectual Property Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New registrations are now permitted.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - JSonnabend

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 228
1
Copyright Forum / Re: ALBUM LYRICS COPYRIGHT
« on: 05-18-13 at 01:57 pm »
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

2
If you are thinking in terms of "searching and clearing classes", then you are thinking about the process all wrong.  As far as I am concerned, the classification system is little more than a way of calculating fees.

- Jeff

3
Copyright Forum / Re: ALBUM LYRICS COPYRIGHT
« on: 05-09-13 at 02:26 pm »
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

4
Copyright Forum / Re: Recipe copyright protection
« on: 05-09-13 at 02:19 pm »
Art is correct, but don't sweat the re-writing too much.  There are only so many ways to say, "bring a pot of well salted water to rolling boil," "brown the meat on all sides," etc.

- Jeff

5
Copyright Forum / Re: ALBUM LYRICS COPYRIGHT
« on: 05-09-13 at 06:22 am »
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

6
Trademark Forum / Re: Cancel or abandon
« on: 05-09-13 at 06:03 am »
Withdrawal and abandonment are substantively the same thing, unless I'm misunderstanding your situation.  In fact, without double checking, I believe the only thing you can affirmatively do on eTeas is "expressly abandon" the application.

- Jeff

7
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

8
I know this is an old thread,  but I had to comment on Mr (Ms?) Cheese's comments.

The fact that two marks rhyme may or may not indicate likelihood of confusion.  In the abstract, it's hard to comment on that issue.

As for the business practices, I think that Cheese's analysis is silly.  What, exactly, is protectable about the business practice described?  It's not a trade secret, and Cheese admits that "writing little stories about products" is allowable and not even unique to J Peterman.

- Jeff

9
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

10
Trademark Forum / Re: Cancel or abandon
« on: 05-07-13 at 06:43 am »
You cannot "cancel" the application.  If you take no further action, it will become abandoned.

- Jeff

11
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

12
Copyright Forum / Re: Tagline Copyright
« on: 02-07-13 at 11:53 am »
"Taglines" are a trademark concept, and using your tagline on your blog post most likely does not give rise to protectable trademark rights. 

As for copyright, a single tagline is likely not long enough to gain copyright protection.

- Jeff

13
Trademark Forum / Re: Help with Dicovery
« on: 02-07-13 at 11:46 am »
Why a list of questions to ask?  This isn't a deposition, its an initial discovery conference.

- Jeff

14
To clarify, are you saying that if someone comes up with a word for a new product, and uses that word generically to refer to the product in an online offer for sale of the directions for making that product, that this single use of the newly invented word as a generic term could then give him rights in the word?--rights sufficient to defeat anyone else who might later want to use that term as a trademark on a similar product, even without the first guy making further use of the term?

I am not saying anything so cut-and dried.  Priority of rights through analogous use is gray to say the least.  If a party has taken sufficient steps in connection with a mark, then that party may establish priority, even without technical use, over a second party who has technical use first.

- Jeff

15
Minni, I have read the thread several times now.  Your question has been answered by several different people in several different ways.  The answer is simply not what you want it to be, though, and so you complain.  When you are ready to face reality, I suggest you read the thread again.

- Jeff

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 228


Footer

www.intelproplaw.com

Terms of Use
Feel free to contact us:
Sorry, spam is killing us.

iKnight Technologies Inc.

www.intelproplaw.com

Page created in 0.132 seconds with 21 queries.