Quote:
Originally Posted by OroLatina
I do agree with you, but as I stated, to protect their trademark, they can (and would) file suit. Its not always who is standing on the right side of the law, but who can afford the lengthy and costly legal process. My recommendation was merely to avoid such a pitfall. A good example of this is with Donal Trump. It is my understanding that he put a plumbing company out of business / forced them to change their name that was using the Trump name. While we have a great legal system in the United States, justice is unfortunately very expensive. Even a frivalous lawsuit still requires the time, energy and effort (and money) to properly respond; with or without a lawyer. With respect to your comment about doing legal legwork yourself, it is certanly plausible, but it is completely based on what you are trying to do. In our case, with repect to trademarks and other corporate assets and affairs, it would be foolish to go to battle without a good attorney. We live in a litigious society and most people have neither the time nor inclination to properly educate themselves to defend or pursue their own suits. I leave it to the lawyers so I can focus on those things I know.
cheers
OroLatina
|
Re Donal Trump - there was a landmark case in the UK a few years ago. The case was of a man called Forte who ran a small teashop in Winchester as The Forte Tearooms. He was taken to court by Trust House Forte who owned the trademark "Forte" and at the time owned chains of hotels and restaurants. Their argument was that Mr Forte shouldn't be allowed to use the Forte trademark for his competing restaurant.
The case eventually went to the House of Lords (that's the equivalent of the Supreme Court in the US), who ruled that an individual always has the right to trade under his or her own name, regardless of whether the name is trademarked or not.
Mr Forte and his Tearoom are still there - I stop in for coffee from time to time. My token anti-corporate statement!