Regarding generic words, as an exception, it is possible to maintain a trademark within a specific industry. For example, Apple Computer could successfully prevent someone else using "apple" (or even names of apple varities such as macintosh) in the computer industry.
However, defending generic words across industries would be completely unprecedented. Apple Records, Red Apple Grocery, Fiona Apple, etc, all exist without infringement.
But that's only half way true Adam. If it is a RELATED industry, it's inconceivable any court would let it fly. the "related disqualifier" thing is a big part of trademarks.
An example is "Ford Automobiles". You and I could not start a "Ford Tire Company" or "Ford Windhsield Wiper Factory" or so on. You could start Ford Marshmallows, but not Ford Leather Auto Seating. Ford Clinic, but not Ford Tow Bars.
PLEASE NOTE: I'm just talking, Adam, about what the reality is. Not libertarian or other views on trademarks and how it SHOULD be, just what WOULD happen in all first world countries.
E-Gold can probably defend their trademark of e-gold as it applies to digital currencies,....
and anything vaguely related to the "IG economy".
It's totally inconceivable you could get away with "e-gold-store" or "e-gold-online-porno" or "e-gold-casino" or "e-gold-exchange-services" or "e-gold-software-development" or "e-gold-online-magazine" etc. This is basic trademark stuff.
Once again....
Please note...
I'm just talking, Adam, about what the reality is. Not political views on trademarks and how it SHOULD be, just what would happen in all first world countries.
I missed the start of this, but if there's someone going "e-gold-shop" or whatever, they're simply not going to be allowed to do it if they're in a 1st world country and Barry or whoever bothers suiing them.
Registration of a trademark does not in itself create a trademark. The trademark must be used, and must be defended. To suggest people simply ought to avoid a trademark is to suggest one ought to forsake the most important moderation aspect of trademarks and take the trademark office at face value. (This is even more important with respect to patents).
Right on! "Trial by jury is the heart and lungs of liberty".
IMHO, every new trademark and patent ought to be infringed upon, and forced to be defended in court.
Well, in say the USA or any first world country, it's difficult to conceive how there could be MORE litigation over patents and trademarks, if your desire is to see a "lot of" such litigation, you're there!!
PS. On two practical notes regarding using e-gold in domain names:
1) If one were to own e-gold-casino, and have it direct to another domain (e.g. wb-casino), one can claim that the domain does not represent use as a trade name, but as a *directory* entry, and thus cannot be infringing.
2) If one were to use the tradename (Electronic Gold Casino), and have the domain e-gold-casino, one can argue the domain represents a valid abbreviation.
Unfortunately both these cases would utterly lose -- in US courts -- for what its worth.
Again please see my clarifier above.
PPS. IANAL either.
I'm far more knowledgable than most attorneys about IP issues. You can take it from me as gospel and not worry about it any more. ;-)
JP
--- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
