In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Udalrich wri
tes:
: >
: >Keep in mind that part of owning a trademark is defending it - if
: >you don't send out cease and desist letters to people who violate it,
: >you can't later claim that they violated your rights.
:
: Is that actually an issue here? The interest in getting the trademark is
: to prevent some company from sending Paul another cease and desist letter,
: not to monopolize the word "JMode". Even if he loses the rights, I doubt
: that someone else could trademark it and force him off of it. At the very
: least, he's got a very strong case for prior use.
IANAL, but I believe it is an issue. In the US, I believe the rule is
"defend it or lose it." Now that may mean that if you don't defend it,
others can use it (which I'm sure would be fine with Paul). But, it may
also mean that those who use it can get the USPTO to agree that you've
stopped defending it and so *they* should be eligible for exclusivity
on the TM. I don't know if this is true or not for trademarks, but it
merits investigation.
Also, remember that it's not a one time expense: TMs expire and have
to be renewed. That's what happened to JD Edwards, as others on this
list have explained it - they let their TM lapse for a year or so,
right around the time the JDE... er...Jmode was born.
Eric "speculatingly wildly" Friedman
