Timeline for Understanding trademark infringements in a world where many dictionary words are trademarks?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 6, 2019 at 21:47 | comment | added | Monty Harder | @Acccumulation It isn't a violation of anyone's trademark to sell a drug as "heroin". 21 CFR 1308.11 is not copyright law. | |
| May 6, 2019 at 2:38 | comment | added | apsillers | (Note also that I don't mean to present "if a majority of people make such a mistake" as the only criterion in determining if a trademark has become generic. I actually don't know, and a nuts-and-bolts level, what specific factors judges is to make such a determination.) | |
| May 6, 2019 at 2:30 | comment | added | apsillers | @ina Probably not. If your app did not deal with hot tubs at all, and you wanted to use the name Jacuzzi, you might succeed, especially if it was the name of an author of the app. As it is, you're clearly using the name to signify the presence of hot tubs, and I don't think that confusion would go away just because you had a app author named Jacuzzi. I'll also note that the fact that you didn't realize"Jacuzzi" was a brand name your entire life is exactlywhy the company pursues misuse so aggressively: if a majority of people make such a mistake, it would be grounds to void the trademark. | |
| May 5, 2019 at 20:54 | comment | added | ina | Very interesting - so if I collaborated with someone named Jacuzzi on the app, then that would be a way to get by this? | |
| May 2, 2019 at 20:57 | comment | added | Acccumulation | @MontyHarder So it's now legal to sell diacetylmorphine as "heroin"? | |
| May 1, 2019 at 19:20 | comment | added | Monty Harder | Bayer AG lost its US trademarks on aspirin and heroin in 1919, right after WWI ended. All of its US assets were seized during the war, so Bayer had nothing to defend (and probably lacked standing to do so) in whatever genericization hearing(s) were held. That makes them far from a typical situation. Aaand I see phoog beat me to it. | |
| May 1, 2019 at 19:20 | comment | added | phoog | @DavidRicherby it is also no longer a trademark in the UK, apparently cancelled in connection with the first world war. I've found the ruling that invalidated the UK patent, but the best evidence I have for the trademark cancellation is mention in Bayer v. American Druggists, a Canadian case from 1924. In the US, the trademark was found to have been genericized in the 1921 ruling (without, however using the word "generic") in Bayer v United Drug. | |
| May 1, 2019 at 18:52 | history | edited | apsillers | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 7 characters in body
|
| May 1, 2019 at 18:02 | comment | added | David Richerby | "Aspirin" is no longer a trademark in the USA but it is still a trademark in many other countries, according to Wikipedia. Not that this dilutes your point. | |
| May 1, 2019 at 17:10 | comment | added | apsillers | @Monty My mistake! Discussion of fanciful trademarks is indeed not applicable here; personal-name trademarks are merely descriptive trademarks. I've removed that paragraph. | |
| May 1, 2019 at 17:09 | history | undeleted | apsillers | ||
| May 1, 2019 at 17:09 | history | edited | apsillers | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 15 characters in body
|
| May 1, 2019 at 17:02 | history | deleted | apsillers | via Vote | |
| May 1, 2019 at 16:28 | comment | added | Monty Harder | "Jacuzzi" is no more "fanciful" than "Ford" is. Giocondo Jacuzzi and his brothers started the company just like Henry Ford started his. Referring to one of their tubs as a "Jacuzzi" is identical to referring to a car or truck made by the Ford Motor Company as a "Ford". | |
| May 1, 2019 at 15:31 | history | edited | apsillers | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 103 characters in body
|
| May 1, 2019 at 15:24 | history | edited | apsillers | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 604 characters in body
|
| May 1, 2019 at 15:19 | history | answered | apsillers | CC BY-SA 4.0 |