14

History of the case Javascript is a trademark of Oracle since 1996/1999. Anything that can cause confusion of origin or endorsement is thus infringing on the trademark of Oracle. A company explicitly named after a product of another implies to be endorsed, so Oracle sued that company under S69(1) of the Companies Act 2006 in November 2019. The company did ...


13

The simplest way to "resolve" this situation is to Change the name of your company to something that doesn't contain or resemble the word "javascript" and Pay £800 costs to Oracle. The alternative is to appeal to the High Court, but you would need a lawyer who is an expert in company law and some reason to think that an appeal is likely ...


4

Do you know that both "The Slants" for an Asian American Band and "Fuct" for a men's clothing line have been OKed as registered trademarks by the Supreme Court? I think this moots the premise of your question, at least in the U.S.


4

The legal question is likelihood of confusion, in this case, confusion over the belief that the product is endorsed or affiliated with the "good vibe tribe" that holds that trademark. A wide variety of factual details could sway that one way or the other.


4

No Minor changes to trade marks are still the same trade mark.


4

From what I can see on the USPTO registry, "tweet" is still not trademarked for the purposes you're talking about. Twitter has been working to secure that trademark, but I can't find any record of them having actually secured it. Just the same, I'd predict that using it will get you at least a cease-and-desist letter, and possibly a lawsuit. ...


4

This would appear to be legal. According to 15 U.S. Code § 1125(c): (3) Exclusions The following shall not be actionable as dilution by blurring or dilution by tarnishment under this subsection: (A) Any fair use, including a nominative or descriptive fair use, or facilitation of such fair use, of a famous mark by another person other than as a designation ...


4

If the person uses that name "in commerce" then it could be a violation of the "Amazon Prime" trademark. Trademark law is often based on the "common sense" doctrine. The question the court would ask themselves is "could a common sense person come to the conclusion that this user represents the company Amazon.com Inc.". ...


4

Firstly, this had nothing to do with trademark or copyright infringement as the question and one of the answers suggest. This was an action taken under Section 69(1) of the Companies Act 2006 which states: A person (“the applicant”) may object to a company's registered name on the ground (a) that it is the same as a name associated with the applicant in ...


2

First of all, copyright law does not apply here. Names, titles, and other short phrases are not subject to copyright protection. The basic rule in such trademark cases is to avoid confusing similarities to existing trademarks. If the existing name has been protected as a trademark, and the proposed new name is sufficiently similar that reasonable people ...


2

Not necessarily, although one can imagine circumstances where it would. In general, you can put anything in the name of a non-profit that you want. So, if I want to start the Borneo Burger Society in Portland, Maine, that isn't in and of itself illegal. Trouble could arise, however, if a name containing a geographic location is used in furtherance of fraud ...


2

It sounds like you're basically talking about using the milk lobby's campaign propaganda to offer one's own commentary on the product. That sounds like pretty solidly First Amendment-protected activity. I wouldn't be surprised if the dairy association or Bill Gates sent a cease-and-desist letter, or even sued -- especially against someone with few enough ...


1

In the US, the key principle is that someone may not use a trademark without permission in a way likely to cause confusion. If you register (or merely use) "Triple-Y" as a mark for selling books, someone selling hot dogs is perhaps not very likely to be confused with you, or to be trading on your reputation. Part of registration is to indicate the category (...


1

Does the product name or the corresponding "ordinary commercial terms" provided by the Nice Classification constitute the "name of the goods"? As used here, "name of the goods" means the word used to denote that sort of thing generically. So if the article in question is a knife, the name of the goods in English is "knife,...


1

Generally speaking, trademarks need to be in continued use to be protected, and if the company that used a name is dissolved in the place where it was organized, it is probably fair to assume that it is no longer in use. But, to some extent, the legal steps that the company took to protect it's name and brands matters. There are several different regimes of ...


1

The person could seek protection, but could well be unsuccessful. Such a person should register the separate parts of the word mark separately. An application for such registration might or might not succeed, of course, because the partial word mark might be ripe for confusion with an existing word mark. For example, if word mark is "Neighborhood Pizza," ...


1

You don't "describe" your business -- you identify the goods or services to which you intend to apply the brand. The USPTO has a useful tool for "The Acceptable Identification of Goods or Services" on its website. You type in a descriptive word and it gives you a list of classes and proposed form of the identification that would be acceptable. The ...


1

There is no strictly correct answer. If you are worried about confusion as might be the case in a business name like ABC such as ABC - a diner, and ABC - an auto repair shop both geographically close to each other where both just go by the name ABC then you could use the business's address to differentiate your business from the other. Alternatively you ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible