So, where your face or voice in an in-person interaction will surely identify you as the source to others on the receiving end of that in-person communication, in the online world your handle or other identifier will do that for you.  In the off line world, others can have the same name as you, but online if someone were to have your same twitter handle or e-mail address as their own, we would call that hijacking, squatting, hacking, or stealing.  Someone can look just like you in the off line world, but they cannot have your same name online; too much confusion would ensue.  With highly similar online names and addresses, such confusion already happens.  But you can choose your online mark–and in that space communication, connection, and information reign supreme.  Tone and delivery are the online body language.  That being the case, in the connected electronic world, where marks do much of the talking and representing, indicators of source are more important than ever.

As for how this fits under the law and connects with trademarks, service marks, collective marks, etc., you’d want to consider whether and how a particular mark has been used in commerce.  That’s a topic for continued thought and discussion…and special analysis based on your use, intended use, and overall plan…because, like the off line world, use online and even in social media contexts can take on different forms: sometimes it’s business, sometimes it’s personal, and sometimes it’s a little of both.

People often wonder about the real value of a trademark.  But marks are unique, and their value is based on how they are “built.”  That is, the value of the mark is based on what the mark represents–what it embodies and what it encompasses.  So, obviously, the Coca Cola trademark is incredibly valuable.  But does that mean a mark currently without an actual product or service connected to it is without value?  The answer is no.

So, what if you haven’t launched the business or the product?  What if you’re not offering the service?  How much is the mark worth then?  You have an idea of what mark you plan to use, but wonder how it can be worth investing time and money in a mark for a product or service that may not succeed… more often than not, protecting and securing that mark is an integral part of being able to communicate the value of the product or service you are launching.  Your target audience can identify with a mark and a brand quite easily, but not necessarily with nuance and complexity of your offering without the trademark delivery vehicle–the mark can bear the complex nuanced message and identity in its simplicity.  Think about what “GE” really means and represents.

A mark embodies the idea of what you want your target audience to understand.  The mark is your flag.  Whether your business is the equivalent of a fledgling nation or an established world leader, the identification–the good will–can develop and change over time and your audience will perceive and understand those changes through your mark.

Prepare your banners before entering the field of competition.  Consider the products you want to sell, the service you want to provide, and the mark you can use to identify and communicate your message.

While discussion continues regarding traditional trademark topics, including brand strength and international registrations, the Internet and technology appear to dominate the conversation these days.  Topics include registration of generic top-level domains (gTLDs), social media and the leverage trademarks and brand identification can provide in that arena, as well as the hot button issue of trademarks and their sale and use in search engine key word and advertising programs.

Fear not brand owners.  I know you may have difficulty sleeping in knowing you were not able to attend the conference yourselves.  But I’ll keep you posted about developments from here at the exhibition hall.

More to come…

You can check out the interview here: http://www.dailyfinance.com/article/linsanity-net-worth-business-profit-ads/

The Uniform Domain-Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) is an arbitration process available to the public for addressing domain name squatters and other disputes over domain name ownership.  The process is applicable across all General Top Level Domains (gTLDs), such as the gTLD “.com”  Under the UDRP process, in certain circumstances you can seek to force a cyber squatter or trademark infringer either to transfer a domain to you or cancel their registration altogether.

What Do You Need to Show?

First, you need trademark rights.  A registration demonstrating those rights is always very helpful.  So, you specify the trademark(s) or service mark(s) on which the complaint is based.  You provide, for each mark, the goods or services, if any, with which the mark is used or with which you intend to use the mark at the time the UDRP complaint is submitted.

Next you will need to describe the grounds on which the complaint is made.  In particular you will need to show:

1. The manner in which the domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which you have rights; and
2. Why the current domain registrant should be considered as having no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name(s); and
3. Why the domain name(s) should be considered as having been registered and being used in bad faith

So, You Get it All Together: What happens Then?

1. Generally, the Arbitration Forum will examine the Complaint to determine whether it conforms to the rules, etc.  If, for some reason, they say it doesn’t, you generally will get a chance to fix any issues.  This should take about three (3) days.
2. Once approved, the Forum will send the official Complaint to the offending registrant (the “Respondent”), and they will have twenty (20) calendar days, depending on the forum, to submit a Response to both the Forum and to you.
3. If Respondent does not file a response, then it would be in default.  The Arbitration Forum will then make a decision based solely on your complaint.  Also, a default is seen as another sign of bad faith registration and use of the domain (Good for you!).
4. An arbiter will be appointed within five (5) calendar days of either (1) Respondent’s response filing or (2) Respondent’s default.
5. A panel decision comes out within fourteen (14) calendar days of its appointment by the Forum.
6. You’ll get the decision about three (3) days later.

Total Time: ~45-50 days

You can take a look at a layout of the process here: http://domains.adrforum.com/main.aspx?itemID=263&hideBar=True&navID=199&news=26

Keep in mind that rules and time frames are open to change, but a UDRP action can be much swifter and less expensive than alternative litigation.

Please note that this blog entry is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice and should not be construed as legal advice. Nothing herein is meant to create an attorney-client relationship.

Now, copyright is granted under the Constitution in the Intellectual Property Clause, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8, in order to provide an ownership incentive to people to create and innovate and share their creations with the public without the fear of them being stolen. That original grant of copyright was 14 years, which is much shorter than the current copyright term of life plus 70 years, the lengthening of which had little to do with incentive to create and share and more to do with financial concerns.

Why does this matter? Well, for the sake of commentary, it matters because the argument has become about money and not about the core justifications for protecting creative works. Moreover, the discussion has little to do with ownership and more to do with demonstrating how much money one side has lost from “piracy” and how much creativity another group can show has thrived where someone’s copyrighted property has been used without permission, whether “fairly” or not. Just because someone can generate more money from taking a painting or creative work from someone else doesn’t make that stealing a justifiable act. And just because you can download or share information and you can grow the economy by doing so does not, legally and ethically speaking, justify taking that information or file and your copying and sending it to others.

Free flow of information should be a goal and essentially is the value that the Internet facilitates and creates. But intentional stealing or taking of another’s work is, at base, unfair. Groups like Creative Commons (www.creativecommons.org) recognize this—protection of artistic integrity is important for creators. How a copyright is licensed or enforced is a whole other subject. But, while the world debates enforcement, strength of laws, and how a copyright regime should be structured, we should all be aware of what is fair for the creators out there. They do not have to share any of their works with us and providing some protections to creators is just the incentive for them to share. Copyright claims may surely be out of control, and fair use under severe attack from all sides, but it is essential that fairness rules the day. Consumers cannot get everything for free and authors and copyright owners need to embrace new ways of doing business and models for delivering content access in a seamless-experience manner at a price point people generally can accept and even enjoy.

To qualify as a word mark, that mark must be composed only of characters or letters corresponding to the Roman alphabet (e.g., A, B, C…), Arabic Numbering (e.g., 1, 2, 3…), and orthographic symbols which help correctly read the mark (e.g.,  – , . ‘ ¿? ¡! “ ” …).

If marks include other symbols (e.g., & # @ \ + …) the Mexican IP Institute will require amending the mark to a Design Mark.  This may not seem like a major issue, but filing properly will save time in prosecution and help you avoid potential pitfalls down the road.

Now, copyright is granted under the Constitution in the Intellectual Property Clause, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8, in order to provide an ownership incentive to people to create and innovate and share their creations with the public without the fear of them being stolen. That original grant of copyright was 14 years, which is much shorter than the current copyright term of life plus 70 years, the lengthening of which had little to do with incentive to create and share and more to do with financial concerns.

Why does this matter? Well, for the sake of commentary, it matters because the argument has become about money and not about the core justifications for protecting creative works. Moreover, the discussion has little to do with ownership and more to do with demonstrating how much money one side has lost from “piracy” and how much creativity another group can show has thrived where someone’s copyrighted property has been used without permission, whether “fairly” or not. Just because someone can generate more money from taking a painting or creative work from someone else doesn’t make that stealing a justifiable act. And just because you can download or share information and you can grow the economy by doing so does not, legally and ethically speaking, justify taking that information or file and your copying and sending it to others.

Free flow of information should be a goal and essentially is the value that the Internet facilitates and creates. But intentional stealing or taking of another’s work is, at base, unfair. Groups like Creative Commons (www.creativecommons.org) recognize this—protection of artistic integrity is important for creators. How a copyright is licensed or enforced is a whole other subject. But, while the world debates enforcement, strength of laws, and how a copyright regime should be structured, we should all be aware of what is fair for the creators out there. They do not have to share any of their works with us and providing some protections to creators is just the incentive for them to share. Copyright claims may surely be out of control, and fair use under severe attack from all sides, but it is essential that fairness rules the day. Consumers cannot get everything for free and authors and copyright owners need to embrace new ways of doing business and models for delivering content access in a seamless-experience manner at a price point people generally can accept and even enjoy.

Whether or not that translation is correct, domain name expansion could be a trademark owner’s greatest nightmare, already having to deal with cybersquatters and others whose only tools up to now had been Latin characters. So, how does ICANN plan to address these trademark issues? Well, it proposes what it calls the Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) Procedure, which is an expedited process to provide trademark holders with a rapid take-down of infringing sites in clear cut instances of trademark abuse. While the standard generally would be the same as the already existing Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP), trademark holders would have a higher burden of proof to meet under the new procedure. Trademark holders would have to show (1) that the registered domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a mark in which the Complainant (2) holds a valid registration issued by a jurisdiction that conducts a substantive examination of trademark applications prior to registration; and (3) that the Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name and; (4) the domain was registered and is being used in bad faith. As these matters develop there we will see how the procedures will be implemented and surely will merit commentary in the future.

What we do know now, however, is that avoiding an issue in the future is always the best policy. Businesses and others should prepare for the upcoming Internet name expansion, secure newly available domains, and capitalize on that virtual real estate ICANN will make available. Develop a plan and make a domain name wish list, consider your target audience and the language(s) it speaks, and weigh the factors relevant to you in making that list.