Trademarking the bands name?

[QORC]

unless you get signed and go big-time, does it matter? would you be willing to pursue some other band in some other State (or country) legally to enforce it? Costs $$

 

[12BitSlab]

I have had a company name trademarked as well as a number of service marks. We engaged outside counsel that specializes in intellectual property stuff.

Also, when we do find offenders, we ask outside counsel if we should pursue the infringer. Sometimes they say, "Yes" and sometimes they say, "No." We heed their advice and it has worked well for us.

 

[Space Pickle]

Can you give me an example of what you're talking about? The issue is consumer confusion. Just adding numbers to a name is unlikely to make you safe from a trademark claim.

Two bands I always thought did this were Death From Above 1979 and Blink 182.

 

[Music Attorney]

I'm curious, how would this apply to a trademark used primarily on the internet, since it's not tied to a geographical area?

Those pesky Internets do create geographical problems. If a band/business properly registers the URL and there is no Federal trademark claim aginst the URL being registered, then I imagine the issue would come down to whether Band A with common law rights in California is using the URL to sell goods in New York and has the same or similar name to Band B with common law rights in New York. This is pretty academic stuff and outside my expertise so I'm going to leave it at that with the possibility I could be wrong. It just isn't something that comes up in my world.

 

[Music Attorney]

What are the correct steps then? At least generally speaking, don't you have to be able to prove that a trademark is yours and that you're actively using it to be granted federal protection? And you're saying its not necessary to include those symbols on printed materials? Like I said, I got my info 20 years ago and it was related to the printing/graphic design field, specifically whether or not to add the symbols next to logos and slogans on packaging.

Trademarks are about actual use in commerce. If you're selling CDs with DXB Records on the labeling and you don't include those symbols, but you do own a trademark (either local or national), then your trademark rights don't all of sudden go away because you aren't using symbols. Conversely, just using symbols on your CDs doesn't get you a trademark. There are a number of factors that go into the process of acquiring a trademark. Some of which I've discussed in this thread.

 

[Music Attorney]

Isn't that similar to a trademark application being shifted to the supplemental register because it's too descriptive? IE, a burger joint wanted to get a trademark for the name 'Thick and Juicy', and if their burgers really are thick and juicy, it goes to the supplemental register where rights and protections are different?

Honestly, I don't really remember what I was saying of yours that wasn't accurate, but the Supplemental Register is really a different discussion. My point was that some names can't be trademarked because they are too generic to be distinctive enough to identify the goods in a manner where consumers won't be confused (which is the basis for granting a trademark).

 

[Music Attorney]

Two bands I always thought did this were Death From Above 1979 and Blink 182.

There's a lot of back story on the DFA situation. The Blink 182 situation was more generic. However, the bottom line is that the changes came about because of legal action and the changes were done in a manner that resolved the dispute. It's not so much that either change was somehow ironclad as much as the changes were enough to make the problem go away.

And, for the record, DFA has recently dropped the 1979 part of their name.

Edit - what I was responding to in my original reply to the poster was the idea that some change made you safe from trademark infringement. Again, the idea is consumer confusion. If DFA can show that consumers are "likely" to be confused by DFA 1979, then DFA 1979 is going to lose and be found liable for trademark infringement. As I said above, the point is whether you move the name far enough away from where it is to avoid a problem. I can assure you that certain brands (e.g., Disney) are ruthless when it comes to their trademarks. You can have all the legal opinions you want as to whether you're "safe," but if your mark catches the eye of certain companies or brands like Disney, I hope you have a boatload of cash to prove you're right.

 

[Downunderwonder]

Thanks M.A. great to have real information on legal stuff.

 

[twinjet]

Thanks M.A. great to have real information on legal stuff.

Quoted for emphasis! MA's posts have kept me glued to this thread.

 

[Music Attorney]

Quoted for emphasis! MA's posts have kept me glued to this thread.

Responding here, but thanks to all for the kind words.

 

[Metalbasspro]

Where do we send the fees for legal services?