| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Courtney writes:
> "Todd Lehman" <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message
> news:G13t90.194@lugnet.com...
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > 2 - is Web Ring a trademark? I dunno. What else can you call it, though?
> >
> > According to the USPTO, Yahoo! (via GeoCities) has a registered • servicemark
> > on WEBRING, with pseudo marks WEB RING and WE BRING, in the goods and • services
> > category of "Computer software, namely a navigation tool that enables • users
> > of a global computer network to obtain access to linked websites that • contain
> > information and services related to specific subset areas."
> >
> > Thus, if any webring is moved off of Yahoo!, it should avoid using the • word
> > "Webring" in its title.
> >
> > --Todd
> >
> > ObDisclaimer: IANAL
>
> This contradicts an email I got from a Webring representative a couple years
> ago, saying that I could in fact use 'Webring' on a system entirely separate
> from theirs. But in that time they very well may have aquired those rights.
To the extent that that e-mail forms a contract (which is relatively weak),
and that e-mail has no specific provisions for review or renewal, I suspect
you could continue using "webring" for the site(s)/system(s) described in that
e-mail (which if the e-mail was fairly general, might encompass any
site/system you administer. It might not be worth defending that grant though
(though if the language was general enough and yet specific enough, and there
was feeling that other evidence besides your copy of the e-mail could be found
to support that e-mail as being a legitimate grant, it's possible that you
might find a lawyer willing to take it on to chip away at Yahoo's ability to
protect the trademark).
Of course all of the above is probably bull pucky since I'm not a lawyer...
> Technically, couldn't I still use the name 'Lego Maniac's WebRing' off-site,
> since I've used that name for 3.5 years - before Yahoo's servicemark??
Given the recent decision about that guy who well established that his
buisiness pre-existed another company's trademark, I doubt it (assuming I'm
remembering that case correctly).
Frank
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
48 Messages in This Thread:
  
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
