- Total posts: 333
Seems damned weird to me, esp when the IP Aust website extols the virtues of the protection afforded by having a trademark.
I totally agree mate, although I can appreciate some outcomes that have transpired in the past.
Without boring you crazy and apologies to the OP for straying offtopic, another example would be this.
Imagine Flying Solo attracted 1 million members over a long period of time and through their hard work were in a position to charge a $10 membership fee from each member resulting in a $10,000,000 turnover each year.
You or I see this and think hmm … Flying Solo isn’t a registered trademark. I think I’ll register it in the class of computers etc and with a description of subscription information forums/services. I’ll have them shut down and take their domain name.
Can you see what’s wrong with this picture?
People do have rights believe it or not.
However if Flying Solo had only 3 members (hardly a market share) they would have an extremely hard time convincing the courts they had built enough good will.
Same with the bigfoot t-shirts. If the existing company had been around 10 years and done very little marketing and sold only 3 shirts, they too would find it extremely hard convincing the courts.
As I said, it’s hazy at best and each case is taken on it’s own merit. There is no black and white.