We're talking about legal business issues here.. do not assume logic or
common sense will rule the day.
We need to consider that if he is granted trademark rights, it's
largely the same result as if Sunbeam had been around all these years
and sold them to him. The license $ may not be as much a motivation to
order others to "cease and desist" using the brands as to maintain
legal standing for when he goes after someone bigger that may try to
horn in on using the brand relative to his "new" car. Any lack of
consistency on his part around enforcing the rights, will compromise
his legal position in protecting them. This is why Disney lawyers go
after even the smallest "mom & pop" shops selling fake Mickey mouse
stuff on e-Bay. It's not the license money they're after, it's all
about protecting their brand investment.
As I mentioned before, the prior use of the brands in public domain are
probably all the leverage needed to stop his application or force him
to establish a "free license" for specific pre-existing
businesses/clubs.
BUT, Once he has established legal trademark rights.. all the legal
burden shifts, and he is in the drivers seat, and all of us would need
to fight a court battle to overwhelmingly demonstrate the prior public
use of the trademark, and still may not win the legal argument.
Stephen
--- CANISDOG@aol.com wrote:
> I don't think it would apply to anything but "regalia" stuff. Even
> the
> chrome strips "TIGER" "ALPINE" are reproductions of original parts
> and would not
> be in danger.
> He cannot collect on what has been around for 40 years.
>
> In my 30 years toying with these cars, I have never purchase a hat,
> patch,
> shirt or anything else. There can't be that much money at stake!
>
__________________________________
Discover Yahoo!
Use Yahoo! to plan a weekend, have fun online and more. Check it out!
http://discover.yahoo.com/
|