Re:Photographer Sues Kat Von D over Miles Davis Tattoo
by BoysenberryPi on Tuesday February 16, 2021 @05:19PM
(#26159465)
IANAL but the idea that you lose your trademark if you don't actively enforce it is not true except in rare edge cases. Whether or not this is an edge case is up to the courts.
Re:Photographer Sues Kat Von D over Miles Davis Tattoo
by chrismcb on Wednesday February 17, 2021 @12:03AM
(#26162911)
What edge cases? Yes, you can most your trademark. It isnt so much as I'd you actively enforce it, but rather if you let the term fall into regular use.
Re:Photographer Sues Kat Von D over Miles Davis Tattoo
by sneak on Tuesday February 16, 2021 @05:40PM
(#26159697)
Copyright does not work that way, unfortunately.
Re:Photographer Sues Kat Von D over Miles Davis Tattoo
by yodon on Tuesday February 16, 2021 @10:08PM
(#26162167)
Trademark != Copyright (the concern here was with Trademark)
Re:Photographer Sues Kat Von D over Miles Davis Tattoo
by pacificmint on Wednesday February 17, 2021 @07:00AM
(#26165429)
> trademark is supposed to work that way - you lose it if you don’t actively enforce it
That’s an oft repeated myth, but it’s not quite true.
From an article by the EFF:
> The circumstances under which a company could actually lose a trademark—such as abandonment and genericide—are quite limited. Genericide […] is very rare […]. Courts also set a very high bar to show abandonment (usually years of total non-use). Importantly, failure to enforce a mark against every potential infringer does not show abandonment.
[1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/trademark-law-does-not...
Could an argument be made that since Disney has never defended this, then they have no right to complain now? (At least trademark is supposed to work that way - you lose it if you don’t actively enforce it).