Tm problem?

[Dean]

I have just been informed of this. Now I dont really understand exactly what they are TMing but I think its the design and possibly the phrase "blogz z" so I assume its ok to have a domain blogz.tld without any legal problems?

 

[jberryhill]

TESS links are session-specific.

Nobody knows what you were trying to link there.

 

[Dean]

Woops, just go uspto.gov and do a trademark search for blogz.

 

[jberryhill]

so I assume its ok to have a domain blogz.tld without any legal problems?

Disclaimer NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "BLOGS" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN


http://tess2.uspto.gov/tmdb/tmep/1200.htm#_T120903j

1209.03(j) Phonetic Equivalent

A slight misspelling of a word will not turn a descriptive or generic word into a non-descriptive mark. See C-Thru Ruler Co. v. Needleman, 190 USPQ 93 (E.D. Pa. 1976) (C-THRU held to be the equivalent of “see-through” and, therefore, merely descriptive of transparent rulers and drafting aids); In re Hubbard Milling Co., 6 USPQ2d 1239 (TTAB 1987) (MINERAL-LYX held generic for mineral licks for feeding livestock).

http://tess2.uspto.gov/tmdb/tmep/1200.htm#_T121308c
1213.08(c) Disclaimer of Misspelled Words

Marks often comprise words that may be characterized as “misspelled.” For example, marks may comprise terms that are “telescoped” (see TMEP §1213.05(a)(i)) or terms that are phonetic equivalents of particular words but spelled in a manner that varies from the ordinary spelling of such words.

If a mark comprises a word or words that are misspelled but nonetheless must be disclaimed, the examining attorney should require disclaimer of the word or words in the correct spelling. See In re Omaha National Corp., 819 F.2d 1117, 2 USPQ2d 1859 (Fed. Cir. 1987); In re Newport Fastener Co. Inc., 5 USPQ2d 1064, 1067 n.4 (TTAB 1987). The entry of a disclaimer does not necessarily render registrable a mark that is otherwise unregistrable.

 

[Dean]

OK, could you explain it in plain English please? I understand Blogs.tld wouldnt have a problem but would Blogz.tld have a problem?

 

[flamewalker]

Published for Opposition August 5, 2008
http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=77272546

I can't tell if its a logo only mark, or includes the word mark "Blogz Z". AFAIK, using the phrase "blogz" to ... well host a blog(s), should be ok since it is descriptive of the service, as jb pointed out that the simple misspelling doesn't make it non-descriptive.

IMO, blogz.tld should be fine when used for their descriptive uses, or for a completely seperate use than what their TM app is for:

IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Communications software for connecting people over the internet and other communications networks

IC 038. US 100 101 104. G & S: Broadcasting programs via a global computer network, audio and video broadcasting services over the Internet, broadcasting of cable television programs, cable television broadcasting, satellite television broadcasting, television broadcasting, voice chat services, providing online chat rooms and electronic bulletin boards for transmission of messages among users in the field of general interest, instant messaging services, and transmission of sound, video and information from web cams, video camera or mobile phones, all featuring live or recorded materials

IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: Online journals, namely, blogs featuring information in the field of Art, Business, Culture, Education, Entertainment, Environment, Fashion, Health, History, Home and Garden, Jobs, Music, News, Paranormal Phenomena, Politics, Real Estate, Sciencie, Sports, Technology, Travel and Weather

IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: Providing a web site featuring temporary use of non downloadable software allowing website users to upload, post and display online videos for sharing with others for entertainment purposes

IMO their TM app is overly broad. Especially the part about blogs that cover basically everything. Now if they are just claiming the exact phrase "blogz z" (not just 'blogz'), or it is a design mark, that will make a load of difference I believe. Maybe jberryhill can clear that part up.

If you are concerned and have any blogz.tld, you might want to consider challenging the tm asap... as it is available for opposition as of today. I wouldn't recommend challenging it yourself... get legal help if you feel you have a real reason for concern.

 

[Dean]

Thanks, I do have a blogz.tld but I am not to concerned as it seems I would be ok, however the domain is currently parked which I know isnt good if there are any TM problems. Anyway there TM is for Blogz Z and not Blogz which I think means I am safe. Thanks for the help, rep added.