Forum: Author Hangout

Copyright vs. Trademark

PotomacBob 🚫

Who can explain the difference between copyright and trademark in terms so simple that even I can understand the explanation? What prompts this question is a story I heard on the radio that said that the people who owned the trademark to Gourmet magazine failed to renew it, and some other people acquired the Trademark and are now publishing an online version of the magazine. That implies that you have to renew a trademark every so often or lose it. A copyright, I think, is different. Do they also cover different things? Do they offer different protections? How does either affect published stories - including those on SOL?

Replies: Dominions Son DBActive Mushroom semanticist REP

Dominions Son 🚫
Updated:

@PotomacBob

I am not a legal expert. The below is my understanding.

Copyright is for all creative works (music, art, writing). It attaches automatically and lasts for life of the creator + X X is 50 years for most of the world outside the US. That comes from the Bern Convention. The US used to be shorter, now it's longer at 70 years.

Trademarks are vastly different.

1. Trademarks must be applied for.
2. They aren't supposed to grant overly generic trademarks.
3. Trademarks are registered to a specific field of commerce (can be registered for multiple fields) and are only good for the field(s) in which it is registered.
4. Trademarks are for a word, short phrase, or a design. You can't trademark an entire story.
5. Trademarks don't expire. However, unlike copyright, they are use it or lose it. If you stop using a trade mark for commercial purposes in the field it is registered in it becomes void.
6. Using someone else's trademark to refer to the product or company for which it was registered is not a violation of the trade mark. Using it for a competing product in the same field would be a violation.

https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/trademark-patent-copyright

Replies: Michael Loucks Switch Blayde Rodeodoc

Michael Loucks 🚫
Updated:

@Dominions Son

3. Trademarks are registered to a specific field of commerce (can be registered for multiple fields) and are only good for the field(s) in which it is registered.

A perfect example of this was the multi-decade tussle between Apple Computer and Apple Music (the Beatles label, not the current incarnation of iTunes)

See, e.g., The Apple Corps vs. Apple Inc. Trademark Dispute.

Switch Blayde 🚫

@Dominions Son

6. Using someone else's trademark to refer to the product or company for which it was registered is not a violation of the trade mark.

Using it in a disparaging way will get you sued.

Replies: Dominions Son

Dominions Son 🚫

@Switch Blayde

@Dominions Son

6. Using someone else's trademark to refer to the product or company for which it was registered is not a violation of the trade mark.

Using it in a disparaging way will get you sued.

For disparagement, not for trademark infringement.

Rodeodoc 🚫

@Dominions Son

Trademarks can expire in both Canada and the US. A quick search shows a ten year limit, but documents must be files and maintained but the Patents and Trademark Office in order to keep the TM active.

Replies: Rodeodoc

Rodeodoc 🚫

@Rodeodoc

My brain and fingers have gone to sleep while my body appears awake. And I had to go back twice to fix that sentence. "Must be filed and bythe Patents and TM Office,

Replies: ystokes ystokes

ystokes 🚫

@Rodeodoc

"Must be filed and bythe Patents and TM Office,

Don't forget fixing this one.

ystokes 🚫

@Rodeodoc

"Must be filed and bythe Patents and TM Office,

Don't forget fixing this one.

DBActive 🚫
Updated:

@PotomacBob

There are also common law rights to trademarks without registration as well as various state trademark statutes.
A trademark can be lost if not defended by the owner. "Thermos" and "aspirin" are two examples of trademarks that were lost because the original owner didn't protect them. That's why if you order a Coke at a restaurant the server may say "Is Pepsi OK?" If they don't Coke may sue them as they have done with many others. IN the 70s Burger King switched to Pepsi for awhile. Coke responded by sending out hundreds of "undercover" inspectors to order soda and confirm that the server informed them it was Pepsi Some didn't and the franchise owners got sued.

Replies: jimq2 Dominions Son

jimq2 🚫

@DBActive

Think of the Pepsi commercial with the little girl who comes off like the Godfather.

Dominions Son 🚫

@DBActive

IN the 70s Burger King switched to Pepsi for awhile.

They likely switched back to Coke, because Yum Brands owns a number of competing chains and for a while Yum Brands was owned by Pepsi. I think Pepsi was the original owner of Yum but don't feel like verifying that.

All of the Yum Brands restaurants carry Pepsi products.

Mushroom 🚫

@PotomacBob

Who can explain the difference between copyright and trademark in terms so simple that even I can understand the explanation?

In short, it's the difference between the work as published and the name or characters. This can really be seen when dealing with works that have fallen into the public domain.

Case in point, the original version of Betty Boop is now in the public domain, as is the first four Nancy Drew novels. Anybody can now use those characters and setting for free as much as they want.

However, that only applies to those works from 1930. And those versions of the characters are not the same ones that most are familiar with. You are free to use Betty Boop as much as you want, but only the 1930 version where she was still a dog. And only the original 1930 Nancy Drew, not the character that was rewritten or morphed over the decades.

You can even use "Pluto" from Disney, but you have to call him "Rover" and have him owned by Minnie and not Micky.

And in short, those either exist for 95 years, the lifespan of the creator plus 70 years, or so long as they continue to use it.

These areas have actually become increasingly muddy as when the legal concepts were originally created, nobody had expected media to still be created based on such things over a century after they were created.

Replies: jimq2

jimq2 🚫

@Mushroom

During the 50's, my older sister amassed a collection of about 30 original books. Since she has been down sizing, she decided to sell them and found a buyer who offered about $300 for the whole set.

semanticist 🚫

@PotomacBob

Trademarks also have to be defended in order to maintain them. If you become aware of anything that might infringe, you must seek redress from the courts or give up your rights. So, the Apple infringement cases mentioned above weren't just frivolous, nor are any other trademark cases typically. They are a necessary part of maintaining that trademark for your exclusive use within that field.

REP 🚫
Updated:

@PotomacBob

Like DS I am not an expert. For what it is worth, my probably oversimplified explanation follows.

Copyright seems to deal with ownership of a created work (book, painting, etc.)

Trademark seems to be about identification with a company or product.

Both have legal implcations if violated.

Reply to topic

Forum: Author Hangout

Copyright vs. Trademark

WARNING! ADULT CONTENT...