Archives for May 2013
To be caught in a situation where your mark has lost its distinctiveness is truly awful, and potentially disastrous to companies or trademark owners. When you create a mark, with its uniquely coined name and/or logo, and seek protection for that creation, you would surely believe that it is exclusive and that no one else has it, uses it, or can use it.
Having confidence that it is a unique mark, you are eager to develop the goodwill of the mark, and building goodwill – as we all know – requires substantial expenditure, time and effort.
One day, my brother and I were playing on the ESCALATOR. I wanted to play FRISBEEi but my brother wanted to practise tricks with his YO-YO instead. He had learnt the tricks from a VIDEOTAPE that mother had bought him last Christmas. I got a lousy WALKMANii instead. Suddenly, I realised that Lucas, the HEROIN addict was right behind us. He had multiple BAND-AIDS on his arm. The ZIPPER on his pants was broken; his pants were held together only with CELLOPHANE tape. He smelled horrible, like a mixture of CLOROXiii and KEROSENE. We were so afraid of him that we ran up the ESCALATOR. In my panic I tripped over the loose LINOLEUM floor covering on the landing and broke the THERMOS I was holding. When I got home my head was hurting so badly my mother gave me an ASPIRIN and sent me straight to bed.
Noticed anything peculiar about the above story? No? Well apart from the exceedingly poor storyline, the bolded words in the above paragraph are all trademarks. However, apart fromCLOROX, FRISBEE and WALKMAN, all of them are no longer given protection in the US as they have become generic and are no longer able to function as an indication of origin.