|
|
|
|
|
by addicted
2083 days ago
|
|
People aren’t able to “trademark single everyday words”. In fact, if a name becomes a simple everyday word the trademark can actually be lost. Thats the reason Google used to discourage people from saying Google it because they were worried they would lose the trademark to the name. What one can do is apply for a trademark to a common word to be used in a specific well defined context where it’s clear it’s applying to your company. And once you get a trademark you don’t automatically own it forever. You have to actively use it and defend its use. Of course, much like anything else in the world, there will be edge cases where the situation is murky and other cases where the outcomes appear outright wrong to most impartial observers. But that’s an artifact of the inherent complexity in trying to balance the various needs as opposed to a problem intrinsic to trademarks themselves. |
|
The short story is that I’d get a form denial for each attempt to use Future, but without any specified reason. A few months later the national phone company launched a new service which they called The Department of the Future - and it suddenly became clear to me why all my names had been denied.
Still feel some bitterness that such an obvious and generic word could be trade-marked - especially as it was an English word and English wasn’t as widespread in Sweden back then as it is now.
Needless to say (for anyone familiar with Telia) Department of the Future was a business failure.