Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc:19807 misc.legal:5938
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ukma!gatech!linus!gateway.mitre.org!rzahavi
From: rzahavi@gateway.mitre.org (Ron Zahavi)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Is ARC a valid trademark?
Message-ID: <40404@linus.UUCP>
Date: 29 Sep 88 13:44:49 GMT
References: <1682@qiclab.UUCP> <3190@ttidca.TTI.COM> <10117@eddie.MIT.EDU> <3212@ttidca.TTI.COM>
Sender: news@linus.UUCP
Reply-To: rzahavi@gateway.mitre.org (Ron Zahavi)
Organization: The Mitre Corporation
Lines: 37

In article <1682@qiclab.UUCP> troeger@ttidca.TTI.COM (Jeff Troeger) writes:

>> Is it possible for two companies to hold trademarks on the same name if 
>> the product is markedly different?


I don't believe so, since the gun company just sued GM over the use of the
name 'Barreta' SP?  The argument is that by the use of the same name, one
company is utilizing the 'good' name of, or familiarity with a product of another.


I don't know, however, how this argument relates to actual words.  
I would be interested to find out what the trademark laws
say about such words as 'Apple' or even 'Arc'.  Apple is a fruit and Arc
is used in math.  Do companies have (OR SHOULD HAVE) the right to 
trademark these words.

For example:

I imagine one cannot make a printer and call it the 'Apple printer',
but why couldn't someone open the 'Apple advertising agency'.

Is there a law that distinguishes between 'real words, e.g. Apple' and
'invented words, e.g. Barreta' when it comes to trademarks?. 

  Thanks, Ron.




==============================================================================
      Ron Zahavi  (703) 883-5637                 Mitre Corporation
      rzahavi@gateway.mitre.org                  7525 Colshire Drive
                                                 McLean, VA  22102

Go Terps!
==============================================================================