Wow, this was looking like such a hornets nest that I wasn't going to say
anything. But I will.
First, the registration does not affect, and can not affect, any current
conflicting use in commerce. Indeed, Rick's and Curt's rights to "Sunbeam
Specialties" and "Classic Sunbeam" will trump any attempt to stop their
businesses or force a name change. Truly, even with the registration,
considering the fact that both Rick and Curt ship nationally and
internationally, each of them would have a good shot at closing down the
conflicting use by the new guy if he tried to market off of their common law
trademarks.
Next, and I wrote on this before, the registration does not give any rights in
and of itself, but is only given meaning by actual use of the trademark.
Third, the term "Sunbeam Car Parts" is probably not a valid trademark
regardless of whether the USPO accepts the registration. Pointedly, what Rick
and Curt sell are "Sunbeam car parts." This has already been tested with
"Shredded Wheat." Nabisco could not get a trademark on the name because it was
simply descriptive. Like the other Sunbeam could not trademark "Toaster", the
interloper cannot trademark "car parts." As "Sunbeam" is descriptive of the
historic manufacturer who's mark is apparently abandoned, its use is not
restricted and the new trademark would only relate to new products.
In short, there is probably a lot of unnecessary angst floating around over
this. No warranty is given by the foregoing, it is a personal rendition and
not a professional rendition, and no attorney-client relationship exists.
Bob Nersesian
|