Community Chat

[esmeraldagooch]

This was from last weeks news.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2015/0822/Michael-Jordan-wins-lawsuit-The-8.9-million-steak-advert...

[esmeraldagooch]

Since her name is out of the ordinary, it's almost like they targeted her.

[missy1]

I have never heard of her. I saw the toy and it's cute. It's all about money. Is her name trademarked? Housewife Kim Z. trademarked her kid Kash's name. Kylie and Kendall want to do it too. 

[Bestdressed]

---

@esmeraldagooch wrote:

This was from last weeks news.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2015/0822/Michael-Jordan-wins-lawsuit-The-8.9-million-steak-advert...

---

Nice gesture...Michael Jordan is donating the money he won in the lawsuit to Chicago charities.

[chickenbutt]

I have no way of knowing what this manufacturer's intent was but lots of people have unusual names.

Heck, I have an unusual name and my (maiden) last name was also quite unusual.  Imagine my surprise when I learned that I wasn't the only person with that name.

At one time, eons ago before I ever got married (dinosaurs still walked the earth), I lived in a VERY tiny town.   I'm talking extremely small with one main street and just little offshoot streets.  It was maybe a mile long, if even that.

One day I went into a place and made a purchase.   The merchant is standing there looking at my check and looking at me.  Finally I asked if there was a problem.  Long story short - there was another person with my exact same first and last name living in that tiny little town!  I was shocked.

Anyway, what with the internet and all, I've learned that pretty much any given name probably belongs to numerous people.  So I wouldn't think that this individual has a case unless it can be shown that her name was used for malicious purposes.  At the very most maybe they could be ordered to not use her name.   But, just like the rest of us (who are not trademarked) even though we have a name, it doesn't belong to just us.

[Cats3000]

It's not just a name.  It's her name.  It's not that the toy is or isn't cute.  It's not whether or not it resembles her; that's a matter for individuals who look at the toy.  The company used her name without her permission.  That's the problem.  What she sues for is a matter between her, her agent and her lawyer.

[GingerPeach]

It will be interesting to see what the outcome of the case is.

Maybe it will help folks to understand trademark law.  It is not based on whether a name is unusual. 

[Say Nay]

Emotional damage from a stuffed animal? 

[GingerPeach]

---

@Cats3000 wrote:

It's not just a name.  It's her name.  It's not that the toy is or isn't cute.  It's not whether or not it resembles her; that's a matter for individuals who look at the toy.  The company used her name without her permission.  That's the problem.  What she sues for is a matter between her, her agent and her lawyer.

---

@Cats3000

Finally, somebody who understands the issue.  Thank you.

People seem to think "trademark" is something completely different from what it really is.

[Pearlee]

---

@Cats3000 wrote:

What she sues for is a matter between her, her agent and her lawyer.

---

@ Well, that's true.  But when the story hits the NY Post and the rest of the media, it's fair game for public comment, which is what we are doing here.