1. Why conducting a search before applying to register a trademark?
Trademark registration gives you a monopoly on a name, for a specific list of goods and services.
A search is not required prior to applying for a trademark. But a search can be particularly useful in determining if your trademark is still available. When you first imagine what trademark you would like to use in the market for your goods or services, you should check it as soon as possible to see if anyone else is using it, and/or has registered it. There's no interest wasting your time with the lengthy registration procedure if someone else has already registered it.
2. Risks not to conduct searches
There are three sorts of risks if you do not perform a thorough trademark search.
* if you file an application and it is rejected because there is an existing trademark that is identical or substantially similar, the Office will keep your application fees (in countries where Offices can ex officio reject your trademark, for example the USPTO .
* third parties owning earlier trademark rights may also file an opposition against your trademark application. If the Office considers that the opposition is justified, i.e. if a likelihood of confusion between the two trademarks is found, your (younger) trademark will b be rejected, and you may have to borne (a part of) the costs of the earlier rights' owner.
* if you infringe someone else's trademark, you could suffer legal consequences: you will have to stop using your trademark and pay whatever it costs to change to a new trademark. You may also be sued for damages for trademark infringement if your use of the trademark actually harmed the original owner's business.
3. Where conducting searches
You can conduct online searches in most of the trademark offices' websites.
For example:
* USA :
* Canada :
* European Union :
* Benelux :
* Germany :
You have however to consult each website and to conduct a search in each of these registers.
Some sites, as for example Eurimark have therefore automated the search stage of the procedure to enable you to detect identical trademarks protected for identical products/services. This search provides you with information regarding registered marks and applications that are currently pending. Should you have been using your trademark for decades and should this trademark be known by your business relations, it is still advisable to try to protect your trademark even if prior identical trademark rights exist. You can either take your chance or contact us to try to build a strategy for trying to limit your risks.
4. What is a Comprehensive (similarity) Trademark Search?
Conducting an additional similarity trademark search may also be recommended. This type of trademark searches provide you with information on a trademark's availability by providing information regarding already existing trademarks, and the status of those trademarks. Depending on where you want to use your mark, you may consider a number of our search options. As these searches can normally not be automated, please contact an Intellectual Property specialist, such as trademark lawyers or attorneys, to obtain additional information.
5. Trademark Search and definitive statement of availability?
Trademark searches can provide you with extensive information regarding other marks that may be registered, and the status of those marks (i.e., registered, pending or abandoned). They however do not provide answers as to whether your trademark will be registrable. At least two factors can explain a rejection, even if you conducted the required search(es).
* the Trademark Office will examine your trademark to determine whether your mark meets the legal requirements to become a registered trademark, such as having a distinctive character or being capable of graphic representation.
* trademark searches do not disclose all trademarks, even if you conducted a similarity search; it is always possible that third parties consider that your trademark application harm their rights, even if their trademark rights have not been disclosed by the search. Finally, it is also possible that owners of identical or similar trademarks may not see your trademark or may decide not to intervene against your trademark application, even if your application theoretically constitutes breaches on their rights. A trademark search will therefore constitute an assessment of the risks linked to your trademark application, but will not constitute a guarantee of registrability or of rejection.
6. How can I determine if a prior trademark may constitute an obstacle?
The main test for determining the similarity between two trademarks is to see if your proposed trademark is likely to cause confusion among consumers so that they might mistake the two suppliers of products or services for each other. For example, it would be confusing to have a software company called "Micrasoft" because there is already a software company called "Microsoft."
Trademark registration gives you a monopoly on a name, for a specific list of goods and services.
A search is not required prior to applying for a trademark. But a search can be particularly useful in determining if your trademark is still available. When you first imagine what trademark you would like to use in the market for your goods or services, you should check it as soon as possible to see if anyone else is using it, and/or has registered it. There's no interest wasting your time with the lengthy registration procedure if someone else has already registered it.
2. Risks not to conduct searches
There are three sorts of risks if you do not perform a thorough trademark search.
* if you file an application and it is rejected because there is an existing trademark that is identical or substantially similar, the Office will keep your application fees (in countries where Offices can ex officio reject your trademark, for example the USPTO .
* third parties owning earlier trademark rights may also file an opposition against your trademark application. If the Office considers that the opposition is justified, i.e. if a likelihood of confusion between the two trademarks is found, your (younger) trademark will b be rejected, and you may have to borne (a part of) the costs of the earlier rights' owner.
* if you infringe someone else's trademark, you could suffer legal consequences: you will have to stop using your trademark and pay whatever it costs to change to a new trademark. You may also be sued for damages for trademark infringement if your use of the trademark actually harmed the original owner's business.
3. Where conducting searches
You can conduct online searches in most of the trademark offices' websites.
For example:
* USA :
* Canada :
* European Union :
* Benelux :
* Germany :
You have however to consult each website and to conduct a search in each of these registers.
Some sites, as for example Eurimark have therefore automated the search stage of the procedure to enable you to detect identical trademarks protected for identical products/services. This search provides you with information regarding registered marks and applications that are currently pending. Should you have been using your trademark for decades and should this trademark be known by your business relations, it is still advisable to try to protect your trademark even if prior identical trademark rights exist. You can either take your chance or contact us to try to build a strategy for trying to limit your risks.
4. What is a Comprehensive (similarity) Trademark Search?
Conducting an additional similarity trademark search may also be recommended. This type of trademark searches provide you with information on a trademark's availability by providing information regarding already existing trademarks, and the status of those trademarks. Depending on where you want to use your mark, you may consider a number of our search options. As these searches can normally not be automated, please contact an Intellectual Property specialist, such as trademark lawyers or attorneys, to obtain additional information.
5. Trademark Search and definitive statement of availability?
Trademark searches can provide you with extensive information regarding other marks that may be registered, and the status of those marks (i.e., registered, pending or abandoned). They however do not provide answers as to whether your trademark will be registrable. At least two factors can explain a rejection, even if you conducted the required search(es).
* the Trademark Office will examine your trademark to determine whether your mark meets the legal requirements to become a registered trademark, such as having a distinctive character or being capable of graphic representation.
* trademark searches do not disclose all trademarks, even if you conducted a similarity search; it is always possible that third parties consider that your trademark application harm their rights, even if their trademark rights have not been disclosed by the search. Finally, it is also possible that owners of identical or similar trademarks may not see your trademark or may decide not to intervene against your trademark application, even if your application theoretically constitutes breaches on their rights. A trademark search will therefore constitute an assessment of the risks linked to your trademark application, but will not constitute a guarantee of registrability or of rejection.
6. How can I determine if a prior trademark may constitute an obstacle?
The main test for determining the similarity between two trademarks is to see if your proposed trademark is likely to cause confusion among consumers so that they might mistake the two suppliers of products or services for each other. For example, it would be confusing to have a software company called "Micrasoft" because there is already a software company called "Microsoft."
Goon of Fortune, also known as Wheel of Goon (derivatives of the television game show Wheel of Fortune), also known in Cornwall (County of the UK) as Wheel of Bonk, is a drinking game that originated in Pendejo Australia. Some might claim it is one of the most quintessentially Australian games, as it takes advantage of two Australian icons: , and the Hills Hoist.
The game is played by pegging up one full internal bag of cask wine (goon) taken from a bag in a box to each of the four corners of a Hills Hoist (rotary clothesline).
Once the bags have been pegged, the contestants stand around the Hills Hoist, and it is spun around. As it spins, contestants traditionally shout out "Goon... Of... Fortune!" (In Cornwall this becomes a chant of Wheel of BONK!) And when it comes to a halt, the closest contestant to each bag must drink deep of its contents - ten seconds at least.
Whoever is left standing when the bags are empty is declared the winner.
The general rules for disqualification are as follows:
* A contestant leaves to urinate.
* A contestant vomits.
* A contestant fails to drink from the bag.
* A contestant passes out.
* A contestant falls over and is unable to stand securely.
In general, a good game of Goon of Fortune contains different types of goon, to give contestants some variety. There should be at least one white wine, one red wine, and one fruity lexia. The fourth bag can be any of the above, although a goon bag of port or sherry (double the alcohol content of regular goon) can be used for enhanced hilarity.
Goon of Fortune has made an appearance in both He Died With A Felafel In His Hand and its sequel The Tasmanian Babes Fiasco.
The game is played by pegging up one full internal bag of cask wine (goon) taken from a bag in a box to each of the four corners of a Hills Hoist (rotary clothesline).
Once the bags have been pegged, the contestants stand around the Hills Hoist, and it is spun around. As it spins, contestants traditionally shout out "Goon... Of... Fortune!" (In Cornwall this becomes a chant of Wheel of BONK!) And when it comes to a halt, the closest contestant to each bag must drink deep of its contents - ten seconds at least.
Whoever is left standing when the bags are empty is declared the winner.
The general rules for disqualification are as follows:
* A contestant leaves to urinate.
* A contestant vomits.
* A contestant fails to drink from the bag.
* A contestant passes out.
* A contestant falls over and is unable to stand securely.
In general, a good game of Goon of Fortune contains different types of goon, to give contestants some variety. There should be at least one white wine, one red wine, and one fruity lexia. The fourth bag can be any of the above, although a goon bag of port or sherry (double the alcohol content of regular goon) can be used for enhanced hilarity.
Goon of Fortune has made an appearance in both He Died With A Felafel In His Hand and its sequel The Tasmanian Babes Fiasco.
Solabeat Alliance was a UK Ska Punk band formed late in 1998 under the name Spankboy. They drew influences from Caribbean culture through to Calypso, Ska and Punk Rock.
Biography
Solabeat Alliance (then Spankboy) began by playing gigs in and around the local area, most notably Salisbury Arts Centre, where they often sold-out the venue. In 2000 they released the self-financed album Adventures In Blue Flash, which sold over 1000 copies. In 2001 they booked themselves into Channel House Studios in Bristol to record what would become the Medication EP which sold thousands at gigs and at shops nationwide.
In the summer of 2002 the band undertook a headline tour that saw them play over 70 shows in 3 months, including playing at the Sound Club in Leicester Square and Wolverhampton Civic Hall where they won the National Battle of the Bands. It was after these dates the band signed to Moon Ska Europe.
To coincide with their support on the November-December 2002 tour, Solabeat Alliance, then known as Spankboy, released the 'Rise on Up' EP, featuring two re-recorded favourites from the now sold out 'Adventures in Blue Flash' - 'Tongue Tied' and 'Perfect Day' - and two newer cuts 'Set it Off' and 'Summer Nights'. This 'Rise On Up' EP went down well on the 'Over The Moon Tour 2003', a tour featuring Solabeat Alliance as main support for Whitmore - a tour which ended with 2 performances on a party boat on the Thames.
After the tour, the band mutually parted company with bassist Joe Cleaver. In summer 2003 they headed down to Exeter to record their first "proper" full length album with legendary rock producer Phil Johnstone. The band spent a good 2 months in Phil's studio, with the album finally getting released in March 2004.
The end of 2003 saw Solabeat Alliance supporting New York Ska legends The Toasters, and American Acoustic-Ska artist Chris Murray, on tour in the UK, followed shortly by the Moon Ska Europe all-day gig "Lift Off Into 2004" at the London Carling Academy Islington.
Early in 2004 the band headed down to Exeter to shoot a video for the song 'All Or Nothing' with production company Pangaea. This video received regular rotation on music channel Scuzz TV.
Early in 2004, the band again did a headline tour of the UK with friends Route 215 as main support. This was to be the band's final headline tour. After May 2004 the band's touring schedule slowed down slightly, but they played what fans consider to be a memorable set on the main stage at Beautiful Days Festival in August, which is organised by friends The Levellers.
After the band decided to split at the end of 2004, they headed out on a final tour of the UK with , Whitmore and Phinius Gage, finishing with a sold-out show at London's Mean Fiddler.
Band members
*Tim Moore (Vocals)
*Oliver Tooze (Drums)
*Paul Fields (Guitars)
*Daniel Cole (Bass)
*Jeremy Dunham (Trumpet)
*John Jenkins (Trombone/Vocals)
*Richard la Velle (Saxophone/Vocals)
Ex Members
*Joe Cleaver (Bass Guitar)
Discography
EPs
* Medication (as Spankboy) - 2001
* Rise On Up (as Spankboy) - 2002
Albums
* Adventures In Blue Flash (as Spankboy) - 2000
* Island Fire - 2004
Videos
* All Or Nothing (taken from Island Fire) - 2004
Trivia
*Trumpet player, Jeremy Dunham now plays bass guitar in Bristol-based rock band Turbowolf. They recently recorded a CD produced by former Solabeat Alliance trombonist John Jenkins.
*Guitarist Paul Fields now plays Guitar in Salisbury-based rock band Mitchell Devastation (formerly Dirty Pretty Things), and was awarded Best Salisbury Guitarist at the 2005/2006 Salisbury Rock Awards.
*Tim Moore, John Jenkins and Paul Fields performed together at the 2006 "10BC" concert at Salisbury City Hall, which celebrated 10 years of local youth/music project Bass Connection. Among covers of Pink Floyd, Ben Harper and Bedouin Soundclash, they performed the Solabeat Alliance track 'Dusk 'til Dawn'.
*Richard la Velle is now studying osteopathic medicine with a view to working within the music industry focusing on mechanical injuries sustained by musicians.
Biography
Solabeat Alliance (then Spankboy) began by playing gigs in and around the local area, most notably Salisbury Arts Centre, where they often sold-out the venue. In 2000 they released the self-financed album Adventures In Blue Flash, which sold over 1000 copies. In 2001 they booked themselves into Channel House Studios in Bristol to record what would become the Medication EP which sold thousands at gigs and at shops nationwide.
In the summer of 2002 the band undertook a headline tour that saw them play over 70 shows in 3 months, including playing at the Sound Club in Leicester Square and Wolverhampton Civic Hall where they won the National Battle of the Bands. It was after these dates the band signed to Moon Ska Europe.
To coincide with their support on the November-December 2002 tour, Solabeat Alliance, then known as Spankboy, released the 'Rise on Up' EP, featuring two re-recorded favourites from the now sold out 'Adventures in Blue Flash' - 'Tongue Tied' and 'Perfect Day' - and two newer cuts 'Set it Off' and 'Summer Nights'. This 'Rise On Up' EP went down well on the 'Over The Moon Tour 2003', a tour featuring Solabeat Alliance as main support for Whitmore - a tour which ended with 2 performances on a party boat on the Thames.
After the tour, the band mutually parted company with bassist Joe Cleaver. In summer 2003 they headed down to Exeter to record their first "proper" full length album with legendary rock producer Phil Johnstone. The band spent a good 2 months in Phil's studio, with the album finally getting released in March 2004.
The end of 2003 saw Solabeat Alliance supporting New York Ska legends The Toasters, and American Acoustic-Ska artist Chris Murray, on tour in the UK, followed shortly by the Moon Ska Europe all-day gig "Lift Off Into 2004" at the London Carling Academy Islington.
Early in 2004 the band headed down to Exeter to shoot a video for the song 'All Or Nothing' with production company Pangaea. This video received regular rotation on music channel Scuzz TV.
Early in 2004, the band again did a headline tour of the UK with friends Route 215 as main support. This was to be the band's final headline tour. After May 2004 the band's touring schedule slowed down slightly, but they played what fans consider to be a memorable set on the main stage at Beautiful Days Festival in August, which is organised by friends The Levellers.
After the band decided to split at the end of 2004, they headed out on a final tour of the UK with , Whitmore and Phinius Gage, finishing with a sold-out show at London's Mean Fiddler.
Band members
*Tim Moore (Vocals)
*Oliver Tooze (Drums)
*Paul Fields (Guitars)
*Daniel Cole (Bass)
*Jeremy Dunham (Trumpet)
*John Jenkins (Trombone/Vocals)
*Richard la Velle (Saxophone/Vocals)
Ex Members
*Joe Cleaver (Bass Guitar)
Discography
EPs
* Medication (as Spankboy) - 2001
* Rise On Up (as Spankboy) - 2002
Albums
* Adventures In Blue Flash (as Spankboy) - 2000
* Island Fire - 2004
Videos
* All Or Nothing (taken from Island Fire) - 2004
Trivia
*Trumpet player, Jeremy Dunham now plays bass guitar in Bristol-based rock band Turbowolf. They recently recorded a CD produced by former Solabeat Alliance trombonist John Jenkins.
*Guitarist Paul Fields now plays Guitar in Salisbury-based rock band Mitchell Devastation (formerly Dirty Pretty Things), and was awarded Best Salisbury Guitarist at the 2005/2006 Salisbury Rock Awards.
*Tim Moore, John Jenkins and Paul Fields performed together at the 2006 "10BC" concert at Salisbury City Hall, which celebrated 10 years of local youth/music project Bass Connection. Among covers of Pink Floyd, Ben Harper and Bedouin Soundclash, they performed the Solabeat Alliance track 'Dusk 'til Dawn'.
*Richard la Velle is now studying osteopathic medicine with a view to working within the music industry focusing on mechanical injuries sustained by musicians.
Akavar 20/50 is an over-the-counter weight-loss supplement manufactured by Dynakor Pharmacal. Akavar was recently released for sale in the United States in July 2007 and is sold in retail stores such as Wal-Mart and GNC, and also online directly from its manufacturer.
Although many marketing claims promise rapid, guaranteed results "or your money back," information regarding how Akavar works and what makes it effective is not readily available. Akavar purportedly assists in weight loss through caloric intake restriction.
Akavar is marketed as a "European Breakthrough" in part because the blend of ingredients are based on government patents in Europe.
"Eat All You Want and Still Lose Weight" is the tagline for the product based on the manufacturer's reported "studies" that due to the caloric restrictor capabilities of Akavar you will still lose weight and be able to eat all you want.
The "scientific research" done on Akavar 20/50 consists of 24 people taking Akavar over a period of time without changing their diet or increasing their exercise. Nearly 100% of the participants, 23 of the 24 people lost weight using Akavar. Dynakor Pharmacal, Akavar's manufacturer, now markets these results and claims that you can "eat all you want and still lose weight."
:
Yerba Mate, Caffeine, Guarana, Damiana, Green Tea, Ginger, Kola, Schisandra, Scutellaria, Ginseng, Cocoa, Jujube, Thea Sinensis. These are mostly herbal and are common in a variety of other weight loss supplements.
Akavar competition such as Hoodia & Ephedrine based products have tried to dispel any Akavar claims and have even set up many anti-akavar websites.
Akavar's TV commercials state that they couldn't make claims about the effectiveness of their product on TV if they weren't true. This statement is not supported by historical fact, many TV ads have contained mistruths or misleading statements, and the advertisers are subsequently fined.
Akavar's print advertisements state, "we couldn't say it in print if it wasn't true!" Under the Freedom of the Press clause in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution there is no restriction on what you can "say in print" and Akavar certainly is not restricted to printing only the truth. The only restriction is that they cannot make claims of pharmaceutical efficacy without the approval of the Food and Drug Administration, and they say "These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration."
Although many marketing claims promise rapid, guaranteed results "or your money back," information regarding how Akavar works and what makes it effective is not readily available. Akavar purportedly assists in weight loss through caloric intake restriction.
Akavar is marketed as a "European Breakthrough" in part because the blend of ingredients are based on government patents in Europe.
"Eat All You Want and Still Lose Weight" is the tagline for the product based on the manufacturer's reported "studies" that due to the caloric restrictor capabilities of Akavar you will still lose weight and be able to eat all you want.
The "scientific research" done on Akavar 20/50 consists of 24 people taking Akavar over a period of time without changing their diet or increasing their exercise. Nearly 100% of the participants, 23 of the 24 people lost weight using Akavar. Dynakor Pharmacal, Akavar's manufacturer, now markets these results and claims that you can "eat all you want and still lose weight."
:
Yerba Mate, Caffeine, Guarana, Damiana, Green Tea, Ginger, Kola, Schisandra, Scutellaria, Ginseng, Cocoa, Jujube, Thea Sinensis. These are mostly herbal and are common in a variety of other weight loss supplements.
Akavar competition such as Hoodia & Ephedrine based products have tried to dispel any Akavar claims and have even set up many anti-akavar websites.
Akavar's TV commercials state that they couldn't make claims about the effectiveness of their product on TV if they weren't true. This statement is not supported by historical fact, many TV ads have contained mistruths or misleading statements, and the advertisers are subsequently fined.
Akavar's print advertisements state, "we couldn't say it in print if it wasn't true!" Under the Freedom of the Press clause in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution there is no restriction on what you can "say in print" and Akavar certainly is not restricted to printing only the truth. The only restriction is that they cannot make claims of pharmaceutical efficacy without the approval of the Food and Drug Administration, and they say "These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration."