After checking through the "full files" of the trademark on UFO, I can tell those of you that may have been worried that you could no longer use the word ufo on your site that unless you use it with magazine you will be fine. Looking through the full files, it is clear that ufo is trademarked in relation to a magazine, even though the word magazine is not trademarked. The specimens provided to the uspto were covers of UFO Magazine. It says very clearly on the registration that UFO is trademarked for: a magazine published periodically dealing with unidentified flying objects and related phenomena.
It is also clear, for anyone who wants to take time to read TM laws, that any type of infringement or perceived infringement must be dealt with or all rights to the TM could be lost. Britton has two patents and the patent laws are exactly the same, so I totally understand this. By filing and receiving a patent you have an obligation to enforce it, or you will lose it. Even if you are not completely sure someone is infringing on your patent, you must bring to their attention that they may be with a cease and desist letter.
The thing that has really bothered me most about this entire thing is the bashing of UFO Magazine, as though it is some huge corporate giant, trying to squash the little guy. UFO Magazine is not huge, if it were, I think there would be others besides just Nancy doing all the work. UFO Magazine is forced by the TM laws to act just as they are. Why else would they spend time and money going after some guy who isn't selling anything or cutting into their profits? Nobody would waste the time or energy on that unless it was necessary.
Then there are those who seem to think that even having something trademarked and trying to protect that trademark is somehow evil. I have heard this sentiment in regards to patents too. It is ridiculous. If you really want to squash the little guy, then close down the patent and trademark office. Because being able to own something and being able to know that if some huge corporation or someone else tries to rip you off that you have legal rights, is the only thing that gives "the little guy" any rights at all. Sure you may have to waste time and money defending it against someone that will never make a dime using it, but it is better than the alternative of having no rights to your own invention or product.
So in closing, as silly as it may seem to some for UFO Magazine to be bothering with some internet site, there is a legal reason for it. It will take the course that such things take and in the end it may be up to a judge or jury to decide, but that is how it must go, according to the laws of the US patent and trademark office.
12 comments:
Well writ, Lesley.
I would have preferred more hair teeth and eye-balls rolling around the street, of course, but you captured the essence neatly.
One can hardly fault Nancy Birnes for standing up and defending her own home. Decidedly, she's not the bad guy here.
alienview@roadrunner.com
> www.AlienView.net
>> AVG Blog -- http://alienviewgroup.blogspot.com/
>>> U F O M a g a z i n e -- www.ufomag.com
On the subject of the aforementioned "hair teeth and eyeballs"? Allow me to append this commentary:
Got me a _cracker-jack_ idea.
I bought-up the domain names "Earthfiles.net," "Coast2Coast.org," and "Rense.us" and I'm running a mash-up of paranormal foo-feraw I procure from others and don't properly attribute (rather like Victor Martinez) so as to capitalize on the traffic these sites generate and draw the spill-over back to _me_. Pretty slick, huh?
These sites I allude to shouldn't miss the few thousand hits to their pages in the first place, I'm just a not-for-profit "hobby-site" in the second, and in the third? Well, think of the free publicity I can generate for myself if any of these trespassed entities _do_ squawk! I can play the part of stepped on little guy railroaded by the well-moneyed corporate big shots! You can't _pay_ for publicity like that. Seems like a short-cut to the big vein of notoriety for me!
What?
Unethical you say? Unprincipled? Immoral? Unscrupulous? Dishonorable? Disreputable? ...Wrong?
Well, all this and more happened over the weekend, reader. Bill and Nancy Birnes, owners of the one and only "UFO Magazine" are being stepped on in a similar fashion. Their investment, integrity, and property, as considered by one Mike Coletta (ufogeek.com) are without legitimacy and beneath the remotest respect.
http://ufomagazine.net/
~~~
The first time I saw the URL I thought the Birnes had a new feature and went to the address expecting to see something from them. I suspect that's the problem, eh, and not all that "beyond belief" as Mr. Coletta whines unconvincingly. The Birnes have no excuse to be nonplussed in the affair? I mean how _dare_ they?
Rather, "beyond belief" is Mr. Colette's pretended incredulity and sullen intransigence in the matter!
I don't know the legalities involved, but the history, investment, and justice outraged by Mr. Colette seems ponderous enough to trump whatever some crass pretender, like Mr. Colette, might trot out in a slimy 'defense', you know?
With regard to Mr. Colette, he obviously lives in a convenient dream-world where honesty and ethics are drawn only to suit himself. Sincerely, only one as apparently self-deluded such as Mr. Colette could persist in seeing a lack of trespass in this matter. As to “watching and learning” as he advices on his Weblog... LOL!
I suspect that even his conjectured victory is likely to be Pyrrhic, in the end. But he should try to have the fun he can, I suppose. I suspect there will be precious little of that as this unwinds to a tedious denouement.
Additionally, Mr. Colette indicates that I am in the tank for Bill and Nancy Birnes, wrongly proclaims I am in their employ and demands to know what my wages are!
As to wages paid to me by William Birnes? That’s really none of his business, is it? I can get a wage and still be ethical, unlike Mr. Colette it might be argued. I point out that the magazine is quite clear every issue and on their web-site; however, that they do not pay their contributors.
I contribute, as it happens, because my contributions were requested by the Birnes, and they have treated me with respect and collegiality since the beginning of our association. I trust this was clear enough for the bystander, and adequate explanation why I am behind them on this matter.
That said, I remind Mr. Colette that, as he would admonish me, I _will_ be “watching and learning”… and commenting on his progress, too.
For now, the Birnes still have to dig into savings occasionally to get a _legitimate_ magazine on press (they are decidedly NOT Microsoft folks), but they'll be plugging along on this with great good will and joy, I'm sure, regardless. This unctuously *earnest* pretender and trespasser, Mr. Colette, seems so damned mean-spirited. Additionally and inexplicably playing the naïf and painting the Birnes as "Big Biz" going after the "little guy,." he prosecutes dodgy behavior he's admitted to before... or why would "Radio Shack" tuck tail and run? Crap, reader!
He's, in fact, more a seeming intellectual thief and an errant spoiler -- no better than a guy who throws a bottle of lye through your brand new plate-glass storefront, a storefront so lovingly painted, as it turns out, by _volunteer_ effort.
I'm appalled at Mr. Colette, frankly. I suggest all fair-minded persons might be similarly appalled.
alienview@roadrunner.com
www.AlienView.net
AVG Blog -- http://alienviewgroup.blogspot.com/
U F O M a g a z i n e -- www.ufomag.com (legitimate)
Mr Lehmberg,
As I've said time and time again, watch and learn. I also said there are things that have happened that you do not know about. I suggested that you wait and get all the facts, but I see you continue to bring out things based on emotion. It will soon be obvious that I am within my legal rights... yes legal rights to use the term "UFO Magazine" on my website. Actually more legal than Mr. Birnes and his company. Please be patient and this will play out, and do not try to turn this around, and now make me look like the bad guy. If you would have heard Mr Birnes conversation with me you would better understand why I recently did what I did. As I said, I am within my legal rights and soon you shall see what I mean. Have a great day!
- Mike
Alfred - what he is referring to is that he has a TM on ufo magazine, so far as an electronic magazine. Serial #77241297. That being said, does not mean there is no legal case. Oh, the stories I could tell you about patent office mistakes that have to go to court to be figured out. So in the end it is all still a legal matter.
Correction to that, I think he has only filed for a TM.
Seeming to thrive on enmity, Mr. Colette is due for an abundance of same, I suspect, and is a worthy addition to the list of scum-bags trifling the community, in my opinion.
We let this guy slide and we're all at peril.
I pledge a hundred dollars to the Birnes for a share in whatever a defense might cost against any errant intellectual thief.
Folks! Think! We hammer this one to preclude the next one!
Finally? I don't reason with scoundrels. I write about them.
"Watch and learn," my ass.
alienview@roadrunner.com
> www.AlienView.net
>> AVG Blog -- http://alienviewgroup.blogspot.com/
>>> U F O M a g a z i n e -- www.ufomag.com
Wow, I tried to be all nice and stuff to Mr. UFO Geek, but sir: You are an assclown. Why? because you just lambasted Lehmberg for bringing things out based on emotion and in the very next breath tell us that because of the tone Mr. Birnes took with you on the phone (waaaah!) you've decided to exact revenge by...well...you didn't say but it was obvious that you were going to register "UFO Magazine" under your name. Thanks to Lesley we now know you're trying to Trade Mark it.
Because of the tone he took with you on the phone? Are you serious?
Stop the assclownery, please. Stick with the UFO Geek routine, it's more befitting. You're not teaching anyone a lesson here, you're just looking like a dick.
By the way, my website is valiens.com so if you want to buy valiens.net for no specific reason at all, at all, that's available too.
Mr Lehmberg, (And all conerned)
Mr Birnes needs no legal defense money. His attorney knows what is next. It is all in the hands of the trademark board. It just takes time, no funds. Please go to the trademark page and you can read all about the flow that a trademark goes through. I have been through this before, it is painless and proper.
And as far as me doing this for revenge, that is not true. What Mr. Birnes said to me on the phone is why... yes, but it was done to protect myself from what he said, not for revenge. I really wish none of this ever happened. But they choose to send a letter, and Birnes choose to say what he said. And because of this, it is now costing me money, not him.
Now, we shall wait to see what the outcome is.
I know all three of you write for his magazine, and this may be why this discussion is happening. Please let him know, if he is behind this, that he and I could have settled this, but his emotions took over and things went south.
We do write for the mag but I've not spoken to him about it. Neither has Alfred. (I don't know about Lesley.)
I was going to not bother with this because there are enough stupid back-and-forth hostile exchanges in the field and I don't need to add to them. However, I don't think this qualifies as that and so here I am. These are my feelings on the issue, not those of the mag or Birnes.
In the final assessment maybe it's not such a big deal, I just can't take the grandstanding and the lying.
This doesn't need to cost anyone anything. If you're not out to make a buck off the magazine's name or a name for yourself off of it, why wouldn't you save yourself the money and the trouble and just use UFO Geek as your brand? No, this IS about revenge, sir.You're out to show the world that nobody treats you this way and all that middle school nonsense. If Birnes wants a war you'll give him a war.
Ridiculous.
I guess if the magazine was just any old rag I wouldn't take issue. But the thing has been around forever and as a stable source of voices from all over the ufological spectrum. I guess I wrongly hoped someone like you who has been blogging for what? 6 years?--someone "into" ufology would have slightly more respect for the magazine than that.
Anyway, I'm beating a dead horse so that's my last rap on the topic. Enjoy martyrdom while it lasts.
--jeremy
Jeremy,
Gee guy... calling me a liar now? You should have stuck with "assclown". At least that was less (fill in the blank). I recently (this morning) figured out who you are. I don't want to clog up Lesley's blog with such stuff, so I've moved my writings about you over to my blog. Oh... you can read that at ufomagazine.net if you so desire.
And thanks Lesley for being the fair one in this. You have stuck with presenting, for the most part, the facts or documented items.
UFO MAGAZINE is a trademark on file with the USPTO, pending registration. It is assigned to Michael Coletta with a serial number of, 77241297.
"Pending" = "I don't have it and will get rejected." Oh, Assclown, is there no end to your assery?
Post a Comment