A person can trademark anything. Labbatt’s has trademarked the word Blue. However, they don’t OWN that word. The trademark laws state this: You can trademark a business using one word but the trademark is the actual activity of the word. Therefore, in the above example, the Word Blue Beer is trademarked and they are entitled to request or sue anyone using the word Blue for their beer. So, if you are looking to trademark a beer name, best not to call it Blue.

Another example. McDonald’s owns the trademarked name McDonald’s, but under the trademark laws, they are known as McDonald’s Restaurants. The law also states that regardless of incidence, a person may use their last name, but the activity is what matters. As an example, perfect example. McDonald’s Restaurants and MacDonald cigarettes. Same, very similar name, but different activity.

It was less than 10 years ago where WWF (World Wildlife Fund) opened a lawsuit against WWF (World Wrestling Federation). The courts ruled in favor of the the Wildlife Fund, since they were established before the wrestling company. Oh, Vince McMahon had a riot with that. Although the billionaire lost the lawsuit, he became even richer with the slogan “Get the F out”.

But here is the problem that was insighted… Fans of the wildlife organization, would go online and type in WWF.com and would find Vince McMahon wrestling’s website instead. Since both companies has an agreement years ago that they could both use the initials WWF could co-exist in peace, the the problem was online.

As I read this, nice blog, I ended up checking out http://www.thrillionaires.com and thethrillionaires.com well, if a fight would go in court, the outcome would probably get thrown out, why?

Two different names, two different domains. Same root name perhaps. As another example… The company Ford has a car named the Fusion, so does the company Polaris which, the snowmobile Fusion model came out before the car, years ago as a 45th anniversary high powered snowmobile. One is a car company, the other is a snowmobile company.

For example, if a company named Fusion, lets say they are a lawnmower company who’s been in business for 40 years and would start getting emails saying: “Hey, I was looking for a Ford Fusion” chances are the long time company would win in a court of law against the car manufacturor, especially if the Ford Fusion website was named http://www.fusion.us

I would see a lawsuit possible if someone has a similar website. In this case, The Thrillionares and Thrillionares both have different domains and activities. Ruth’s website is all about having the Thrill of giving and feeling like a million, while the other one is about paying millions for thrills and gives success coaching to its customers (which to me sounds like a scam). This isn’t a trademark infrigement. Perhaps a lawsuit would cost a thrillion…

Basically, anyone can use the word as long as they don’t copy your business model, business logo and business activities.

If I can suggest something, use the ™ symbol on your logo. This would mean that you have use an un-registered trademark name. It doesn’t indemnify you or you business, but this gives your logo and your moto (Know the thrill of giving) an implied trademark agreement.

To bad you abandoned your registration, I’d have stuck my ground… Apparently the book The Thrillionaire is a registered trade mark and the website appears nothing more than a scam. In the USA, The Thrillionaire, The Thrillionaires or Thrillionaires are not currently registered trademarks. Although it might be registered in Australia, it isn’t necessarily registered in other countries…

Check it out here

http://www.uspto.gov/

If you do get it registered internationally, which would cost a lot of money to do, then you would have the rights to stop the sales of his book in jurisdictions in which it hasn’t been registered because it would be “reasonable ground” because he would be operating business using a name that is “too similar” to a registered name.

However, who’s to fight a damn millionaire…

Wish you all the best

Love this article. It was brought to my attention after a coaching program module today on personal development of legacy projects – the range of what they can look like (and how they might differ from traditional notions of estate planning), and how they may be operational during life time and include things that may need intellectual property protection — depending on what the project entails. We talked about the fact that protection and pursuing that protection as allowed by law may be worth it and needed, and may simply be a headache.

I love your Thrillionaires work, too – it has been dear to my heart as an example of legacy projects, as I put my whole Creating Legacy program together. And never once did it occur to me (until this article today) that the word you’ve used might refer to adrenaline filled activities!

Endorphin filled is more like it!!

Best to you and all the “real” Thrillionaires. Good for us all, for your definition.

Cheers, Dolly