Sarah Palin and daughter Bristol seek to trademark names

Boston Herald via AP ^ | February 4, 2011 | Associated Press

[GQuagmire]

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — Sarah Palin is trying to trademark her name.

The former Alaska governor and 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate filed paperwork with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in November to register the trademark.

The federal office is seeking more information and examples of usage. Palin’s attorney said Friday that they have until late spring to provide that information.

[PA Engineer]

You lie.

You are delusional. Get help.

[Fiji Hill]

I think we’re already to the point where she’s achieved cult status. Her fanbois will continue to adore her and prostrate themselves at her feet, but realistically, her support is going no further.

Perhaps her support shall go no further, but she has certainly been an inspiration to conservatives--while at the same time enraging the angry young liberals on this board.

[Atlas Sneezed]

...and it allows bristol to be part of any campaign she chooses to be a part of and/or any career path she chooses to take.

---

No it doesn’t!

Trademark law has established principles, and few of those on this thread posting with ignorant confidence realize it.

Bristol’s name is applied for to cover the field of “Educational and entertainment services, namely, providing motivational speaking services in the field of life choices.”

[Fiji Hill]

How dare you imply that the woman who once sat in the very womb of the anointed one is not worthy?

FAIL!

[Guenevere]

For goodness sakes, she didn't ask Dancing with the Stars for a promo spot....they asked her!

She was working & supporting her son at the time.....but the press wouldn't leave her alone, and I think she wanted to prove she was made of stronger stuff, .....and did! by taking the DWTS role and working her hardest to make it to the finish line.

The press continues to make up stories about her, just like they do for her mom!

Give this young woman a break, OK.

[napscoordinator]

Is it fair that Palin get the domain Palin2012 from someone who purchased it already? What does that owner get in return or do I don’t understand how this work. You call it a squatter but isn’t it good business sense if you have a domain name of someone who is famous? I would hope that if she does get this approved and the individual who obtained or even purchased this domain get compensated for it to the tune of millions.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Is it fair that Palin get the domain Palin2012 from someone who purchased it already? What does that owner get in return or do I don’t understand how this work. You call it a squatter but isn’t it good business sense if you have a domain name of someone who is famous? I would hope that if she does get this approved and the individual who obtained or even purchased this domain get compensated for it to the tune of millions.

---

We disagree. A trademark owner has the right to prevent others from using their trademark, or variations of it, for related goods and services. And registering a domain contaioning a trademark, with the expectation of selling it to that trademark owner, is cybersquatting, as defined under the law.

Here is the test used by those who rule on these cases:

In determining whether the domain name registrant has a bad faith intent to profit a court may consider many factors including nine that are outlined in the statute:

1. the registrant’s trademark or other intellectual property rights in the domain name;
2. whether the domain name contains the registrant’s legal or common name;
3. the registrant’s prior use of the domain name in connection with the bona fide offering of goods or services;
4. the registrant’s bona fide noncommercial or fair use of the mark in a site accessible by the domain name;
5. the registrant’s intent to divert customers from the mark owner’s online location that could harm the goodwill represented by the mark, for commercial gain or with the intent to tarnish or disparage the mark;
6. the registrant’s offer to transfer, sell, or otherwise assign the domain name to the mark owner or a third party for financial gain, without having used the mark in a legitimate site;
7. the registrant’s providing misleading false contact information when applying for registration of the domain name;
8. the registrant’s registration or acquisition of multiple domain names that are identical or confusingly similar to marks of others; and
9. the extent to which the mark in the domain is distinctive or famous.[10]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticybersquatting_Consumer_Protection_Act