Band name copyrighting (1 Viewer)

[Mr Creosote]

I was wondering does anyone know anything about copyrighting band names? Not that we're at the stage of world domination or anything, but its just that I've just found out that theres an extremely dodgy looking heavy metal band in Tucson Az that call themselves Mr Creosote. Damn! They're at www.mp3.com/mrcreosote. But beware, their songs have a 'dark undertone' so you'd better be careful..

 

[justin]

well, i think what you can do is, print out your band name with the (c) sign beside it and maybe details about your band and then send it to yourself by registered mail. Keep it somwhere safe and dont open it. hey presto Name registered with the date of registry on the envolope and the receipt!

hope that helps

 

[pete]

you sure that's not your band?

them's some cracking hairstyles....

 

[snap-apple]

http://www.bandname.com
http://www.bandreg.com - seems to be offline at the mo

dunno how water-tight these are legally but...

 

[Pantone247]

All posting things to yourself via registered mail does is give you evidence that you created whatever it is you posted on the date you posted it, evidence that could be used if you had to ever go to court over it.

I think you also have to prove that the name is an asset to you, as in if somebody elsed used it you would lose out somehow.

I was just thinking last night did bands like The Vaselines ever get hassled by the company who make Vaseline???

 

[Mr Creosote]

I'm going to try that mail thing, and I'm checking out the internet as I write. Don't know what to say about the haircut thing, a man would be proud to have a head of hair like that.

 

[pete]

i was talking to dudley about this recently & to the best of my knowledge the posting something to yourself thing only works for things like the invention of a tangible asset, like a new design for a tin opener or something. It would also work for something like a song or a book or something like that, something that you had created and there was a risk of someone ripping off from you.

It wouldn't work for a band name because you could (theoretically) post yourself registered letters of every word in the english language and then just sue anyone else who used them.

I think the rights to a band name thing is more dependent on things like prior use and stuff.

However, there's an email knocking around about a scottish (?) punk band whose name was registered (trade marked) for use by an american boy band. If i remember correctly the scottish band will be sued if they continue to use their name, which they HAD been using for years beforehand.

But hey - what do I know?

 

[pete]

oh and another thing -

bands from different continents can share a name. sort of.
see:

the frames dc
the UK verve
the london quireboys

(not 100% certain on the last one - it was a very long time ago)

all bands who had to make slight changes to their names in order to publish stuff in the states because some yanks had prior use.

am i boring you yetzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz?

 

[Pantone247]

Suede = LONDON suede

is'nt this fun!!!

(Mr Creosote I'll sell you said head of hair)

 

[Mr Creosote]

anyone whos familiar with the Jerky Boys, I think the fella 2nd from the right is a prime candidate for Big 'Ol Bad Ass Bob The Cattle Rustler - 'Howwwdy Maaam! Now I drive me one o them 18-wheelers!'..

I registered with bandname.com and get the tackiest certificate ever, but still its better than nothing.

 

[Keeror]

I was just thinking last night did bands like The Vaselines ever get hassled by the company who make Vaseline???

Pan Sonic used to be called Panasonic, until the electronics manufacturers of the same name kicked up a fuss.
Pan Sonic then called their next album "A", which I thought was funny.

 

[#10-7]

i recorded all my songs on a tape: (just guitar + vocals) and wrote out the words and stated that i wrote each one, and put the lyrics + the basic song in a envelope and put the date on AND signed it: is that enough to ensure no-one can rob them?

 

[pete]

pete (07 Mar, 2001 02:17 p.m.):
However, there's an email knocking around about a scottish (?) punk band whose name was registered (trade marked) for use by an american boy band. If i remember correctly the scottish band will be sued if they continue to use their name, which they HAD been using for years beforehand.?

here's some background from the band (Four Letter Word) i had been talking about:

A company manufacturing a future 'Boy Band' in Minnesota, USA has trademarked the name 'FOUR LETR WORD' (sic) including all phonetic variants, and filed to sue BYO Records (our record label) for trademark infringement (employing one of America's biggest law firms). Due to our comparatively small record sales, they were forced to avoid the potentially damaging legal costs and we are now no longer with that label and what's more we can never sell or promote anything with our name on in the US again. The company, 'FLW MARK, LLC' is now in the final stages of a UK trademark application. We are attempting to oppose their application in order to stop them from buying a name we've been using for nine years and the subsequent lawsuit they will bring against us for infringement upon their trademark once they have successfully registered it.
So now we have a major fight on our hands, which doesn't come cheap. So please, if you care, support us…
One way or other you're probably going to see a boy band with the name sometime in the near future splattered all over your TVs and magazines… It goes without saying that the amount of money they've thrown at this already, with or without band members, is telling us that the one thing that is not an option for them, is failure.
It is ironic that the gigantic capitalist machinery we've talked about so often in our lyrics and writings is the exact same thing that has us in its sights for our ultimate liquidation. Thank you for your time and support.

FOUR LETTER WORD, June 2000

And I just saw this in a Flex Your Head interview with Four Letter Word:

Four Letter Word seem to be going through a period of adversity right now. There's a lot up with the band right now, a lot of changes. Fill us in!

Welly: Tell me about it! It all started going wrong in the summer of '99, when our bassist and drummer simultaneously quit over a pathetic argument. This left us reeling for six months, because it's very difficult finding people in this part of the world. We got some new people to be quickly met by the news that a company out of Minnesota had Trademarked our name for a boy band they were putting together. They filed to sue BYO Records for unlawful usage of the name. BYO backed down 'cuz of the immense costs. We were dropped from the label and by doing so forfeited us the right to sell anything ever again in the U.S. Then we discovered that they had applied for a UK Trademark. So we decided to fight it. We did the tour I talked about and raised some cash. I've talked to lawyers (£200 an hour - that's $400 in Canadian, $300 U.S.) and we are in the process of sorting this out. We may lose the name, who knows. I just can't believe that after using a name for nearly a decade, someone can buy the right to use it, and sheerly by the fact that they have more money than you can stamp you out of existence for a corporate project that will probably fail anyway. So we would have been destroyed for nothing, that's a double waste!

Except it didn't end there:

Sorry to bother you but we've just received word that our old label B.Y.O.
is signing a 'settlement' with the boy band company. Part of this settlement
is that they hand over every last item with our name on for destruction.
B.Y.O, against the rules of the game, is prepared to ship us one last
payload of F.L.W. LP's, CD's and 7"s at wholesale before the rest of it is
destroyed. As you can imagine, this is a tough one to call at the last
chance saloon, so we were wondering, in order to keep F.L.W. music in
circulation for as cheap as possible, whether you'd be prepared to take any
of this, to help us keep our music alive? This is a 'one time only' offer,
after this, our music on B.Y.O. is permanently deleted and we will be erased
from their back catalogue. I'm sure you understand that we are offering you
this because, we do not have the resources to buy all $10,000 worth of stuff
remaining at B.Y.O. and we want to take as much as we can from them.

So what's the moral of the story?

Trademark your bandname? Should you have to? Do you have to?

I dunno.

 

[Willie Willions]

yep, I think it all really depends on how greedy your record company is, it's a sliding scale

 

[Cormy]

Yeh, the whole Four Letter Word thing is shockin...they're actually an incredible band, one of the UK's best, I was gutted to find out all that. They were dropped by BYO in the States and everything because of it. Below is the most recent update on the situation...:

Hi All,
this makes truly disturbing reading about a Cardiff based Band called "Four Letter Word". this piece was written by Welly who sings with the band, any comments get back to Welly from FLW on: [email protected]
REPUTATIONS IN JEOPARDY
For those you who don't know, 'Four Letter Word' is a Cardiff based punk
rock band, they formed in 1991 under that name. Released their first 7" EP
'Words That Burn' in 1995 and later signed with L.A. label 'B.Y.O. Records'
and released two albums 'A Nasty Piece Of Work' ('97) and 'Zero
Visibility'('99) and a 7" 'Do You Feel Lucky, Punk?' ('98) with them. They
toured the U.S.A.,Canada, and the U.K. more than once. A company from
Minnesota manufacturing a boy band trademarked the name in the U.S.A. and
filed to sue B.Y.O. Records for Trade Mark infringement (employing one of
America's biggest law firms). Due to comparatively small record sales B.Y.O.
were forced to concede to avoid legal costs, although with a winnable case.
F.L.W. got dropped from the label because the label had been ordered to
cease and desist sales and promotion of products with their name permanently
destroying any reputation they had built up in the U.S. (see their website:
they don't exist!)
F.L.W. discovered that although without a release and only an impending demo
tape the boy band was in some way linked with MCA Records (Universal
Studios) and had also applied for a UK TM application. With some detective
work F.L.W. found out that the 'boy band' was one of many umbrella/phantom
businesses set up by Raymond Johnson out of Minnesota, this particular one
for his son, Danny, a pop producer. They also found out that due to an
unhappy relationship with this producer and very lengthy preparation time,
all the boys in the boy band had quit and one even contacted the U.K. band
because he wanted to "help anyone else who's lives he's messed with". The
U.K. F.L.W. tried to stop their U.K. trade mark with a lawyer using their
own money and donations from people all over the U.K., but they soon ran out
(two lawyer letters = £200, UK TM application = £250, phone calls/
preparation of evidence/postage = £50) and were advised to conserve the
little they had left for an attack by the ever stronger U.S. company. They
had also requested a co-existence agreement with the company because they
knew they had acted illegally applying for a UK TM in full knowledge of the
U.K. bands prior existence, but all correspondence was ignored, creating a
game of financial 'chicken' meaning F.L.W. had to back down allowing the
U.S. company to get their U.K. Trade Mark. They also owe their ex-label a
lot of money for merchandise. It also looks like the MCA link may be not be
currently viable, but may well resurface in the future.
THE WRITING ON THE WALL
The fact that everyone is getting bored of reading about this is yet another
symptom/tragedy of our little punk rock scene in the scheme of things; we
can't break outside of it, no-one listens, it's like telling your same
friends the same thing over and over. This is intrinsically linked to the
current climate though, more than ever, it's harder than ever to find a
space left on the wall to scribble about something important to you without
it being painted over by the person who just bought the wall. In the same
way as the little flyers seem to get instantly stripped off by the local
council or postered over by the professional ravers, whilst the corporate
pop posters and big business raves and clubs, strangely get left untouched
on the walls of our cities.
When this all started I even took the story to the local paper because I
want as many 'normaloids' to know that this happens as possible. The paper
took photos of us, interviewed me at my home and everything, but when they
went off to contact 'MCA' about it, they went strangely cold, wouldn't
return my calls, wouldn't even give us copies of the photos - very weird...
it seems that even a reasonable sized newspaper is too scared to speak out
about an (albeit tentative) connection to a global corporation. I think my
first mistake there was when they asked, I gave them a CD to listen to, and
the music and politics probably didn't help much. But then I see in the same
paper recently a full page spread about some reformed Oi!/Punk band who used
to have a right wing following, openly supported, oh well.
As it stands, right now it feels like standing alone in a desert, waiting
for the black helicopters to come swooping over the horizon and take you out
with their heat seeking missiles. The Patents Office, strictly following
regulations, refused our application for a UK Trade Mark on the grounds of
low turnover. This is what they had to say; "Unfortunately however I do not
consider the TURNOVER and ADVERTISING figures for the five year period to be
SUFFICIENT for this application to proceed based on honest concurrent use.
When considering evidence, the greater the turnover, the more likely it is
for the mark to be accepted. On this occasion, I do not feel that the
turnover for the goods and services and the amount spent on advertising are
acceptable as an indication that the public are used to distinguishing your
mark and the EARLIER one." (emphasis: mine). Note: they will ONLY take into
account U.K. sales, turnover and advertising expenditure.
So, regardless of whether we used it first, or any artistic integrity:
tough! Regardless of whether the other company has sold ANYTHING or indeed
is operating as a business at all, or whether they stole our name in full
knowledge of what they were doing... they bought a TM first and that's it!
We are now wide open and just waiting for legal action against us when the
oppositions decides it's time to take Britain. I was also shocked to hear
from Clara Zero in London (who wrote an article as part of her journalism
course about our problem) that when she went 'undercover' and talked to
4LW's lawyers... legal eagles in Minnesota and L.A. - amongst other things,
get this:- they admitted that they KNEW that WE were using the name by doing
a search (something you have to do) and when they discovered we hadn't
bought it and that we 'didn't sell many records', they bought it!!!

Continued in next posting...

 

[Cormy]

Cont:

That is
TOTALLY illegal under trademark law! They knew what they were doing, they
actually STOLE our name! And there's me thinking it was just coincidence
backed by corporate dollars when in fact it was total corporate theft ! But
what can we do? It's that old addage; 'So sue me!' spat in your face, after
all, they know that we've got nothing to fight them with... and they're
resources are, well, unlimited.
Aside from that it was the usual smugness, like L.A. TM specialist attorney
Peter Eichler who worked on the case; "a band would be STUPID not to protect
themselves", and 4LW's legal representative Deborah Wagnon; "I'm sure those
boys in Cardiff are hugely talented, but in this day and age it is essential
you secure the legal side of things BEFORE you start FUNCTIONING as a band."
(emphasis: mine) So don't forget that kids... make sure you get a line of
trainers and a soft drink branded before your first practice! They still
maintain that the boy band will be 're-cast' with new human logo's
'sometime' but in the meantime Mr. Danny Johnson is using 4LW as a pop
promotion company promoting his girlfirend 'Goldylocks' as a pop act.
I called up the Patents people again this week, and I put the question to
them, that although we had applied for the classes containing; 'Records,
CD's etc.' and also 'Live Performance' (on the advice of our lawyer) because
they had for some reason NOT included live performance in their Trade Mark
that is bought and paid for... why had we been turned down under 'confusion
with an earlier mark', when their mark didn't even have this. The guy seemed
confused as to why this would matter, and upon looking at the file found out
it had been refused because of something completely different and completely
minor (that I had already asked to be changed), but had this lady bothered
to tell me in her 'official response' this? No she hadn't. The question is
why? An oversight? But surely in an indepth refusal including all grounds
for furthering your application, all reasons would be covered. Not this time
it seems. Now I've been told to write in again, telling them to drop the
Records/CD's class and to strip down the live performance class to make it
suitable. Even then though, their lawyers can oppose it... and so on and so
forth, until everyone climbs into their own backsides, or, inevitably, Jack
runs out of money and the giant triumphs.
DEMYSTIFICATION
It might be important to note at this point: Everyone seems to get confused
between Trade Mark, Patent and Copyright... our problem has nothing to do
with copyright (which is the natural artistic ownership of a single piece of
artwork containing the artists name, (c) symbol and year of production),
Patent (a purchased 'intellectual property' or an idea for use as, for
example; an invention), a Trade Mark is the purchased right to use a
specific word/name, logo, image or all three including all phonetic variants
for business usage, and this is solely where our problem lies. So when you
sit there thinking "why don't they just change it to 'Fore Letter Wurd' or
'4 Letter Word'?", it's an irrelevance. Corporations are employing these
tactics more and more, as well as the smaller wannabe's who aspire to be
like the big boys. U.K. band 'Silencer 7' had to change their name because
of the same thing. And you are going to find this happening more and more as
time goes on and I urge any of you with a band name that could possibly be
used in the mainstream (obviously we're not talking about 'Adolf and the
Piss Artists' here!) to protect yourselves rather than find out too late
like we have (I actually called the Patents Office in 1995 and was told we'd
be covered under Copyright law - we had no money anyway!).
A Trade Mark in the U.K. will cost you £200 for the first class you apply
for and £50 for each additional class. A 'class' is a specific area of
trading, each has a number with a set of descriptions, ie: a band would
probably want to trade mark Class 9: 'Apparatus for reproduction of sound or
images, recording discs etc.', Class 41 'Education and Entertainment' and
maybe Class 25: 'Clothing, Footwear, Headgear' and if you're a boyband like
the U.S. company, then Class 16: 'Stationery' and Class 28: 'Games and
Playthings' may also come in handy for posters and personalised pillow
cases.
Now, I'm not being paranoid here. I don't think there's a conspiracy or
anything. They all have to follow stringent guidelines and procedure and
nothing outside of that will be taken into account. It is also important to
note another common misconception; the fact that this is a courtroom battle
ala Jello Biafra. It's NOT! This will probably never reach that level,
unless they threaten, we refuse and then we get dragged through the courts
being sued... and on my wage, with my pessimistic cynicism towards this
world, I think we would change the name before we allow ourselves to be put
over a barrel and forced to pay an 'as yet undisclosed' sum of money.
When you think about it it's all rather pathetic, squabbling over a few
words, but it's the principle of the matter. Regardless of whether it
matters, whether anyone gives a shit or not, the current modus operandi of
big business is to basically trample anything that gets in the way, and the
fact it has encroached on my life and something I feel we earned by right of
usage, at least I will know we might've been like a particularly pungent
piece of dug turd they stood in as we were trodden in their wake.
Thanks to Sned and all the Reason To Believe crew for letting us take up
space with my whingeing. If anyone wants to put this article up on their
website, please let me know and I'll e-mail it over as I want as many people
to find out that this goes on before or after we have to change our name.
Consumerism is crowd control,
Welly, February 2001.
FOUR LETTER WORD
c/o 1 Aberdulais Road, Gabalfa, Cardiff, CF14 2PH, Wales, U.K.
E-Mail: [email protected]
THE PATENT OFFICE
Trade Marks Registry, Cardiff Road, Newport, NP9 1RH, Wales, U.K.
Tel: (01633) 814000
Web: www.patent.gov.uk
Ask for information and they will send it to you for free with an
application form.
PUT THIS IS IN AT YOUR OWN DISCRETION...
HELP US PAY OTHERS...
FOUR LETTER WORD
'A Cold Day In Hell' 5 track CDEP - £4.00 ppd.
'The Band That Time Forgot' 7 track coloured vinyl 12" EP - £6.00 ppd.
'Zero Visibility' 12 track CD - £6.00 ppd.
'A Nasty Piece of Work' 13 track LP/CD - £6.00 ppd.
'Do You Feel Lucky, Punk?' 2 track 7" - £2.50 ppd.
ARTCORE (£1.50 ppd.)
Issue 15 - 15th anniversary issue w/ Dillinger Four, Alkaline Trio, Slug and
Lettuce, Imbalance, WxHxNx?, American Steel, Amdi Petersens Arme, Anthem of
the Century, Kraut, CH3, Dangerhouse, Upright Citizens, Rites of Spring,
Vince Ransid, rantin' 'n' ravin' 'n' reviewin'. A4 28 pages.
Issue 14 w/ The 'Tone, Brezhnev, Grand Theft Audio Records, WTO riots, Code
of Honor, Flipper, B.Y.O. Records, rantin' 'n' ravin' 'n' reviewin'. A5 48
pages.
Issue 13 w/ FLW Tour Report, Panic, Grover, Turtlehead, I.T.S., Crucifix,
Dead Kennedys, rantin' 'n' ravin' 'n' reviewin'. A5 48 pages.