Runboard.com
You're welcome.
Community logo






runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)

 
Spikosauropod Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

The Prophet & Moderator

Registered: 06-2007
Posts: 5958
Reply | Quote
Brand Name and Royalties Chuckle


The point has been repeatedly made that trademarks are altered, reversed, or obscured to avoid royalties. This label clearly says Dr Scholl’s. Also, the trademark is clearly that of Dr Scholl’s. So how did they justify it?

Image

I strongly suspect, though I haven’t investigated it thoroughly, that the square tin container and the blue elliptical icon are anachronistic. Also, Scholl is a common name. Another thing: it could possibly be the name Scholls in its regular form rather than Scholl in its possessive form. The apostrophe is not quite discernable. I checked several phone directories and both names are common. Is it possible to skirt trademark issues with such trivial modifications?

This is obviously important to collecting, because we may be looking for a tin of Dr Scholl’s that does not exist. It may be that the only way to acquire it is to modify an existing tin in the manner of Founder Bunny.

And what about this:

Image

This appears to be a consistent brand and label. Was it justified because Shinola is no longer in business?
7/20/2008, 2:41 pm Link to this post Send Email to Spikosauropod   Send PM to Spikosauropod
 
ThatsTom Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered Collector

Registered: 05-2008
Location: Ayer, ma Leominster, ma
Posts: 297
Reply | Quote
Re: Brand Name and Royalties Chuckle


mimicry that close is actually covered
under us patent and federal law
something about brand dilution
and causing customers to become
emoticon and then buying a product
they thought was blah blah blah....

I never thought that they were trying to
obscure brands or trademarks
it's usually someone who is hired to be a set
designer or artistic something or other
you know something like most people are
right handed so the label should be on the right
kind of thing, OR
the ones that are reversed are the ones they couldn't
get product placement deals with.
we don't just sell the future, we also sell the past.

---
Be seeing you.
7/20/2008, 11:49 pm Link to this post Send Email to ThatsTom   Send PM to ThatsTom
 
M89 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered Collector

Registered: 07-2008
Posts: 42
Reply | Quote
Re: Brand Name and Royalties Chuckle


if the trademark on the brand is no longer held by anyone then you don't need to pay royalties. as long as there's someone holding the rights to a name, weather it's out of business or not, you have to deal with them about royalties.

I don't know if anyone owns Shinola.

Last edited by M89, 7/20/2008, 11:59 pm
7/20/2008, 11:52 pm Link to this post Send Email to M89   Send PM to M89
 


Add a reply





You are not logged in (login)

The Collectors is a cabal of fans of the SciFi series "The Lost Room" who want you to join our cause
and search for The Objects, discuss the series and show off your own collection plus help others
with their collection and remember....... some forums are better left closed.