History MediaNotes / Trademark

The general lack of registrations for individual titles of books or movies can cause problems because there are two completely unrelated movies named ''Film/{{Crash}}'', one about people that set up car crashes as erotica, and another that won an Academy Award. But, if you have a particular work and someone else releases something under the same or a very similar name you ''may'' be able to stop them, especially if it's close to when your film s released, on the grounds the secondary film is trying to confuse people as to which movie is the one they want. But there are exceptions, especially for parody. This is why [[ParallelPornTitles porn movies usually do puns that are similar to mainstream movies]] ("Juranal Park" for ''Film/JurassicPark'', "Saturday Night Beaver" for ''Film/SaturdayNightFever'' and "Schindler's Fist" for ''Film/SchindlersList'') as it can be considered parody, which comes (no pun intended) under Fair Use, below. There are exceptions; there is both a clean film called "What's Love Got to Do With It" and a porno film of the same name. How come the porno is able to have the same name? They used it first.

Trademarks, along with UsefulNotes/{{Copyright}} and patent, are considered "intellectual property" in that it's a special type of government-granted monopoly. Trademarks, however are different from copyright: a copyright owner can ignore some infringing uses of its works and does not lose the ability to go after other infringements. But if you own a trademark and do not make efforts to stop unauthorized uses of your mark of which you are aware, someone doing exactly that can use your failure to "police" your mark to [[BrandNameTakeover prevent you from stopping him]] from using it as well - this aspect of trademark is sometimes referred to as ''defend or die''. It's why the International Olympic Committee, the NFL, etc. seem to be absolutely tyrannical with regard to their trademarks - the law pretty much demands they have to be. (Yes, they're quite aware of the "damned if they do, damned if they don't" position they're in. Cease-and-desist letters for non-malicious infringement often take on an apologetic tone, thanking the person for their support but explaining why they have to tell them to stop, and these sometimes go viral.)

Then there is the concept of UsefulNotes/FairUse (which while normally relevant to copyright, also applies to use of other people's trademarks), where someone can use someone else's trademark whether its owner likes it or not. This is why when a movie or TV show shows a building with an advertising sign for Coca-Cola, Mountain Dew, or Dr. Pepper, or even another movie, they do not need permission, partuicularly if the sign is incidental to the scene, for instance a sequence being shot in Times Square in New York, where advertising signs are unavoidable. The same rules protect other parties that use someone else's trademarks. For example, let's say you run a blog and you post openly that you happen to hate Coca-Cola because you think it tastes bad. They can't successfully sue you because it's a legitimate commentary. This use of their trademarks is fair use because you are giving a comparison of products. Besides that, it's pure opinion; there is no objective way to prove if a soft drink tastes good or bad. Now, if you sold a soft drink called "Swill", and you ran a survey, you could legally say that "86% of customers preferred Swill over Mountain Dew" (as long as it was true). (This was the entire premise of the UsefulNotes/PepsiChallenge, where Pepsi showed that people preferred it over Coke, and started the Cola Wars of the 1980s.)

Note that this "no offensive marks can be registered" law was challenged as a result of a 2019 US Supreme Court Decision, ''[[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iancu_v._Brunetti Iancu v. Brunetti]]'', where the Supreme Court found, as Website/{{Wikipedia}} put it, "The Lanham Act prohibition on the registration of "immoral" or "scandalous" trademarks infringes the First Amendment." (The respondent [[note]]the Supreme Court has its own language, the plaintiff, or party suing, in the Supreme Court is called the ''petitioner'' while the party being sued, the defendant, is called the ''respondent''[[/note]] Erik Brunetti tried to register the word "FUCT", which is generally pronounced the same as "fucked", so the Patent and Trademark office refused registration. Brunetti sued, and the appeals court found the law violated the First Amendment. The Supreme Court agreed.) So now, the rule against "scandalous and immoral" trademarks no longer applies. Now the only question is how long before someone registers a trademark containing any of Creator/GeorgeCarlin's famous "seven dirty words" list. [[note]] for those curious, the seven words that can't be used on television/radio are: shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits. We can probably take "piss" and "tits" out of that list since they are much less offensive now, and "shit" looks to be joining that club soon.[[/note]]

There's another issue about trademarks, generally for titles of works of art like books, films, songs. originally, this article said you can't register the title as a trademark unless the work is extremely popular or has a very long history of use. ''Literature/HarryPotter'' or ''Literature/LeftBehind'' as the title of a series of works could be registered, but probably not the titles of the individual books in the series. That was not correct; someone could do that but never do.

The most likely reason that titles of individual episoses of a TV series or individual book titles are not registered is that a trademark registration takes about a year, and while the registration lasts for at least five years before an affidavit of use must be filed, most movies don't stay in theaters (or in the front page of streaming service's recommendations) that long, and books either go out of print or the e-book stops being reommended long before then. So it's uneconomic for a studio with, say, 20 different movies in production, plus five or six serieseach generating 20+ episodes a year, to spend tens of thousands of dollars every year to file over 100 trademark registrations on the title of every individual film and tv show released, or the same for a book publisher that releases hundreds of book titles. It's more cost effective to register a single title for a film franchise or for an entire book series.

The general lack of registrations for individual titles of books or movies can cause problems because there are two completely unrelated movies named ''Film/{{Crash}}'', one about people that set up car crashes as erotica, and another that won an Academy Award. But, if you have a particular work and someone else releases something under the same or a very similar name you ''may'' be able to stop them, especially if it's close to when your film s released, 9on the grounds the secondary film is trying to confuse people as to which movie is the one they want. But there are exceptions, especially for parody. This is why [[ParallelPornTitles porn movies usually do puns that are similar to mainstream movies]] ("Juranal Park" for ''Film/JurassicPark'', "Saturday Night Beaver" for ''Film/SaturdayNightFever'' and "Schindler's Fist" for ''Film/SchindlersList'') as it can be considered parody, which comes (no pun intended) under Fair Use, below. There are exceptions; there is both a clean film called "What's Love Got to Do With It" and a porno film of the same name. How come the porno is able to have the same name? They used it first.

Then there is the concept of UsefulNotes/FairUse (which while normally relevant to copyright, also applies to use of other people's trademarks), where someone can use someone else's trademark whether its owner likes it or not. This is why when a movie or TV show shows a building withj an advertising sign for Coca-Cola, Monutain Dew, or Dr. Pepper, or even another movie, they do not need permission./ The same rules protect other parties that use someone else's trademarks/ For example, let's say you run a blog and you post openly that you happen to hate Coca-Cola because you think it tastes bad. They can't successfully sue you because it's a legitimate commentary. This use of their trademarks is fair use because you are giving a comparison of products. Besides that, it's pure opinion; there is no objective way to prove if a soft drink tastes good or bad. Now, if you sold a soft drink called "Swill", and you ran a survey, you could legally say that "86% of customers preferred Swill over Mountain Dew" (as long as it was true). (This was the entire premise of the UsefulNotes/PepsiChallenge, where Pepsi showed that people preferred it over Coke, and started the Cola Wars of the 1980s.)

Famous people registering their name or ''nom de plume'' as a trademark or service mark is not that unusual. Music/FrankSinatra and Creator/StephenHawking did so during their lifetimes (and their estates retain those registrations); the Estate of Creator/MarilynMonroe has both that ''nom de plume'' and her birth name "Norma Jean Baker" registered. Which name the estate of Elvis Presley has registered is left as an exercise for the reader.

Then there's the problem where a trademark or servicemark is so successful that people use the mark interchangeably with the non-branded name. When a mark becomes generic, anyone can use it, and it is no longer capitalized except when used as the first word of a sentence. Note that a mark can be generic in one use and a strong trademark or service mark in another. It's perfectly legal to sell solid fuel under the name "coke" (a type of processed coal) without getting permission from anyone, but unless you're selling "The Real Thing" you'd better not try to sell any beverage under the name "Coke" unless it's authorized by The Coca-Cola Company of UsefulNotes/{{Atlanta}}. The word "peanuts" (not capitalized) refers to nuts that grow underground [[note]] technically peanuts are legumes - a class of pea - rather than actual nuts [[/note]], but the word "ComicStrip/{{Peanuts}}" (capitalized) refers to a comic strip by Charles Schulz as well as a series of books and TV specials.

There's another issue about trademarks, generally for titles of works of art like books, films, songs, you can't register the title as a trademark unless the work is extremely popular or has a very long history of use. ''Literature/HarryPotter'' or ''Literature/LeftBehind'' as the title of a series of works could be registered, but probably not the titles of the individual books in the series. This can cause problems because there are two completely unrelated movies named ''Film/{{Crash}}'', one about people that set up car crashes as erotica, and another that won an Academy Award. But, if you have a particular work and someone else releases something under the same or a very similar name you ''may'' be able to stop them. But there are exceptions, especially for parody. This is why [[ParallelPornTitles porn movies usually do puns that are similar to mainstream movies]] ("Juranal Park" for ''Film/JurassicPark'', "Saturday Night Beaver" for ''Film/SaturdayNightFever'' and "Schindler's Fist" for ''Film/SchindlersList'') as it can be considered parody, which comes (no pun intended) under Fair Use, below. There are exceptions; there is both a clean film called "What's Love Got to Do With It" and a porno film of the same name. How come the porno is able to have the same name? They used it first.

Then there is the concept of UsefulNotes/FairUse (which while normally relevant to copyright, also applies to use of other people's trademarks), where someone can use someone else's trademark whether its owner likes it or not. For example, let's say you run a blog and you post openly that you happen to hate Coca-Cola because you think it tastes bad. They can't successfully sue you because it's a legitimate commentary. This use of their trademarks is fair use because you are giving a comparison of products. Besides that, it's pure opinion; there is no objective way to prove if a soft drink tastes good or bad. Now, if you sold a soft drink called "Swill", and you ran a survey, you could legally say that "86% of customers preferred Swill over Mountain Dew" (as long as it was true). (This was the entire premise of the UsefulNotes/PepsiChallenge, where Pepsi showed that people preferred it over Coke, and started the Cola Wars of the 1980s.)

However, there is the issue of "disparagement", which means you claim something about a company, product, or service which makes it look bad. If it's pure opinion, there's nothing they can do about it. If the statement is true, they also can't do anything (on Website/YouTube you can find the video of a New York City Kentucky Fried Chicken - Taco Bell restaurant at 6th Avenue and 4th Street in Greenwich Village where rats were running rampant.) But, if the statement is factual, ''and'' false, then that is actionable. To pick on [[SpellMyNameWithAThe The]] Coca-Cola Company again, let's say you do a blog, where not only do you say their flagship product tastes like piss, you say it's because they use actual sewer water in the product. Then, since that's clearly untrue, then they can sue, demand a retraction, an apology, and other damages.

Now if you've been paying attention, what problem does the group Chicago have with their name? Remember the example I gave earlier about ''The Washington Post'' failing to renew its mark, and now cannot have the exclusive right to its city in its name? The group Chicago registered its mark back when you could. If the group Chicago ever fails to renew its trademark, they will lose the ownership of their name.

While we're on the subject of locations, there is yet another wrinkle. The Europeans are trying to create a form of "protected location" where you can't use certain geographic identifiers for certain products unless it actually comes from that area. The most famous example of this has been the attempts to stop producers of sparkling wine from calling it "champagne" unless the product was grown and bottled in the Champagne region of France. This might also mean you can't release whiskey under the name "bourbon" unless it's made in Bourbon County, Kentucky, United States.[[note]]This is already a requirement for a different spirit. Federal law only permits a product to call itself "Tennessee Whiskey" if it is made and bottled in one particular state. Which one is left as an exercise for the reader. (Actually, "Tennessee whiskey" is a type of bourbon; its production process meets all federal requirements for "bourbon", but its makers choose not to use the latter term.)[[/note]] I guess the next thing will be the group Chicago will have to be sure all their records are recorded there (if they aren't already, I mean).

Then there is the concept of UsefulNotes/FairUse (which while normally relevant to copyright, also applies to use of other people's trademarks), where someone can use someone else's trademark whether its owner likes it or not. For example, let's say I run a blog and I post openly that I happen to hate Coca-Cola because I think it tastes bad, and I happen to like Dr Pepper. They can't successfully sue me because it's a legitimate commentary. (To be fair, I will note that my brother, on the other hand, likes Coke and hates Dr Pepper.) This use of their trademarks is fair use because I am giving a comparison of products. Besides that, it's pure opinion; there is no objective way to prove if a soft drink tastes good or bad. Now, if I sold a soft drink called "Swill", and I ran a survey, I could legally say that "86% of customers preferred Swill over Mountain Dew" (as long as it was true). (This was the entire premise of the UsefulNotes/PepsiChallenge, where Pepsi showed that people preferred it over Coke, and started the Cola Wars of the 1980s.)

However, there is the issue of "disparagement", which means you claim something about a company, product, or service which makes it look bad. If it's pure opinion, such as my example from above how I dislike the taste of Coke, there's nothing they can do about it. If the statement is true, they also can't do anything (on Website/YouTube you can find the video of a New York City Kentucky Fried Chicken - Taco Bell restaurant at 6th Avenue and 4th Street in Greenwich Village where rats were running rampant.) But, if the statement is factual, ''and'' false, then that is actionable. To pick on [[SpellMyNameWithAThe The]] Coca-Cola Company again, let's say I do a blog, where not only do I say their flagship product tastes like piss, I say it's because they use actual sewer water in the product. Then, since that's clearly untrue, then they can sue, demand a retraction, an apology, and other damages.

This was the case when some Amway dealers were spreading false rumors that an executive of Procter & Gamble ("P&G", as they've been known for over a hundred years, which makes products that compete with some of Amway's offerings) was a practicing satanist who had gone on TV to admit this (which he hadn't) and that P&G's "man in the moon" logo, that they had used for decades was a satanic symbol (it wasn't). The company successfully sued some of these people, but the damage was so bad P&G had to drop their old logo and create a new one. In this case, P&G was able to sue over these false rumors, but not always. For a disparagement case to be successful, what's said must be untrue ''and'' people would have to believe the lie. If I pick on Coke again and say in my blog that it tastes like piss because they use swamp water direct from the planet Mars, that's clearly hyperbole because no one could seriously believe it's possible to import anything from another planet. But if someone says something provably wrong that could be believed and it makes that product look bad, there is a good chance the manufacturer can go after the speaker or publisher for disparagement. (This is also why it's legal to give these fictitious examples about Coca-Cola in this article because it's clear that I am identifying them as false and am not intending that anyone believe them.)

Trademarks are statutory in nature, meaning that in some cases you might have a perfectly valid and unique name but the law may prohibit you from registering the mark or claiming an exclusive right to an unregistered mark. For example, you can no longer claim exclusivity on a location as part of a mark, but you can if you had a mark registered before about 1990. Someone at ''The Washington Post'' failed to notice its trademark for the name of the paper, held for over 100 years, had expired. Had they kept it registered, under the old rules they would still have an exclusive right to the name Washington as part of the mark, but now they had to disclaim an exclusive right to the name of the city as part of the mark when they re-registered it. Remember this, I'll come back to it later.

[[quoteright:271:https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/trademark.png]]

[[quoteright:271:https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/Trademark_symbol_8384.png]]

You might be asking why Wiki/TVTropes has an article about trademarks (and servicemarks). Well, so that you can understand what they are; what they aren't; how someone else (other than the mark's owner) is allowed to use them in a story; when they can't (or their lawyer thinks they can't) use it; under what circumstances someone using them as part of a media franchise can get a trademark; and when they can't. This will also let you understand ''why'' sometimes they use an obvious fake name in place of an (even more obvious) brand name.

Note that this "no offensive marks can be registered" law was challenged as a result of a 2019 US Supreme Court Decision, ''[[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iancu_v._Brunetti Iancu v. Brunetti]]'', where the Supreme Court found, as Wiki/{{Wikipedia}} put it, "The Lanham Act prohibition on the registration of "immoral" or "scandalous" trademarks infringes the First Amendment." (The respondent [[note]]the Supreme Court has its own language, the plaintiff, or party suing, in the Supreme Court is called the ''petitioner'' while the party being sued, the defendant, is called the ''respondent''[[/note]] Erik Brunetti tried to register the word "FUCT", which is generally pronounced the same as "fucked", so the Patent and Trademark office refused registration. Brunetti sued, and the appeals court found the law violated the First Amendment. The Supreme Court agreed.) So now, the rule against "scandalous and immoral" trademarks no longer applies. Now the only question is how long before someone registers a trademark containing any of Creator/GeorgeCarlin's famous "seven dirty words" list. [[note]] for those curious, the seven words that can't be used on television/radio are: shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits. We can probably take "piss" and "tits" out of that list since they are much less offensive now, and "shit" looks to be joining that club soon.[[/note]]

Trademarks (and service marks; that term will be explained later) are a term used to refer to an identifier for something placed in (legal) commerce. We have to make this additional point about it being legal, because you can't get a registration for something illegal. If, for example, you developed an improved version of crystal meth, [[Series/BreakingBad that's bright blue because of its high quality]], you won't be able to get a trademark registration on whatever name you put on it (or possibly on the color, as we explain below) because the product isn't legal, or more likely, the cops will get your address from the trademark application and come bust you.

A trademark or servicemark is used to identify goods or services that you produce; you do not necessarily have to be a commercial organization or even making a profit to obtain one to identify your products and services. For example, a religious organization might have a trademark on the name of its particular religious text ("The Most High Sun Prayer Guide") and a service mark for the name of its particular religion. ("[=PraySun=]"). This is exactly the situation with the Church of Scientology, where "Scientology", the name of their religion, is a registered servicemark, while their primary reference manual, "Dianetics" is a registered trademark. The Salvation Army has a service mark registration on its red shield, and the Jehovah's Witnesses have trademarks in their publications ''Awake!'' and ''The Watchtower''. UsefulNotes/BoiseStateUniversity has a trademark on its football stadium's blue field.[[labelnote:*]]The trademark is specifically on the color of the area between the goal lines; colored end zones have long been common in gridiron football. BSU actually holds a trademark on ''any'' non-green athletic field, although the enforceability of that trademark with regard to colors not associated with the university has been questioned. Several other colleges, plus a few high schools, also have non-green fields; BSU grants free licenses to any such institution to use a color other than blue or orange, its official colors. Two schools in lower divisions, one in NCAA Division II and the other in Division III, have blue fields via similar agreements with Boise State; one of these officially calls its field "blue and yellow".[[/labelnote]] The United States Department of Defense has a service mark in ''American Forces Network'', its broadcasting/satellite TV arm for members of the military even though its stations do not run commercials.

Trademarks are proper names; that's why they are capitalized when used to refer to the particular product or service. (Except when ''the trademark itself'' is not capitalized, or in camel case.) A trademark is classed as "strong" or "weak". A strong mark is so significant that any use typically implies the original company, e.g. if you sold silverware with the name "Exxon", Exxon Mobil would very likely be able to successfully argue in court that anything with that name would be thought to come from the oil company. However, if you sold something under the name "Acme", that mark is so weak that even Creator/WarnerBros probably couldn't stop you.

The reason for the strong vs. weak dichotomy is that if you have a registered mark or use an unregistered one, you can't necessarily stop someone else from using the same or a similar mark on completely different goods or services unless your mark is considered "strong". Going back to Exxon Mobil again, they had a bit of trouble with Kellogg's. Now, Kellogg's sells Frosted Flakes cereal with their mascot, Tony the Tiger. At some point after this, Standard Oil of New Jersey (the predecessor to Exxon) started advertising Esso gasoline along with a tiger, either real or a drawing. Kellogg's didn't have a problem with this; gasoline has nothing to do with breakfast cereal or food. Flash forward forty-plus years, and what is now [=ExxonMobil=] wants to sell food at some of its gas stations under the "On the Run" name, and use their unnamed tiger mascot. This, however, Kellogg's was not happy about, and won in court to stop [=ExxonMobil=] from using a tiger in connection with the sale of food. Again, Kellogg's specifically told the court it had no objection to [=ExxonMobil=] using a tiger image at their gas pumps or in connection with the sale of gasoline. In this case, the image of a tiger is a strong mark for Kellogg's in the area of food products, but is a weak mark as applied to other things.

Trademarks are statutory in nature, meaning that in some cases you might have a perfectly valid and unique name but the law may prohibit you from registering the mark or claiming an exclusive right to an unregistered mark. For example, you can no longer claim exclusivity on a location as part of a mark, but you can if you had a mark registered before about 1990. Someone at The Washington Post failed to notice its trademark for the name of the paper, held for over 100 years, had expired. Had they kept it registered, under the old rules they would still have an exclusive right to the name Washington as part of the mark, but now they have to disclaim an exclusive right to the name of the city as part of the mark when they re-registered it. Remember this, I'll come back to it later.

Also, under a 1905 law, a trademark/servicemark couldn't be "offensive", e.g. a woman registered a word for lollypops in the shape of a rooster. If you guessed the word she used was "cocksuckers" you can probably understand why her registration was cancelled. Also, there have been attempts to cancel the Washington Redskins mark for its football team because it's considered offensive to Native Americans but a previous attempt was overturned in court on technical grounds, basically the mark has been in use since the 1940s and registered since 1967, so if there were objections they're supposed to be filed before the mark has been registered for twenty years. [[note]]And because they registered "Washington Redskins" that far back they ''do'' have an exclusive right to the name of the city as a part of the mark.[[/note]]

Note that this "no offensive marks can be regitered" law was challenged as a result of a 2019 US Supreme Court Decision, ''[[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iancu_v._Brunetti Iancu v. Brunetti]]'', where the Supreme Court found, as Wiki/{{Wikipedia}} put it, "The Lanham Act prohibition on the registration of "immoral" or "scandalous" trademarks infringes the First Amendment." (The respondent [[note]]the Supreme Court has its own language, the plaintiff, or party suing, in the Supreme Court is called the ''petitioner'' while the party being sued, the defendant, is called the ''respondent''[[/note]] Erik Brunetti tried to register the word "FUCT," which is generally prounounced the same as "fucked," so the Patent and Trademark office refused registration. Brunetti sued, and the appeals court found the law violated the First Amendment. The Supreme Court agreed.) So now, the rule against "scandalous and immoral" trademarks no longer applies. Now the only question is how long before someone registers a trademark containing any of Creator/GeorgeCarlin's famous "seven dirty words" list. [[note]] for those curious, the seven words that can't be used on television/radio are: shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits. We can probably take "piss" and "tits" out of that list, they are much less offensive now.[[/note]]

Trademarks and Servicemarks come in two flavors: registered marks and unregistered marks. In some jurisdictions, ownership of a mark comes from registration, if you don't register the mark and someone else does, they own it. (This is the situation with Internet domain names.) In some jurisdictions, the first party to use a mark owns it, and can take away ownership from someone who started using it later even though the other party had registered their use of the mark and the first user did not. (This is the status in the United States.) There are, of course, various exceptions to the rules, which is why we say that the wives of lawyers that handle this sort of law have mink coats. To add to the fun, a trademark/servicemark can be registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or it can be registered with the Secretary of State or equivalent agency in each state where the goods or services are sold. Or it can be registered at both the state and federal level. There are two reasons for this: if you only operate in one state, a state registration may be enough to start, is generally cheaper (about $50 or less vs. about $300 at the Federal level) requires less paperwork (often nothing more than one page and a copy of the item or the advertising) and if you get to the point that you want to register the mark federally, the state registration can serve as evidence of the first use of the mark, which can be helpful if someone else uses the same or a similar mark to yours and you need to show you used it before them. Also, it gives your lawyer an option, in which they can sue in either federal court or state court, which, may be more advantageous in some cases.

Generally, if a mark is not registered, the owner will try to warn people it claims some ownership by using TM next to the term. If a mark is registered with the Federal Government through the Patent and Trademark office, the owner can use the R-in-a-circle ® symbol, or the much older "Reg. U.S. Pat. & TM Off." (Dupont likes to use the old format on its corporate logo). You can't use the ® on a mark only registered at the state level, but you can mention the state registration, e.g. "Trademark Registered with the Virginia Corporation Commission", "Servicemark Registered with the UsefulNotes/{{Arizona}} Secretary of State." etc. A lot of companies would register their marks with the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, which is why a lot of products would have a notice "Reg. Penna Dept. of Agr." on them. Some countries did not allow the use of the R in a circle notice so some countries where a product's mark is registered the product would have the notice "Trade Mark Regd." on it.

There are certain marks you cannot register. This varies by country, but here are some examples from the United States. A mark consisting of the coat of arms of seal of a country generally isn't registrable. Also, a government may grant trademark status for certain terms used by its organizations, these are called "Chartered Marks" because the ownership of the mark was granted by charter. In the US, The Boy Scouts, the 4H Club (and its special 4 leaf clover), the FDIC, and certain other organizations, have been granted ownership of their name or mark by statute. Also, the state flag and state seal of each of the 50 states is not registrable by a private organization.

But even then, the restriction is only with respect to goods or services using a protected name or symbol; if you're making a movie involving a UN peacekeeping agency, you can put UN uniforms on the actors and use the UN flag or logo on their vehicles, or film a scene where International Red Cross workers are involved because of the First Amendment. This also means if you're filming a movie about a real or fictional bank, you can post "FDIC" stickers at the fake teller windows or on the front door. As long as you don't try to include the protected symbols or names in the advertising for the movie, it's unlikely a court would prevent you from doing so unless you tried to claim you had approval of the organization. Although if the usage puts them in a bad light, they may threaten litigation. (See below about "disparagement.") The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority made noises that they were going to take legal action against ''Film/DieHard2'' because of its frequent mention of "Dulles Airport," which it operates, but nothing happened, someone probably realized they have no grounds to sue and would simply provide lots more publicity, vis-a-vis the StreisandEffect.

So anyway, a trademark is an identifier. That identifier can be a word or two (''Perrier'' water, ''Total'' gasoline, ''Microsoft'' software, ''Jiffy Lube'' oil changes), a phrase (''The Sweetheart of the Corn'' is a trademark that still appears on boxes of Kellogg's Corn Flakes, and Canadian Club Whiskey is also known by the phrase ''The Best in the House''), an image (called a 'device' in trademark law) such as the ''Bat symbol'' (not to be confused with [[Franchise/{{Batman}} another bat symbol]]) appearing on a bottle of Bacardi Rum, a color (Owens Corning won the right to trademark the color ''pink'' for use in fiberglass insulation), a layout design (The design of the label on a bottle of Jack Daniels is the property of the Jack Daniels Distillery, as they will be happy to inform you if you use it without permission), or a sound (The Creator/{{MGM}} Lion's roar for motion pictures). The latter are technically referred to as ''trade dress'', as a "mark" is specifically a phrase or image used to mark an item to denote its manufacturer, but share similar protections.

The reason for the strong vs. weak dichotomy is that if you have a registered mark or use an unregistered one, you can't necessarily stop someone else from using the same or a similar mark on completely different goods or services unless your mark is considered "strong". Going back to Exxon Mobil again, they had a bit of trouble with Kellogg's. Now, Kellogg's sells Frosted Flakes cereal with their mascot, Tony the Tiger. At some point after this, Standard Oil of New Jersey (the predecessor to Exxon) started advertising Esso gasoline along with a tiger, either real or a drawing. Kellogg's didn't have a problem with this; gasoline has nothing to do with breakfast cereal or food. Flash forward forty plus years, and what is now Exxon Mobil wants to sell food at some of its gas stations under the "On The Run" name, and use their unnamed tiger mascot. This, however, Kellogg's was not happy about, and won in court to stop Exxon Mobil from using a tiger in connection with the sale of food. Again, Kellogg's specifically told the court it had no objection to Exxon Mobil using a tiger image at their gas pumps or in connection with the sale of gasoline. In this case, the image of a tiger is a strong mark for Kelloggs in the area of food products, but is a weak mark as applied to other things.

Also, if a trademark does not represent a distinct, specific owner to people who use the product or service it identifies (as opposed to the trademark or service mark being the "generic" term used to describe the product), the trademark can be declared "generic" by a court and then anyone can use it. This is why anyone can call acetysalicylic acid "aspirin" in the United States, it's become the generic term for that product. (Aspirin is still a trademark of Bayer in the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, and over 80 other countries, however.) This is why Johnson & Johnson (creators of [[StuckOnBandaidBrand Band-Aid bandages]]) and Xerox tried to discourage the public from using their trademarks as generic terms for the type of product[[note]]or the verb form of the product's function, in the case of Xerox[[/note]]--it weakened the respective trademarks.

Famous people registering their name or ''nom de plume'' as a trademark or service mark is not that unusual. Music/FrankSinatra and Creator/StephenHawking have done so; the Estate of Creator/MarilynMonroe has both that ''nom de plume'' and her birth name, "Norma Jean Baker" registered. Which name the estate of Elvis Presley has registered is left as an exercise for the reader.

A trademark or servicemark is used to identify goods or services that you produce; you do not necessarily have to be a commercial organization or even making a profit to obtain one to identify your products and services. For example, a religious organization might have a trademark on the name of its particular religious text ("The Most High Sun Prayer Guide") and a service mark for the name of its particular religion. ("[=PraySun=]"). This is exactly the situation with the Church of Scientology, where "Scientology", the name of their religion, is a registered servicemark, while their primary reference manual, "Dianetics" is a registered trademark. The Salvation Army has a service mark registration on its red shield, and the Jehovah's Witnesses have trademarks in their publications ''Awake!'' and ''The Watchtower''. Boise State University has a trademark on its football stadium's blue field.[[labelnote:*]]The trademark is specifically on the color of the area between the goal lines; colored end zones have long been common in gridiron football. BSU actually holds a trademark on ''any'' non-green athletic field, although the enforceability of that trademark with regard to colors not associated with the university has been questioned. Several other colleges, plus a few high schools, also have non-green fields; BSU grants free licenses to any such institution to use a color other than blue or orange, its official colors. Two schools in lower divisions, one in NCAA Division II and the other in Division III, have blue fields via similar agreements with Boise State; one of these officially calls its field "blue and yellow".[[/labelnote]] The United States Department of Defense has a service mark in ''American Forces Network'', its broadcasting/satellite TV arm for members of the military even though its stations do not run commercials.

There's another issue about trademarks, generally for titles of works of art like books, films, songs, you can't register the title as a trademark unless the work is extremely popular or has a very long history of use. ''Literature/HarryPotter'' or ''Literature/LeftBehind'' as the title of a series of works could be registered, but probably not the titles of the individual books in the series. This can cause problems because there are two completely unrelated movies named ''Film/{{Crash}}'', one about people that set up car crashes as erotica, and another that won an Academy Award. But, if you have a particular work and someone else releases something under the same or a very similar name you ''may'' be able to stop them. But there are exceptions, especially for parody. This is why porn movies usually do puns that are similar to mainstream movies ("Juranal Park" for ''Film/JurassicPark'', "Saturday Night Beaver" for ''Film/SaturdayNightFever'' and "Schindler's Fist" for ''Film/SchindlersList'') as it can be considered parody, which comes (no pun intended) under Fair Use, below. There are exceptions; there is both a clean film called "What's Love Got to Do With It" and a porno film of the same name. How come the porno is able to have the same name? They used it first.

A trademark or servicemark is used to identify goods or services that you produce; you do not necessarily have to be a commercial organization or even making a profit to obtain one to identify your products and services. For example, a religious organization might have a trademark on the name of its particular religious text ("The Most High Sun Prayer Guide") and a service mark for the name of its particular religion. ("[=PraySun=]"). This is exactly the situation with the Church of Scientology, where "Scientology", the name of their religion, is a registered servicemark, while their primary reference manual, "Dianetics" is a registered trademark. The Salvation Army has a service mark registration on its red shield, and the Jehovah's Witnesses have trademarks in their publications ''Awake!'' and ''The Watchtower''. Boise State University has a trademark on its football stadium's blue field.[[labelnote:*]]The trademark is specifically on the color of the area between the goal lines; colored end zones have long been common in gridiron football. BSU actually holds a trademark on ''any'' non-green athletic field, although the enforceability of that trademark with regard to colors not associated with the university has been questioned. Several other colleges, plus a few high schools, also have non-green fields; BSU grants free licenses to any such institution to use a color other than blue or orange, its official colors.[[/labelnote]] The United States Department of Defense has a service mark in ''American Forces Network'', its broadcasting/satellite TV arm for members of the military even though its stations do not run commercials.

A trademark or servicemark is used to identify goods or services that you produce; you do not necessarily have to be a commercial organization or even making a profit to obtain one to identify your products and services. For example, a religious organization might have a trademark on the name of its particular religious text ("The Most High Sun Prayer Guide") and a service mark for the name of its particular religion. ("[=PraySun=]"). This is exactly the situation with the Church of Scientology, where "Scientology", the name of their religion, is a registered servicemark, while their primary reference manual, "Dianetics" is a registered trademark. The Salvation Army has a service mark registration on its red shield, and the Jehovah's Witnesses have trademarks in their publications ''Awake!'' and ''The Watchtower''. Boise State University has a trademark on its football stadium's blue field.[[labelnote:*]]The trademark is specifically on the color of the area between the goal lines; colored end zones have long been common in gridiron football. Other universities now have non-green fields, but use colors other than blue. A few US high schools have blue fields; Boise State allows high schools to use that field color for a nominal license fee (along with some form of recognition of BSU's trademark).[[/labelnote]] The United States Department of Defense has a service mark in ''American Forces Network'', its broadcasting/satellite TV arm for members of the military even though its stations do not run commercials.

A trademark or servicemark is used to identify goods or services that you produce; you do not necessarily have to be a commercial organization or even making a profit to obtain one to identify your products and services. For example, a religious organization might have a trademark on the name of its particular religious text ("The Most High Sun Prayer Guide") and a service mark for the name of its particular religion. ("[=PraySun=]"). This is exactly the situation with the Church of Scientology, where "Scientology", the name of their religion, is a registered servicemark, while their primary reference manual, "Dianetics" is a registered trademark. The Salvation Army has a service mark registration on its red shield, and the Jehovah's Witnesses have trademarks in their publications ''Awake!'' and ''The Watchtower''. The United States Department of Defense has a service mark in ''American Forces Network'', its broadcasting/satellite TV arm for members of the military even though its stations do not run commercials.

Famous people registering their name or ''nom de plume'' as a trademark or service mark is not that unusual. Music/FrankSinatra and Creator/StephenHawking have done so; the Estate of Creator/MarilynMonroe has both that ''nom de plume'' and her birth name, "Norma Jean Baker" registered, Which name the Estate of Elvis Presley has registered is left as an exercise for the reader.

However, there is the issue of "disparagement", which means you claim something about a company, product, or service which makes it look bad. If it's pure opinion, such as my example from above how I dislike the taste of Coke, there's nothing they can do about it. If the statement is true, they also can't do anything (on Website/YouTube you can find the video of a New York City Kentucky Fried Chicken - Taco Bell restaurant at 6th Avenue and 4th Street in Greenwich Village where rats were running rampant.) But, if the statement is factual, ''and'' false, then that is actionable. To pick on [[SayMyNameWithAThe The]] Coca-Cola Company again, let's say I do a blog, where not only do I say their flagship product tastes like piss, I say it's because they use actual sewer water in the product. Then, since that's clearly untrue, then they can sue, demand a retraction, an apology, and other damages.

Also, if you register a domain name and someone else claims they are entitled to that name[[note]] unless the name is obviously theirs, e.g. an individual has the right to register a domain name which consists of their birth or married name[[/note]] the domain dispute process looks to see if either party has a trademark or service mark registered at the national level of some country, so state-level registrations don't count. Due to the much faster processes involved, some companies that don't even operate there are registering marks in the country of Tunisia (and then take advantage of the [[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madrid_system Madrid system]] for their trademarks to have validity in several countries of the world).

As a result of treaties between countries, there are marks of international organizations that can't be used without their permission (unless you were using the mark for something before the mark was granted treaty status). The word "[[UsefulNotes/OlympicGames Olympic]]" or the 5 interlocking rings; the UsefulNotes/UnitedNations flag or logo; UsefulNotes/TheRedCross (Johnson & Johnson [[GrandfatherClause can still use the Red Cross for cotton in the United States because they were using it more than 100 years ago before the symbol was protected]]), Red Crescent (some Muslim countries) or Red Crystal. (The Red Crystal got created because the Arab countries wouldn't put up with the use of a red Star of David as the Israeli Red Cross used, so the Israelies picked something less offensive.)

Trademarks are proper names; that's why they are capitalized when used to refer to the particular product or service. A trademark is classed as "strong" or "weak." A strong mark is so significant that any use typically implies the original company, e.g. if you sold silverware with the name "Exxon", Exxon Mobil would very likely be able to successfully argue in court that anything with that name would be thought to come from the oil company. However, if you sold something under the name "Acme", that mark is so weak that even Creator/WarnerBros probably couldn't stop you.

The reason for the strong vs. weak dichotomy is that if you have a registered mark or use an unregistered one, you can't necessarily stop someone else from using the same or a similar mark on completely different goods or services unless your mark is considered "strong". Going back to Exxon Mobil again, they had a bit of trouble with Kellogs. Now, Kellogs sells Frosted Flakes cereal with their mascot, Tony the Tiger. At some point after this, Standard Oil of New Jersey (the predecessor to Exxon) started advertising Esso gasoline along with a tiger, either real or a drawing. Kellogs didn't have a problem with this; gasoline has nothing to do with breakfast cereal or food. Flash forward forty plus years, and what is now Exxon Mobil wants to sell food at some of its gas stations under the "On The Run" name, and use their unnamed tiger mascot. This, however, Kellogs was not happy about, and won in court to stop Exxon Mobil from using a tiger in connection with the sale of food. Again, Kellogs specifically told the court it had no objection to Exxon Mobil using a tiger image at their gas pumps or in connection with the sale of gasoline. In this case, the image of a tiger is a strong mark for Kelloggs in the area of food products, but is a weak mark as applied to other things.

Now, if you're going to use a mark for a product or as the name of an organization (like a band), if it's the same as someone else's name or mark (because you are doing a homage) the original owner may not like it and can probably demand it be changed. During the 1960s, two groups named themselves after other organizations. The band named Pacific Gas and Electric did not impress the San Francisco-based public utility, so the band changed its name to PG&E. (Years later, after that band broke up, the utility also started using the name PG&E.) Another rock group used the name of the local bus and rail transportation company, the Chicago Transit Authority. They also did not like this, so the band changed its name to Chicago.

While we're on the subject of locations, there is yet another wrinkle. The Europeans are trying to create a form of "protected location" where you can't use certain geographic identifiers for certain products unless it actually comes from that area. The most famous example of this has been the attempts to stop producers of sparkling wine from calling it "champagne" unless the product was grown and bottled in the Champagne region of France. This might also mean you can't release whiskey under the name "bourbon" unless it's made in Bourbon County, Kentucky, United States.[[note]] This is already a requirement for a different sprit. Federal law only permits a product to call itself "Tennessee Whiskey" if it is made and bottled in one particular state. Which one is left as an exercise for the reader.[[/note]] I guess the next thing will be the group Chicago will have to be sure all their records are recorded there (if they aren't already, I mean.)

In the examples given earlier, the color pink used on insulation is a trademark (you actually have the insulation), but Jiffy Lube is a service mark, you had the service of an oil change done (and the oil change is done using oil bearing the "Pennzoil" trademark, and oil filters bearing the "Purolator" trademark.). As noted earlier, in some cases the identifier can be both a trademark and a servicemark. While the Creator/{{MGM}} Lion Roar sound was a service mark until the 1980s since you didn't get a copy of the film, you just got the service of viewing the film, but now you can get the service of watching a film (in a theatre, via pay-per-view or on-demand via cable or satellite, or on-line via streaming), and the goods of the actual film (on video disc, or digital download), this sound mark could be both a trademark and a service mark.

A trademark or servicemark is used to identify goods or services that you produce; you do not necessarily have to be a commercial organization or even making a profit to obtain one to identify your products and services. For example, a religious organization might have a trademark on the name of its particular religious text ("The Most High Sun Prayer Guide") and a service mark for the name of its particular religion. ("[=PraySun=]"). This is exactly the situation with the Church of Scientology, where "Scientology," the name of their religion, is a registered servicemark, while their primary reference manual, "Dianetics" is a registered trademark. The Salvation Army has a service mark registration on its red shield, and the Jehovah's Witnesses have trademarks in their publications "Awake!" and "The Watchtower". The United States Department of Defense has a service mark in "American Forces Network," its broadcasting/satellite TV arm for members of the military even though its stations do not run commercials.

Why bother? Well, during the covid-19 outbreak of 2020, some meat processing plants had to shut down due to positive test results at these factories. Due to fears of food shortages, a federal order was issued to force these facilities to remain open. Now, let's say to give workers in these essential facilities more protection, a company develops an improved protective system that's as good as a full hazmat suit but considerably less difficult or uncomfortable to wear, that's so good other workers can use it. So they ask OSHA to verify its more effective and allow them to say OSHA approved it. The agency finds their claims are true and allows this. Now, lets say some CorruptCorporateExecutive decides to make more money by cheapening the product so it's not effective. OSHA finds out and informs them they can no longer use its name or initials on the equipment they produce (or maybe not make it anymore). But, since the company has released equipment with OSHA's registered trademark on it, any of the defective equipment can be ordered impounded and destroyed, just as with knock-offs of popular brands.

Trademarks, along with UsefulNotes/{{Copyright}} and patent, are considered "intellectual property" in that it's a special type of government-granted monopoly. Trademarks, however are different from copyright; A copyright owner can ignore some infringing uses of its works and does not lose the ability to go after other infringements. But if you own a trademark and do not make efforts to stop unauthorized uses of your mark of which you are aware, someone doing exactly that can use your failure to "police" your mark to [[BrandNameTakeover prevent you from stopping him]] from using it as well - this aspect of trademark is sometimes referred to as ''defend or die''. It's why the International Olympic Committee, the NFL, etc. seem to be absolutely tyrannical with regard to their trademarks - the law pretty much demands they have to be. (Yes, they're quite aware of the "damned if they do, damned if they don't" position they're in. Cease-and-desist letters for non-malicious infringement often take on an apologetic tone, thanking the person for their support but explaining why they have to tell them to stop, and these sometimes go viral.)

Also, if a trademark does not represent a distinct, specific owner to people who use the product or service it identifies (as opposed to the trademark or service mark being the "generic" term used to describe the product), the trademark can be declared "generic" by a court and then anyone can use it. This is why anyone can call acetysalicitic acid "aspirin" in the United States, it's become the generic term for that product. (Aspirin is still a trademark of Bayer in the United Kingdom, however.) This is why Johnson & Johnson (creators of [[StuckOnBandaidBrand Band-Aid bandages]]) and Xerox tried to discourage the public from using their trademarks as generic terms for the type of product[[note]]or the verb form of the product's function, in the case of Xerox[[/note]]--it weakened the respective trademarks.

There's another issue about trademarks, generally for titles of works of art like books, films, songs, you can't register the title as a trademark unless the work is extremely popular or has a very long history of use. ''Literature/HarryPotter'' or ''Literature/LeftBehind'' as the title of a series of works could be registered, but probably not the titles of the individual books in the series. This can cause problems because there are two completely unrelated movies named ''Film/{{Crash}}'', one about people that set up car crashes as erotica, and another that won an Academy Award. But, if you have a particular work and someone else releases something under the same or a very similar name you ''may'' be able to stop them. But there are exceptions, especially for parody. This is why porn movies usually do puns that are similar to mainstream movies ("Juranal Park" for ''Film/JurassicPark'', "Saturday Night Beaver" for ''Film/SaturdayNightFever'' and "Schindler's Fist" for ''Film/SchindlersList'') as it can be considered parody, which comes (no pun intended) under Fair Use, below. There are exceptions; there is both a clean film called "What's Love Got To Do With It" and a porno film of the same name. How come the porno is able to have the same name? They used it first.

Then there is the concept of UsefulNotes/FairUse, (which while normally relevant to copyright, also applies to use of other people's trademarks), where someone can use someone else's trademark whether its owner likes it or not. For example, let's say I run a blog and I post openly that I happen to hate Coca-Cola because I think it tastes bad, and I happen to like Dr. Pepper. They can't successfully sue me because it's a legitimate commentary. (To be fair, I will note that my brother, on the other hand, likes Coke and hates Dr. Pepper.) This use of their trademarks is fair use because I am giving a comparison of products. Besides that, it's pure opinion; there is no objective way to prove if a soft drink tastes good or bad. Now, if I sold a soft drink called "Swill", and I ran a survey, I could legally say that "86% of customers preferred Swill over Mountain. Dew" (as long as it was true). (This was the entire premise of the UsefulNotes/PepsiChallenge, where Pepsi showed that people preferred it over Coke, and started the Cola Wars of the 1980s.)

But you have to be careful, especially in advertisements. Taco Bell got into a public relations disaster after - without asking him first - they ran ads suggesting rap music performer 50 Cent (Curtis Jackson) change his name to 79 Cent, 89 Cent, or 99 Cent, and order one of their menu items at that price, and they'd donate $10,000 to the charity of his choice. He sued them, and it's probably likely the settlement Taco Bell agreed to was considerably more than $10,000, and probably went to his pockets directly.

Famous people registering their name or ''nom de plume'' as a trademark or service mark is not that unusual. Frank Sinatra and Stephen Hawking have done so; the Estate of Marilyn Monroe has both that ''nom de plume'' and her birth name, "Norma Jean Baker" registered, Which name the Estate of Elvis Presley has registered is left as an exercise for the reader.

However, there is the issue of "disparagement," which means you claim something about a company, product, or service which makes it look bad. If it's pure opinion, such as my example from above how I dislike the taste of Coke, there's nothing they can do about it. If the statement is true, they also can't do anything (on Website/YouTube you can find the video of a New York City Kentucky Fried Chicken - Taco Bell restaurant at 6th Avenue and 4th Street in Greenwich Village where rats were running rampant.) But, if the statement is factual, ''and'' false, then that is actionable. To pick on the Coca-Cola Company again, let's say I do a blog, where not only do I say their flagship product tastes like piss, I say it's because they use actual sewer water in the product. Then, since that's clearly untrue, then they can sue, demand a retraction, an apology, and other damages.

This was the case when some Amway dealers were spreading false rumors that an executive of Proctor & Gamble ("P&G", as they've been known for over a hundred years, who makes products that compete with some of Amway's offerings) was a practicing satanist who had gone on TV to admit this (which he hadn't) and that P&G's "man in the moon" logo, that they had used for decades was a satanic symbol (it wasn't). The company successfully sued some of these people, but the damage was so bad P&G had to drop their old logo and create a new one. In this case, P&G was able to sue over these false rumors, but not always. For a disparagement case to be successful, what's said must be untrue ''and'' people would have to believe the lie. If I pick on Coke again and say in my blog that it tastes like piss because they use swamp water direct from the planet Mars, that's clearly hyperbole because no one could seriously believe it's possible to import anything from another planet. But if someone says something provably wrong that could be believed and it makes that product look bad, there is a good chance the manufacturer can go after the speaker or publisher for disparagement. (This is also why it's legal to give these fictitious examples about Coca-Cola in this article because it's clear that I am identifying them as false and am not intending that anyone believe them.)

Then there's the problem where a trademark or servicemark is so successful that people use the mark interchangeably with the non-branded name. When a mark becomes generic, anyone can use it, and it is no longer capitalized except when used as the first word of a sentence. Note that a mark can be generic in one use and a strong trademark or service mark in another. It's perfectly legal to sell solid fuel under the name "coke" (a type of processed coal) without getting permission from anyone, but unless you're selling "The Real Thing" you'd better not try to sell any beverage under the name "Coke" unless it's authorized by the Coca-Cola Company of UsefulNotes/{{Atlanta}}. The word "peanuts" (not capitalized) refers to nuts that grow underground [[note]] technically peanuts are legumes - a class of pea - rather than actual nuts [[/note]], but the word "ComicStrip/{{Peanuts}}" (capitalized) refers to a comic strip by Charles Schulz as well as a series of books and TV specials.

Why bother? Well, during the covid-19 outbreak of 2020, some meat processing plants had to shut down due to positive test results at these factories. Due to fears of food shortages, a federal order was issued to force these facilities to remain open. Now, let's say to give workers in these essential facilities more protection, a company develops an improved protective system that's as good as a full hazmat suit but considerably less difficult or uncomfortable to wear, that's so good other workers can use it. So they ask OSHA to verify its more effective and allow them to say OSHA approved it. The agency finds their claims are true and allows this. Now, lets say some CorruptCorporateExecutive decides to make more money by cheapening the product soo it's not effective. OSHA finds out and informs them they can no longer use its name or initials on the equipment they produce (or maybe not mmake it anymore). But, since the company has released equipment with OSHA's registered trademark on it, any of the defective equipment can be ordered impounded and destroyed, just as with knock-offs of popular brands.

But even then, the restriction is only with respect to goods or services using a protected name or symbol; if you're making a movie involving a UN peacekeeping agency, you can put UN uniforms on the actors and use the UN flag or logo on their vehicles, or film a scene where International Red Cross workers are involved because of the First Amendment. As long as you don't try to include the protected symbols or names in the advertising for the movie, it's unlikely a court would prevent you from doing so unless you tried to claim you had approval of the organization. Although if the usage puts them in a bad light, they may threaten litigation. (See below about "disparagement.") The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority made noises that they were going to take legal action against ''Film/DieHard2'' because of its frequent mention of "Dulles Airport," which it operates, but nothing happened, someone probably realized they have no grounds to sue and would simply provide lots more publicity, vis-a-vis the StreisandEffect.

Now, if you're going to use a mark for a product or as the name of an organization (like a band), if it's the same as someone else's name or mark (because you are doing a homage) the original owner may not like it and can probably demand it be changed. During the 1960s, two groups named themselves after other organizations. Pacific Gas and Electric did not impress the San Francisco-based public utility, so the band changed its name to PG&E. (Years later, after that band broke up, the utility also started using the name PG&E.) Another rock group used the name of the local bus and rail transportation company, the Chicago Transit Authority. They also did not like this, so the band changed its name to Chicago.

While we're on the subject of locations, there is yet another wrinkle. The Europeans are trying to create a form of "protected location" where you can't use certain geographic identifiers for certain products unless it actually comes from that area. The most famous example of this has been the attempts to stop producers of sparkling wine from calling it "champagne" unless the product was grown and bottled in the Champagne region of France. This might also mean you can't release whiskey under the name "bourbon" unless it's made in Bourbon County, Kentucky, United States. I guess the next thing will be the group Chicago will have to be sure all their records are recorded there (if they aren't already, I mean.)