NAR steal word Realtor?

[DaddyHalbucks]

Garry,

Sure .REG can do all that, but you have not shown that there is any compelling advantage of your system over the way trademarks are currently registered and identified. It seems to further complicate the matter. There are some large potential detractions to .REG such as it being cumbersome, and yes, even.. CONFUSING.

Most consumers don't really care where a mark is registered, or in which class of goods it is categorized. The fact that it is a recognized brand with a (R) is good enough.

Perhaps all this will inspire a gigantic lawsuit. I can see the complaint now..

Garry Anderson
V.
The World

Gee, I wonder who will win?

 

[namedropper]

What have the following pairs of words in common?

Jail - Jailor

Vend - Vendor

Communicate - Communicator

Operate - Operator

Warranty - Warrantor

Advocate - Advocator

Advise - Advisor

Guarantee - Guarantor

Those pairs of words show that you can often take a verb and add an -or ending to make a noun, for a type of person who does that verb. "Realty" is not a verb and thus doesn't take the same word ending.

By the way, the proper word for someone who advocates is advocate, not advocator. Warrantor and guarantor are also very clumsy, but maybe those are Brit speak or legalese...

It's really ballsy for someone of your limited intellectual abilities to call all the various people who disagree with you stupid. I just draws attention to your inability to support your opinions with reasoned arguments.

 

[DaddyHalbucks]

Originally Posted by Garry Anderson

What have the following pairs of words in common?

Jail - Jailor

Vend - Vendor

Communicate - Communicator

Operate - Operator

Warranty - Warrantor

Advocate - Advocator

Advise - Advisor

Guarantee - Guarantor
+++++++++++++++++++++

You forgot the most famous example of all:

Absurd - Absurdtor

 

[FineE]

You forgot the most famous example of all:

Absurd - Absurdtor

Absurdtor.com is available for registration. Any comments on possible trademark conflicts for this name?

 

[Garry Anderson]

Daddy H> Sure .REG can do all that,

Thank you - very nice of you to admit it

Daddy H> but you have not shown that there is any compelling advantage of your system over the way trademarks are currently registered and identified.

Just exactly how is the way trademarks are currently identified on the internet adequate?

For registered trademarks - what other way is there to avoid confusion with ordinary domain names - than to have some sort of label (like .reg) that cannot be copied?

Daddy H> It seems to further complicate the matter.

It simply adds certificate of authentication and directory functionality - the user does no more - howso complicate?

Daddy H> There are some large potential detractions to .REG such as it being cumbersome, and yes, even.. CONFUSING.

How can two certificates confuse? e.g. apple.tobacco.us.reg and apple.computer.us.reg

Howso cumbersome?

This does not require user to do anything different. They simply enter .com as normal and can check address bar for certificate if they want to.

Daddy H> Most consumers don't really care where a mark is registered, or in which class of goods it is categorized. The fact that it is a recognized brand with a (R) is good enough.

These two sentences contradict one another - perhaps except for remark about class.

Sorry - trademarks are important - they are for the good of consumer as well as big business.

Regarding Garry Anderson V. The World:

You (and others) seem to be under some form of misconception. I have no delusions of grandeur - these are all simply logically reasoned ideas - I believe them true. You are most welcome to give comment or prove them wrong.

Like stated - these logically reasoned ideas have proven true in the past:

1. vCJD - I stated blood was an obvious transport for this disease - two years prior to this being discovered by 'experts'.

2. The under reporting of surgery errors - years prior to reports by British Medical Journal and World Health Organization 'experts'.

Gee, I won against 'The World' ;-)

Gosh, surely that is impossible Daddy H?

Links to proof are on my SKILFUL.com site - acquired after reports that nearly every dictionary word had been taken in .com TLD - using childishly simple deductive reasoning.

I do not claim to be one bit better than anybody here. You may have greater IQ or higher education or even be a better person in every sense. Primarily, clear objectivity and simple elementary logic is all that I use.

Like stated - past success does not mean that I could be proven wrong about the .reg label as authentication and directory services for registered trademarks.

Or that I may be proven wrong about UN WIPO unlawfully aiding and abetting trademark overreach - a fact which seems clear as day to me.

 

[DaddyHalbucks]

garry anderson wrote:

UN WIPO unlawfully aiding and abetting trademark overreach - a fact which seems clear as day to me.
+++++++++++++++++++++++

I agree with you about WIPO.

They are NFG.

 

[Tippy]

If I post my Realtor name here, you people gotta promise not to line me out about it, ok lol ?

Mike

 

[Garry Anderson]

Sorry Dan - I missed your post chum ;-)

Jail is also a noun: A building for the detention of persons committed by process of law.

Jailors are the ones who have charge of the jail or prisoners in it.

Realtors have charge of selling the realty.

It seems the spoof example of NUJ claim on word "Jailor" - highlighting the absurdity and real monopolistic nature of NAR claim on word "Realtor" - went way over your head as well.

Dan> It's really ballsy for someone of your limited intellectual abilities to call all the various people who disagree with you stupid. I just draws attention to your inability to support your opinions with reasoned arguments.

Thought I let peoples own argument speak for itself.

People who disagree with me are definately not stupid. Like I said, they may have greater IQ or education than than me. Nobody is always right - I am certainly not. Others argument may be better or worse formed.

You, on the other hand, use personal attacks against me. Not that I mind - it is good fun rebuffing your feeble insults.

As I have only "limited intellectual abilities", perhaps you would be ever so kind and lend me a brain cell - or would the other one get too lonely ;-)

 

[dtobias]

Garry,

Why is .REG superior to the USPTO (R) symbol to designate a registered trademark?

Because the (R) symbol isn't a valid character for including in domain names?

(Well, maybe some of the schemes for Unicode-based internationalized domain names would allow it.)

 

[Garry Anderson]

Daddy H> Garry, Why is .REG superior to the USPTO (R) symbol to designate a registered trademark?

Dan Tobias> Because the (R) symbol isn't a valid character for including in domain names?

Thank you for pointing that out Mr Tobias. Sorry for the formality - so as not to confuse with Dan Norder

 

[Garry Anderson]

Garry> Only monkey-brained cretinous morons would think that a letter could reach a SPECIFIC destination using address "Apple", "Ball", "Cat", "ABC" etc. - people like those in UN WIPO, US DoC and ICANN.

I was reminded, by a WIPrg.uk visitor today, that I made same argument at least two years ago:

Imagine what the future would be like - if the postal service had just been invented.

The Government are pleased to announce - a Postal Service.

Only one business is to be allowed for each word.

All post with 'apple' will go to Apple Computers.

The thousands of other businesses using word 'apple' will never receive mail.

The same for EVERY other business unlucky enough not to have got first chance to get their word (or rich enough).

As all words are trademarked, people using ANY dictionary word (or initials) can have their post taken away - indeed, they will be chucked out of their home.

When new delivery routes put in (new TLD), they will go to the same businesses as before e.g. letters with 'apple' on, will always go to Apple Computers.

P.S. We read all your mail, you have no basic human right to privacy.

http://forum.icann.org/newtldagmts/3C3276DA00001E57.html

 

[dtobias]

And that is precisely what the evidence showed in the TTAB case that started this thread - that the overwhelming majority of the purchasing public relevant to the NAR's membership services, i.e. real estate agents, perceive "Realtor" as a distinctive indicator of source or origin of the NAR's membership services.

That strikes me as a questionable call -- to regard the relevant public as real estate agents rather than the general class of people in the market to buy or sell real estate, of which a much higher portion would be unaware that Realtor is a trademark, and perhaps a majority thinks it to be generic. The value, such as it is, of the trademark "Realtor", is in identifying NAR members to the general public and encouraging them to regard them as the superior class of agents to seek when they wish to buy or sell a home. Any internal marketing of the term to the real estate profession when seeking to get agents to join and become official Realtors is of a secondary nature rather than primary, since it depends for its effectiveness on the marketing value of the term to the general public.

If "Realtor" were such a specialized brand name that it was known only to real estate professionals and used only in marketing the NAR's services within the profession (so that the general public wouldn't have heard of the word, and have no knowledge or opinion about whether it was generic or a trademark), then that specialized audience would be the proper group to poll, but as it is, with "Realtor" being used heavily in marketing to the public, the public should be considered the relevant audience. I'm working with a Realtor (yes, he's an NAR member, so the term is proper) to find a home now, so I'm part of that audience.

The NAR has failed to follow long-standing trademark attorney advice to use the trademarked name only as an adjective, not a noun or a verb. But then again, "Realtor (R) brand real estate agent" wouldn't be nearly as catchy. The presence of busybodies trying to compel people to use ugly constructs like "Scrabble (R) brand crossword game" instead of just saying that you're playing Scrabble, are yet another of the evils of the modern-day litigious society. Good thing the present-day expansionist intellectual property regime didn't exist for all of human history, or else we might be compelled to refer to the "Chess (R) brand strategy game" (and the distant descendant of the inventor of Chess (R) would still get royalties on it), not to mention that the latest copyright term extension would cause copyrights to last for the life of the author plus 2000 years so that the Catholic Church could still maintain its copyright on the New Testament and enforce it against other upstart churches.

 

[Garry Anderson]

"The NAR has failed to follow long-standing trademark attorney advice to use the trademarked name only as an adjective, not a noun or a verb."

Well observed Dan.

You completely pulled the rug from under NAR feet.

For John - from SMARTer Kids Foundation:

Trademark Usage

1. Always use a trademark as an adjective, followed by the appropriate noun descriptor(s)

Trademarks are adjectives that describe a specific person, place or thing. Using a trademark as an adjective avoids using the trademark in a generic sense.

Because a trademark is an adjective, always use it to modify a noun. Exceptions to this rule may occur in cases where space is very limited. In such cases, the noun may be omitted (for example, in the column heading of a table, in a drop-down menu, in a sidebar or in a heading or title). In such cases, however, the noun should be close to the trademark, or it should appear in the next text reference.

http://www.smarterkids.org/aboutus/tm/usage.asp

In case he needs any further help - on what an adjective is:

ad·jec·tive ( P ) Pronunciation Key (jk-tv)
n. Abbr. a. or adj.
The part of speech that modifies a noun or other substantive by limiting, qualifying, or specifying and distinguished in English morphologically by one of several suffixes, such as -able, -ous, -er, and -est, or syntactically by position directly preceding a noun or nominal phrase.
Any of the words belonging to this part of speech, such as white in the phrase a white house.

adj.
Adjectival: an adjective clause.
Law. Prescriptive; remedial: adjective law.
Not standing alone; derivative or dependent.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=adjective

 

[jberryhill]

That point was also covered in the decision you obviously haven't looked at.

Anyone who thinks Phillip Morris is going to lose their rights in "Marlboro" for cigarettes because they have used it as a noun in the slogan "Marlboro tastes good, like a cigarette should" is just plain stupid.

"See the USA in your Chevrolet."

"I'd walk a mile for Camel."

"At McDonald's, we do it all for you."

"I'm going to DisneyLand!"

---
"For John - from SMARTer Kids Foundation"

Yeah... and if you apply childlike concrete reasoning to everything, you come off sounding like a DUMBer kid.

In the absence of other factors, using a trademark consistently as a noun can cut against the trademark owner. It is hardly ever a determinative issue.

 

[jberryhill]

"That strikes me as a questionable call"

I agree... which is why we have procedures for getting answers to questionable calls.

 

[Garry Anderson]

John - as you may have guessed - I picked that quote because it was from kids site ;-)

As you say - "using a trademark consistently as a noun can cut against the trademark owner".

However - with them using Realtor as a noun, it seems this is a NOUN in the minds of most people.

They think of them as "Realtors" - and not "Realtor Real Estate Agents".

 

[dtobias]

Anyone who thinks Phillip Morris is going to lose their rights in "Marlboro" for cigarettes because they have used it as a noun in the slogan "Marlboro tastes good, like a cigarette should" is just plain stupid.

It's actually Winston that "tastes good like a cigarette should."

(Not that I have any personal experience about how a cigarette tastes, or how it should taste, being a life-long nonsmoker.)

 

[Tippy]

So, what should I do or not do with my R E A L T O R . W S Domain lol ?

Why did I reg it you may ask, well if I didnt I figured some other bozo would lol

Mike

 

[options]

Are there any criterias when a new made-up word becomes a generic one?
What if someone proves that his ancestors invented a word "doctor"?

Anyway, I don't see a consistency in similar rulings, especially when you look at Bayer's case for losing the rights on absolutely proprietary word "aspirin". Well, political conotations and a war conditions largely influenced the decision (branch of the company was appropriated by the US, and the trademark voided, which raise some questions of overal credibility of the system as well as those people trying to defend the farse in many ways including "the consumers weren't consistently reminded of the connection between the name and the manufacturer").

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tmcases/bayer.htm

Still... 'aspirin' being a generic word and 'realtor' not is a bit hard to swallow.

 

[dtobias]

That "aspirin" case has an element that seems fairly parallel to the situation of "Realtor":

The case, therefore, presents a situation in which, ignoring sporadic exceptions, the trade is divided into two classes, separated by vital differences. One, the manufacturing chemists, retail druggists, and physicians, has been educated to understand that 'Aspirin' means the plaintiff's manufacture, and has recourse to another and an intelligible name for it, actually in use among them. The other, the consumers, the plaintiff has, consciously I must assume, allowed to acquaint themselves with the drug only by the name 'Aspirin,' and has not succeeded in advising that the word means the plaintiff at all. If the defendant is allowed to continue the use of the word of the first class, certainly without any condition, there is a chance that it may get customers away from the plaintiff by deception. On the other hand, if the plaintiff is allowed a monopoly of the word as against consumers, it will deprive the defendant, and the trade in general, of the right effectually to dispose of the drug by the only description which will be understood. It appears to me that the relief granted cannot in justice to either party disregard this division; each party has won, and each has lost.

Similarly, the real estate profession is aware of the trademarked meaning of Realtor, while the general public, by and large, is not. The precedent of the aspirin case would point to a possibility of a split ruling, where only the NAR is permitted to use the word "Realtor" in advertising its membership and services within the profession, but others could use it in promoting real estate brokerage services to the general public. However, the USPTO chose instead to let the trademark remain fully protected both within and without the profession, despite a showing of secondary meaning mostly limited to the internal view of professionals.