Harassment - your view please!

Now all this BS is getting irrelevant. Let's get to the bottom of the problem.

1. PoolTees is unhappy with PoolRoomTees because the names are very similar.

2. PoolTees was refused trademark rights to the name and so there is no case of infringement.

3. PoolTees contacted PoolRoomTees with a "cease and desist" type warning.

4. PoolRoomTees does some research, and feels confident that no law has been broken, then contacts PoolTees and informs them of this.

5. PoolTees, without filing for legal action, goes to Facebook and MySpace and gets PoolRoomTees's stuff taken down, alleging infringement, which is not true. Results in possible damages for PoolRoomTees.

6. Instead of taking PoolTees to court for libel and fraud by proxy, PoolRoomTees brings this issue on here for opinions.

Now, with this being said, I think PoolRoomTees needs to stop with the drama because this is none of our business, and PoolTees needs to apologize for going to Facebook and Myspace, and explain to them that there's been a mistake and that there is no legal infringement.

Note: By "Fraud by Proxy", I mean that PoolTees misrepresented information to Facebook and Myspace, but the actual damages were inflicted upon PoolRoomTees. I'm not trying to throw around legal terms, I doubt this one even is one, but it's the only thing I can think of to describe the whole affair at the moment.
 
Just because the trademark office will not register a trademark does not abolish the trademark.

AGAIN FOR EVERYONE - a TRADE MARK is established AUTOMATICALLY when a company or individual uses it in commerce.

If I open a business called Ted's Cameras and NO ONE ELSE has used that name then Ted's Cameras is my trademark. If someone across town opens a business called Ted's Cameras and Binoculars then the second business is infringing by use of the "Ted's Cameras" portion of the name. Neither of these have to be registered trademarks.

When you see the R inside a circle it means that the trademark has been granted a registration. When you see TM is is notice that the user is claiming the mark as their trademark.

So please stop with the nonsense that PoolTees has no claim just because they might not have a federally registered trademark.

PoolTees claims might not hold up in court but that does not mean that Jake cannot pursue it. I would BET large that a person who starts a business in the same field and adopts a similar name would be looked at with some degree of scrutiny by the court.
 
What if the 2nd Ted shop's owner was named Ted? And also, using a person's name makes the "Trademark" a bit more unique than simply using some commonly used words in a certain order.

I would argue that the issue of PoolTees vs PoolRoomTees is more like this scenario:

Person 1 opens up a camera store called "Camera Store" and later person 2 opens up a different camera store on the other side of town called "Budget Camera Store". The problem here is that the trademark "PoolTees" may not unique enough. (Name is a bit too generic. Likewise, you're probably not going to have a monopoly on the word "Sandwich" because you were the first to open up a sandwich store by that name.)
edit: Also, not having a federally registered trademark is different from having a trademark registration request denied.
 
Last edited:
lil joey's like the attnys' pockets

JB Cases said:
PoolTees claims might not hold up in court but that does not mean that Jake cannot pursue it.

True. Anyone can pursue anything.

I would BET large that a person who starts a business in the same field and adopts a similar name would be looked at with some degree of scrutiny by the court.

True, & in this case, if Jake brings it to the "right" attorney, they will see to it that the courts scrutinize it, at least for 3 minutes IMO.
Click to expand...

I would bet LARGE, that Jake would get tossed to the curb by the courts (ie. law would not support his claim for Angela to change so much as the color of her toe-nail polish)

Based on what we have here, I'm confident the law is on her side, BUT sentiment is not on either ATM.

I still think these two can get it together if cooler heads prevail. I hope so, this damn industry is too fractured to begin with.

Kiss and makeup dammit! Us lil joey's are running outta breath here in Kangaroo land!!

(interesting catch SM, makes the pic even darker)
 
Gosh, I wonder why there are so many Colas out there if Coca-Cola was the first to come up with the idea of using the Cola nut to add astringency and a unique taste to a caramel colored, phosphoric acid loaded, carbonated sugar water. Oh, that's right, because the Cola nut is a generic item that is not unique, just like Pool T-Shirts are not unique and the product of solely one mind. You can add Cola nut and sours to caramel colored, carbonated sugar water and call it Cola if you'd like, just not COCA-Cola. Why? Because "Coca" is not a commonly used word. I bet you if Coca-Cola decided to trademark their drink under the name of just plain old "Cola", it still wouldn't have made the other cola companies stop naming their drinks after the word "Cola".
 
ShootingArts said:
Domain names can be exactly the same except the extension and many of them are. Try typing a simple domain name and all of the possible extensions, dot net, dot com, dot on and on. Someone had to change one that was their name because the name was already being used by a porn site, one was dot net and one was dot com.

There is a catfish restaurant franchise called Catfish Charlies. One of their Franchisees got annoyed and dropped the franchise. They simply closed the "C" in Charlies making it an "O" and put an apostrophe and became Catfish O'harlies!! Same sign! I don't know if O'harlies has multiple outlets or franchised but it appears that they franchised too. Charlie took them to court and lost.

Jake has some more work to do or possibly these folks should be coming after him if they were first. Poolshirts.net and Poolshirt.com aside from being almost identical to each other could be typed in when someone really wanted pooltees. Of course pooltees could be typed in when someone really wanted one of these businesses. Perhaps Angela should go to war with poolroomproducts, they could be confused.

Of course there are thousands of businesses and domains with similar names. Depending on how silly they want to get they can all go to war. Years ago a young lady opened a cafe. Her nickname was Sony. Quite reasonably she named it Sony's Cafe. This was a tiny little low end cafe and nobody could conceivably believe the electronics giant had chosen this manner to enter into the restaurant business. However they came down on her like the hounds of hell and made her change the name of the business. As a result they got millions of dollars of international bad publicity when the print and television media picked it up and did interviews with a pretty young girl squashed by the giant corporation. All things being equal, I still don't buy Sony because of them being such silly nits and that was a decade or so ago. Wonder how much that "win" has cost Sony in initial bad publicity and from people who remember that silly deal?

Hu
Click to expand...


You can find examples all day to support whichever side you happen to be on.

The test is generally whether a customer could confuse one business with another.

There are something like 435 categories that one can register a trademark for. So with that in mind you can register the same domain name with other extensions but you cannot use that domain for the same business IF it infringes on the trademark owned by someone else.

Poolshirts is different than Pooltees. As I stated earlier if one seaches for Pooltees which is the brand name, and ends up on PoolRoomTees.com then that consumer could conceivably genuinely believe that they landed on the website of the business that they were looking for. If a person searches for PoolTees and ends up on PoolShirts.com then they will be highly unlikely to believe that they landed on the website that belongs to the brand they were looking for. That is the difference.
 
just shortened the ingredients

jcommie said:
Gosh, I wonder why there are so many Colas out there if Coca-Cola was the first to come up with the idea of using the Cola nut to add astringency and a unique taste to a caramel colored, phosphoric acid loaded, carbonated sugar water. Oh, that's right, because the Cola nut is a generic item that is not unique, just like Pool T-Shirts are not unique and the product of solely one mind. You can add Cola nut and sours to caramel colored, carbonated sugar water and call it Cola if you'd like, just not COCA-Cola. Why? Because "Coca" is not a commonly used word. I bet you if Coca-Cola decided to trademark their drink under the name of just plain old "Cola", it still wouldn't have made the other cola companies stop naming their drinks after the word "Cola".
Click to expand...

All Coke did was shorten cocaine and list it and cola, the two key ingredients. Had someone came out with Cocaine Cola back in the day I doubt Coke could have won a trademark case at the time.

Hu
 
Last edited:
JB Cases said:
Poolshirts is different than Pooltees. As I stated earlier if one seaches for Pooltees which is the brand name, and ends up on PoolRoomTees.com then that consumer could conceivably genuinely believe that they landed on the website of the business that they were looking for. If a person searches for PoolTees and ends up on PoolShirts.com then they will be highly unlikely to believe that they landed on the website that belongs to the brand they were looking for. That is the difference.
Click to expand...

So you're not saying this is a trademark issue, but rather an internet search issue.

Here's a thought... if someone was specifically trying to find "PoolTees", how about the possibility that the would just add ".com" onto it and go to that domain straight up? :P

Just as an exercise, google "PoolTees". PoolTees.com has the first two results. PoolRoomTees.com doesn't even how up on the first five.

Also google "Pool Tees" (with a space). Same bit with PoolTees.com, PoolRoomTees.com shows up on the second page.
 
PoolRoomTeesCOM said:
The more the better, Actually I would link to you....

Ok... I've said enough here..... But know, all your imput is read.... Thanks to all of you weather for or against - views are appreciated.
Click to expand...


That begs the question. Would you also link to PoolTees.com? :eek:
 
jcommie said:
What if the 2nd Ted shop's owner was named Ted? And also, using a person's name makes the "Trademark" a bit more unique than simply using some commonly used words in a certain order.

I would argue that the issue of PoolTees vs PoolRoomTees is more like this scenario:

Person 1 opens up a camera store called "Camera Store" and later person 2 opens up a different camera store on the other side of town called "Budget Camera Store". The problem here is that the trademark "PoolTees" may not unique enough. (Name is a bit too generic. Likewise, you're probably not going to have a monopoly on the word "Sandwich" because you were the first to open up a sandwich store by that name.)
edit: Also, not having a federally registered trademark is different from having a trademark registration request denied.
Click to expand...

Exactly, there are plenty of what-ifs and things that look so clear aren't so clear anymore when it goes to court.

Um how is having a trademark registration denied different than not having one? Either way you don't have a registered trademark. That does NOT invalidate your trademark.

A trademark is simply some sort of identification that your business is known by. Be it a logo or a word mark makes no difference. If you are the first person to market with the name then you own it whether it's registered or not. Registration is just another layer of protection. People FALSELY apply to register trademarks all the time in the belief that if they obtain a registration that they can then force the orginal owner to abdicate the mark. If the originator can document provenance to the satisfaction of the court then they can have the registration dismissed.
 
ScottW said:
So you're not saying this is a trademark issue, but rather an internet search issue.

Here's a thought... if someone was specifically trying to find "PoolTees", how about the possibility that the would just add ".com" onto it and go to that domain straight up? :P

Just as an exercise, google "PoolTees". PoolTees.com has the first two results. PoolRoomTees.com doesn't even how up on the first five.

Also google "Pool Tees" (with a space). Same bit with PoolTees.com, PoolRoomTees.com shows up on the second page.
Click to expand...

Which brings us to the point of proving damages. You pretty much have no case concerning trademark infringement if you can't prove that you suffered significant damages solely because the names were similar. The same thing applies to fraud- if someone defrauds you but you end up not suffering significant damages attributed to the deal going through, which was due to fraudulent information, chances are you won't have much of a case. This is why "Damages" is actually one of the elements of fraud that courts SPECIFICALLY look for in ALL fraud cases.
 
jay helfert said:
That begs the question. Would you also link to PoolTees.com? :eek:
Click to expand...

With a reciprocal link with them, of course!

.....................................................

Thank you guys for searching Pool Tees online... If you go to Yahoo and do the search - look to the right... Here is what you will find...

# Pool Tees
Find pool tees at Target. Shop and Save at Target.com.
www.Target.com

# Pool T Shirts
Clothing & More from 100+ Shops. Buy Pool T Shirts Fast.
www.Calibex.com/clothing

# Pool Tees
1000+ Swimming & Jacuzzi Stores. Save On Pool Tees.
poolsSupplies.Shopzilla.com


......................... It is true, do it!
 
ScottW said:
So you're not saying this is a trademark issue, but rather an internet search issue.

Here's a thought... if someone was specifically trying to find "PoolTees", how about the possibility that the would just add ".com" onto it and go to that domain straight up? :P

Just as an exercise, google "PoolTees". PoolTees.com has the first two results. PoolRoomTees.com doesn't even how up on the first five.

Also google "Pool Tees" (with a space). Same bit with PoolTees.com, PoolRoomTees.com shows up on the second page.
Click to expand...

No. Make it two real world stores. A customer is driving around and sees PoolRoomTees on the sign and they are looking for PoolTees. They go in and see that it's pool themed t-shirts and assume that they are in the right place. The ONLY reason that they assume that they made it to the PoolTees store is BECAUSE of the words Pool and Tees in on the sign.
 
Exactly

Pinocchio said:
See an attorney an lay off of the chit-chat or you could be percieved as the stalker. Thats what attorneys are for sometimes a simple letter will put an end to all the BS.....................
Pinocchio
Click to expand...

My suggestion to you, don't post another word anywhere in public. A consultation with a TRADEMARK Lawyer is what you need. Call a couple of them to ask what they will charge just for a visit. My guess is about $50 to $100, and well worth it. Mark sure you take the questionable materials with you. And some of his. Then see what they say. It may turn out all you need is a letter from him/her to get your Myspace stuff settled, and get him to stop haraassing you.

By the way, I have to agree with pool balls in the o's. I was doing that on my flyers for tournies in the early 80's. And I know that's been used for years before me. Good Luck
 
not on a side here

John,

I'm not on a side here other than the side of reason for both parties. Judging from the cases I know of trademark cases are like most civil cases, there is a little black, a little white, and a huge area of gray in between. If you do a search on poolshirts when looking for a pool tee shirt pooltees will show up in the search. A reasonable person could find themselves in the wrong place. The argument could be made for infringement. Depending on the judge and the quality of lawyer or depth of pocket each side have, the argument could be won or lost.

I could get into a trademark battle with an interloper right now. My momma didn't raise any foolish children and I'm only going to wish them well in their efforts.

Hu



JB Cases said:
You can find examples all day to support whichever side you happen to be on.

The test is generally whether a customer could confuse one business with another.

There are something like 435 categories that one can register a trademark for. So with that in mind you can register the same domain name with other extensions but you cannot use that domain for the same business IF it infringes on the trademark owned by someone else.

Poolshirts is different than Pooltees. As I stated earlier if one seaches for Pooltees which is the brand name, and ends up on PoolRoomTees.com then that consumer could conceivably genuinely believe that they landed on the website of the business that they were looking for. If a person searches for PoolTees and ends up on PoolShirts.com then they will be highly unlikely to believe that they landed on the website that belongs to the brand they were looking for. That is the difference.
Click to expand...
 
Why Not?

PoolRoomTeesCOM said:
With a reciprocal link with them, of course!
Click to expand...

Why not both do this? Quit the fighting online and off. Post links to each other's sites on your own along with a disclaimer letting people know that you aren't affiliated with each other and let the customers decide where to buy.

Hu
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top