- Share This Post
- submit
- 17
-
Sparkle (0)
When I started blogging at Surrender, Dorothy, I knew trying to trademark my site name would be impossible. I stole the phrase from the sky, for one thing (although mine, with a comma, insists Dorothy surrender rather than be surrendered, which I think is an important point, ahem). For another thing, there is already a Surrender, Dorothy band, a movie, a book, you name it. We can’t all be suing each other. So I never thought much about the other Surrender, Dorothy bloggers out there, and there are many – I see them in my Google alerts. No big deal, I think. As long as I differentiate my writing style and include my photo, people will always know who I am. However, that said, I totally respect the right of anyone to trademark an idea. Trademarking is totally different than copyrighting.
From the U.S. Copyright Office’s Web site:
How is a copyright different from a patent or a trademark?
Copyright protects original works of authorship, while a patent protects inventions or discoveries. Ideas and discoveries are not protected by the copyright law, although the way in which they are expressed may be. A trademark protects words, phrases, symbols, or designs identifying the source of the goods or services of one party and distinguishing them from those of others.
Recently there’s been a public fight between Dana of Mamalogues and Genevieve of Momologue. From what I can tell, Dana sent Genevieve a cease-and-desist letter because she has trademarked the “Mamalogue” name and Genevieve was using it and has been using it for a long time. Genevieve went to the Bakersfield news with the story.
Dana’s position:
I never tried to prevent anyone's speech, but rather act to protect my proprietary interest in my URL. I've never told anyone that they couldn't blog, but rather am asserting my right to my trademark which identifies my website. That's why companies protect their trademarks.
Genevieve’s position (from the news coverage):
While Hinson said she can understand wanting to protect a trademark, she added “I’ve been blogging here for three years. And I feel like it’s my Internet home. To me it feels like someone is trying to come in and evict me. And not only take my house, but take the car and the furniture. And then make me pay them on top of that in order to do it. It’s not a great feeling.”
What to do, what to do.
Legally, I have to give it to Dana. If it were me, I’d probably live and let live. But legally, Dana has every right to protect her trademark, and so, sorry, Genevieve, I totally understand how you feel, but if Dana wants to push it (and she does), she has the law on her side. You should've trademarked it first. Would I be upset if another blogger showed up and claimed he or she had trademarked my blog title? YES. But, if it could be proved, I'd be out of luck. (I'm sure I've now tempted the Internet gods and a letter will be showing up in my mail at any minute.) That said, I'm aware that other bloggers are out there using that title, and I really don't care.
This isn’t the first time I’ve heard about trademark wars in the mommyblogging world. I remember last year Melissa of Suburban Bliss was up in arms over a morning TV show (featuring her) using her trademarked momtini (martini glass with a pacifier in it – I’ve always thought it was quite clever) design without giving her any credit or money. This is what she had to say when the noise died down:
I guess there is a gray area where influence and copying overlap. I wonder if, since I have been able to procure a US trademark for the momtini logo without issue, perhaps someone at Eckler's publishing house was inspired to put a martini glass with a binky around the stem because of my logo.
It remains I don't own the rights to all pacifier and martini glass imagery.
Trademarks are different from copyrights in that you have to really defend them. Copyrights come into being the instant you write down the idea, and though registering them is a good idea, you really don’t have to if you can prove you wrote it down first. Which isn’t that hard to do on the time-stamped Internet. They also apply to photos. Remember Trumangate from Sweetney? That happened with Fox News swiped












