Re: Community Input Requested on Trustees' Intent to Renounce "IETF Secretariat" Trademark

[Ray Pelletier <[e-mail]>]

 
On Apr 4, 2014, at 6:08 PM, cdel.firsthand.net <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I was about to ask under what classes IETF registrations are held? 

IETF is in Class 42.

The IETF Logo is in the following classes:  9, 35, 42

“IETF Secretariat” is in: 35, 42.

Ray


> 
> 
> Christian de Larrinaga
> 
> 
>> On 4 Apr 2014, at 22:57, Ray Pelletier <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Apr 4, 2014, at 3:45 PM, John C Klensin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --On Friday, April 04, 2014 14:19 -0400 Ray Pelletier
>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> It sounds as if this will open the door to my being able to
>>>>> advertise myself as the IETF Secretariat.  Or even the ITU's
>>>>> being able to.  Yes?
>>>> 
>>>> You could certainly use "Secretariat" but you cannot use
>>>> "IETF Secretariat" without violating the "IETF"
>>>> trademark.
>>> 
>>> Ray, I assume that if Dave (or someone else) set themselves up
>>> as the International Elegant Tophat Fabrication Society, made at
>>> least a perfunctory effect to establish themselves as being in
>>> that business, established a business unit that they called
>>> their "Secretariat", and then advertised the result as the "IETF
>>> Secretariat", things could get dicey.  Given the different line
>>> of business, they might even be able to take out a trademark on
>>> "IETF Secretariat".  Right?
>> 
>> The "risk" applies to IETF in addition to IETF Secretariat.  
>> We don't own IETF in every class of goods and services. 
>> IETF bananas, top hats and car tires can be sold and  
>> that won’t violate our IETF trademark  
>> 
>> People aren’t going to be confused between the two,
>> just like they aren’t for Apple computers and Apple records.
>> 
>> Ray
>>> 
>>> Now, whether having a trademark registered as "IETF Secretariat"
>>> with whatever line of business the IETF and IETF Secretariat
>>> claim to be in would offer significant protection against that
>>> attack is far outside my knowledge or experience.
>>> 
>>> I have enough trouble imagining someone going to the trouble to
>>> attempt the above as an attack that I think it would probably be
>>> foolish to worry about it, but it is, in principle, the
>>> difference between "no risk" and "no risk worth worrying about".
>>> 
>>>  john
>>