Do Morons In A Hurry Buy Real Estate?
from the how-confusing-is-this? dept
I was going to pass on this particular story, but so many people have been submitting it that it seemed worth at least a quick post. Real estate giant Re/max apparently has some lawyers with free time on their hands now that the housing market has collapsed. It seems like they must, because they felt it was necessary to oppose the trademark application of a small real estate agency in North Carolina that goes by the name Rehava. Remax and Rehava aren't particularly similar, and neither are their logos:![remax_t180](http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3617/3348151427_591d66eeb3_m.jpg)
![rehava__t180](http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3548/3348151403_0521ca40fc_m.jpg)
"If you chop the top off of the 'h,' you (almost) have the 'm' in Re/Max. The next letter is an 'a,' and if you take the 'v' then you have half of an 'x.' "This certainly seems like a situation where the moron in a hurry test should apply. Tragically, however, our legal system never seems to be in much of a hurry, and so its costing Rehava plenty of time and money to respond to the opposition by Re/max.
![Hide This Hide this](https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/topclose.png)
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: confusion, real estate, trademark
Companies: rehava, remax
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
sigh...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not The First
I used to subscribe to Wired magazine. I stopped when they cheerfully admitted in one issue to shutting down the domain for a women’s group called WIRE, because the name was too similar to their own.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not The First
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If you remove the vertical line from the 'd', remove the 'i', remove the horizontal line in the 't' and extend the curl, finally adding an "nch". It is infringing on techcrunch.
Better watch out for a lawsuit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
LA/WYERS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can't pass it up
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Trying to justify their employment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ban Guns or Lawyers?
The ownership of guns is protected by the Constitution, but lawyes are not and they cause far more damage. Let's ban them.
Are you listening Barry Hussein Obama?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ban Guns or Lawyers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ban Guns or Lawyers?
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am2
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Ban Guns or Lawyers?
Actually it does. Militias were typically composed of private citizens who banded together using their own private arms. The term "standing militia" is an oxymoron. A militia is NOT a standing military and is many times not even government sanctioned.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Ban Guns or Lawyers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm from Portugal and a few years back Philip Morris sued a Portuguese tobacco company because of the similarities between Marlboro and Marbelo (picture links included), both in name and design and that people would get confused. Thankfully a judge through the lawsuit out the window.
A lot of people where not very happy with the decision, mostly the press and large companies going on a "crusade" arguing that copyright would get abused, and other companies would start commercializing "Relax" watches, etc. etc.
Bottom line, nobody got confused and no "other copyright issues"...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re/Max if your branding is so crappy that you are threatened by this company (that looks nothing like you) - one pointless lawsuit isn't going to help you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ReMax vs. Rehava
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Please read people, and do a little investigating...
As for Mike's comment regarding "plenty of time and money" to fight the opposition, that depends on your definition of "plenty." Yes, it might cost several thousand dollars. On the other hand, it might cost several hundred dollars. Unless Mike is prepared to give a definition to "plenty" or a source that indicates that "plenty" was significantly more than the cost of applying for the trademark, "plenty" seems like exaggeration and possibly hyperbole.
From the "time" viewpoint, responding to an opposition may take several hours, or it may take very little time and may be a relatively simple response.
In any case, the definition of "plenty" in this case is not defined at all, and thus is a relative term. Plenty of time as compared to baking chocolate chip cookies? Probably. Plenty of time as compared to overhauling your car engine? Probably not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Please read people, and do a little investigating...
(techdirty - techdirt)
even remotely similar to
(Rehava - ReMax)
For your argument to work, wouldn't it have to be
(ReMaxy - ReMax)
or is hava == max in some foriegn language?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Please read people, and do a little investigating...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Please read people, and do a little investigating...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Please read people, and do a little investigating...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Please read people, and do a little investigating...
- Again, your selection of an an analogous situation is in error.
"example was related to the opposition process, not with respect to the similarity of the names Remax and Rehava"
- So, it is the process that is important and not the analogy. Gee, it all makes much more sense now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Please read people, and do a little investigating...
The opposition process in the USPTO is for stakeholders to set forth an argument as to why an applicant for a trademark should not receive that trademark.
For example, if someone applied for a trademark on "techdirty," which might be used as a web site to promote intellectual property, then Mike Masnick could oppose the filing of that trademark on the grounds that the proposed trademark would cause confusion in the minds of users of techdirt.
At what point in this chain of thought did you become confused?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Funny
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Funny
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Interesting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rehava
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]