Andrei Mincov - Trademark Factory®’s Comments

• Apr 6th, 2018 @ 6:00pm

  University Of Illinois Attempts To Trademark Bully An Alumnus Af

  on University Of Illinois Attempts To Trademark Bully An Alumnus After Failing To Stop His Trademark Registration
  A rare case when I fully agree with Techdirt's comments about a trademark dispute. Looks like the University of Illinois has just created a no-win situation for themselves. They will look dumb if they drop the case. They will look dumb if they lose the case. And if they somehow win the case, it will generate so much shi-TM-storm that they'll wish they'd never win it in the first place.
• Feb 26th, 2017 @ 11:33am

  What if he lost?

  on Chinese Trademarks And The Emoluments Clause: Do They Intersect In The Trump Presidency?
  Left-wing media continue to look for reasons to bash President Trump. This time, Trump should be impeached for winning his trademark disputes in China after he agreed to honor "One China" policy. Let's not forget that the same left-wing media were going nuts when Trump QUESTIONED "One China" policy. The same media would certainly find something to blame Trump for if he had lost his trademark battles in China. Imagine the headlines: "Trump's Chinese Trademark Humiliation", "China Court Not Impressed With Trump's Presidency", etc. I mean, come on! The left's vendetta against President Trump has gotten so personal—it's absolutely ridiculous. When a man is condemned for every little thing he does (or does not do), the substance of such attacks becomes irrelevant: essentially, Trump is guilty by default because he is not Hillary. But if we look back at the substance of Trump's trademark dispute, what is wrong with an American company being successful in protecting one of its most valuable assets overseas?
  
  Andrei Mincov
  Founder and CEO of Trademark Factory® ( https://trademarkfactory.com ), the only firm in the world where licensed lawyers and trademark agents will help you register your trademarks with a free comprehensive trademark search, for a single all-inclusive flat fee, with a 100% money-back guarantee.
• Oct 3rd, 2016 @ 4:13pm

  Protecting one's property is not evil

  on Chicago Cubs: With Success Comes Trademark Lawsuit Against Street Vendors
  While I completely disagree with the entitlement spirit of the article (I have been a fan of X all of my life and I'm so used to being able to get X bypassing the much more expensive official channels, I am entitled to this, and whoever is taking is taking steps to limit my ability to enjoy X in this fashion, is evil), I agree that Cubs may have a problem with having allowed the street vendors to openly infringe on Cubs' trademark rights for so long. This is called 'estoppel.' Cubs may be found to be estopped from going after those vendors who through Cubs' former policies may have reasonably come to believe that Cubs are OK with vendors' selling counterfeit swag. Cubs are facing a lose-lose situation. If they do nothing, the value of their brand goes down because it becomes less and less enforceable every day. If they go after the vendors now, there will not only be a backlash from people like the author of the article, there will also be a risk that a few vendors would actually lawyer up and take this case all the way to the courtroom and prove that Cubs should not be allowed to suddenly turn around and change their mind about what's OK and what's not OK. My prediction: Cubs will use their resources to settle with those stubborn vendors and avoid an open trial at all costs.
  
  ---------------------------
  Andrei Mincov
  Founder and CEO of Trademark Factory®,
  the only firm in the world where licensed lawyers and trademark agents help entrepreneurs and businesses from around the world trademark their brands with a free comprehensive trademark search, for a single all-inclusive flat fee, with a 100% money-back guarantee.
• Sep 1st, 2016 @ 9:52pm

  Trademarks are NOT just about consumers (as TrademarkFactory)

  on Louis Vuitton's Inability To Take A Joke Opens Up A Chance To Fix Our Broken Trademark Laws
  Also, it is not inconceivable that consumers as a group would actually BENEFIT from being able to lawfully purchase LV look-alike bags for a fraction of the price of an authentic bag. If interests of consumers was the sole purpose of trademark laws, you would not word these laws in a form that grants brand owners a monopolistic control over their brands!
• Sep 1st, 2016 @ 9:44pm

  Trademarks are NOT just about consumers (as TrademarkFactory)

  on Louis Vuitton's Inability To Take A Joke Opens Up A Chance To Fix Our Broken Trademark Laws
  While the story is fascinating and LV's position is weak, I completely disagree with the underlying idea of the article. If trademark laws were ONLY to deal with customer confusion for the benefit of consumers, why would it be the brand owners' responsibility to police trademark infringements, at trademark owners' expense? Trademarks always had a dual purpose: protect intellectual property of the brand owners AND protect consumers from being mislead into buying imitations. Dilution arguments can indeed sometimes go too far—and it is the responsibility of the court system to keep these arguments constrained to reasonable limits—but to deny that trademarks are and should be recognized as intellectual property is intellectually (pun intended) dishonest.
• Jun 14th, 2016 @ 8:23pm

  (untitled comment) (as TrademarkFactory)

  on Stupid Patent Of The Month... With Special Stupid Trademark Bonus Round
  MY HEALTH is a registered trademark... Really?