9 ms·
Trademarks aren't anything a holder would want to license out, though. First off, they're basically a brand's identity, and give the holders the legal defense
by cube13 15y ago
Trademarks aren't anything a holder would want to license out, though. First off, they're basically a brand's identity, and give the holders the legal defense to keep that brand name as protected. Secondly, they're very specific. Multiple companies can have the same trademark for different product categories. For example(like I have posted here before), Starcraft is a computer game developed by Blizzard Entertainment. It's also a pretty big recreational vehicle manufacturer. Both co-exist, because Blizzard does not make RV's, and Starcraft does not make video games.
There isn't any regulation in place because Trademarks are intended to reduce consumer confusion for products. A trademark owner is under absolutely no obligation to license out the trademark to anyone, and if it is widely licensed out, the holder can actually lose the trademark if it becomes a common name for the product.
- antiterra 15y agoIn addition to certification trademarks and limited uses via "trademark guidelines" there's an interesting counterpoint in the case of Portal: Prelude. Valve permitted (at the very least a verbal license) an independent developer to use their trademark (and other assets) in an unrelated project not controlled by Valve. I'm very curious on the line of thought of Valve's lawyers as to how this would be ok. Perhaps it's because Portal: Prelude requires Portal to be purchased in the first place and therefore doesn't actually compete with Portal?