Wilson Whitaker Rynell

Experienced Lawyers

info@wwrlegal.com

a blue and orange check mark with the letter w on it as the Wilson Whitaker Rynell Logo
972-248-8080 DALLAS
713-830-2207 HOUSTON
512-691-4100 AUSTIN
wilson whitaker rynell attorneys and counselors at law logo
972-248-8080 DALLAS
713-830-2207 HOUSTON
512-691-4100 AUSTIN

Common Law Trademarks and the Internet

ATTORNEYS IN DALLAS

Challenges in navigating the nuanced realm of common law trademark rights in the digital age.

Common Law Trademarks and the Internet

To successfully file and register a trademark with the USPTO, two essential steps must be taken. First, it is crucial to show that the trademark is distinctive enough in relation to the goods or services associated with it. Secondly, evidence must be provided to demonstrate that the goods and services are genuinely being sold in interstate commerce. Interestingly, what many people may not be aware of is that trademark rights can also be obtained without submitting a trademark application to the USPTO. This can be achieved through the Common Law doctrine of trademark jurisprudence. If you're curious about the evolution of Common Law trademark rights in the internet era, continue reading to discover more.

Common Law Trademarks

Common Law Trademarks, like their official counterparts filed in the USPTO, are marks that possess sufficient distinctiveness in relation to their goods or services and are being used in commerce for the sale of those designated goods or services. However, what distinguishes Common Law Trademarks is their limited scope, which is confined to the geographical area where the marks are actually used. For instance, a ice cream shop named Arctic Delights in Dallas, TX, holds exclusive rights to use that name specifically for selling ice cream within Dallas (and possibly the rest of Texas).

The primary challenge in enforcing Common Law trademark rights arises from the fact that these marks are never formally registered with the USPTO. Consequently, determining the actual owner of the trademark and the date of ownership becomes difficult. Consider, for example, a scenario where two pizza shop owners in Queens have similar names and each wants to prevent the other from using that name. Since neither registered the name with the USPTO and instead relied on Common Law rights, it becomes challenging to establish who was the first user of the name and who possesses superior rights.

Ultimately, it falls upon the courts to address crucial questions such as the extent of trademark rights regarding the goods or services, the parties to whom these rights apply, and the geographic area that should be covered by the mark. In making these determinations, the courts consider various factors including the location where sales originated, the space from which sales are marketed and conducted, sales volume, the scope of usage, the expansion or contraction of sales, advertising saturation in the market, and efforts made to expand the usage of the mark.

Trademarks on the Internet

As mentioned earlier, Common Law trademark rights are limited to a specific geographic area where the trademark is being used. For example, if you sell ice cream under a certain name in Dallas, your rights to that name only apply in Dallas. However, the challenge arises when it comes to trademarks used online and in e-commerce websites. The internet allows sellers to reach customers worldwide without physical limitations.

In the era of e-commerce, Common Law trademark rights may seem outdated. How can the courts define a geographic scope for a trademark's use and rights when anyone from anywhere can access goods with a simple click? The traditional factors considered by courts in analyzing Common Law rights, such as the physical location of the business and its customers, are becoming less relevant in the online space. It's important to remember that Common Law trademark rights provide protection within a specific geographical area, allowing two companies to potentially sell the same goods under the same trademark as long as they operate in different geographic regions. This is known as Concurrent Trademark Use and is considered appropriate because the geographic distance minimizes consumer confusion regarding brand ownership.

Now, let's consider a scenario where an e-commerce website named Snowy Wonder Globes was established in Texas in 2010, selling snow globes. Then, in 2020, a small retailer based in Oklahoma also sets up an e-commerce website selling baseball cards under the name Snow Wonder Globes. What happens when a trademark owner in a specific location faces digital competition from a distant competitor? The heart of trademark law revolves around the question of consumer confusion. When a consumer sees a junior trademark associated with goods or services, do they mistakenly believe that the goods or services are produced by the senior trademark owner?

Applying this principle to Common Law trademarks and the internet is less straightforward. It would seem unfair for the courts to deny concurrent internet use based solely on the act of publishing a website, considering the vast scope and reach of the internet. If that were the case, there would be no need to file for a federal trademark, which provides national coverage, as one could simply publish an e-commerce website accessible worldwide.

At the same time, the fact that the owner of an e-commerce website resides in Texas does not mean their website cannot have a significant impact and influence in Washington. If the owner has actively marketed and sold their products in Washington, it logically follows that their trademark rights should extend to that state as well. The devil is in the details, and in cases of infringement and enforcement, the courts will closely examine the real-life impact of a website.

Contact an Experienced Trademark Attorney

If you need legal advice regarding your trademark rights, assistance with trademark prosecution, or representation in a domain name dispute, contact Wilson Whitaker Rynell. Our team of trademark lawyers has extensive experience in all aspects of trademark and copyright law, including the filing of trademark applications and representing clients in defense or prosecution before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.

a blue and orange check mark with the letter w on it for Wilson Legal Group Logo

Trademark Resources

  • 66(a) Applications
  • Abandoning a Trademark Application or Withdrawing a TTAB Proceeding
  • Abandonment and Nonuse
  • Abbreviations as Trademarks
  • Accelerated Case Resolutions
  • Acquired Secondary Trademark Meaning
  • Amending Trademark Application
  • Assigning a Trademark
  • Assigning a Trademark and the Intent to Use Application
  • Avoiding Fraud on Trademark Applications
  • Avoiding Trademark Litigation
  • Basis for Filing a Trademark
  • Benefits of Registering a Trademark
  • Bona Fide Intent to Use
  • Celebrity Trademarks
  • Challenging the Relatedness Factor
  • Challenging Trademark Rights
  • Claims in a Notice of Opposition
  • Co-Existence Agreements
  • Common Law Trademarks in the Internet Era
  • Common Law Use and Priority
  • Conflicting Marks
  • Consent Agreements
  • Constructive Use Priority
  • Dates of Use
  • Defenses in Opposition and Cancellation Proceedings
  • Descriptive or Generic Trademarks
  • Design Marks
  • Design Trademarks
  • Determining Trademark Similarities
  • Discovery in TTAB Proceedings
  • Dividing a Trademark Application
  • Drawing Page
  • Electronic Display Specimens for Trademarks
  • Evidence in TTAB Proceedings
  • Evidence of Acquired Distinctiveness
  • Expediting Trademark Cancellation for Nonuse or Abandonment
  • Extending Time to Oppose
  • Factors of a Likelihood of Confusion Analysis
  • False Suggestions of Connection
  • Famous Trademarks and Likelihood of Confusion and Dilution
  • Filing an Opposition or Cancellation Proceedings
  • First Sale Doctrine
  • Five Years of Use
  • Foreign Trademark Rights
  • Generic Trademarks
  • Geographic Trademarks
  • Hiring Trademark Counsel
  • Immoral and Scandalous Trademarks
  • Incontestability of U.S. Trademarks
  • International Trademark Filings
  • Joint Trademark Ownership
  • Lawful Use of a Trademark in Commerce
  • Likelihood of Confusion Analysis
  • Likelihood of Confusion Refusal
  • Merely Descriptive Trademarks

Trademark Resources

  • Multiple Bases for a Trademark Application
  • Overcoming and Ornamentation Trademark Refusal
  • Personal Name Trademarks
  • Principal and Supplemental Registers
  • Protecting Single Creative Works
  • Recording Trademark Assignments
  • Refusal of a Trademark
  • Refusing a Trade Dress Application
  • Registering a Certification Trademark
  • Registering a Service Mark
  • Registering a Trademark That Lacks Inherent Distinctiveness
  • Registering an International Trademark
  • Relatedness of Goods or Services
  • Request for Reconsideration in Trademark Office Action
  • Requirements for International Trademark Application
  • Revive an Abandoned Trademark Application
  • Secondary Meaning
  • Source Confusion
  • Special Trademark Applications
  • Standard Character and Special Format Marks
  • Standing in Opposition and Cancellation Proceedings
  • State Trademark Registration
  • Statement of Use Extensions
  • Tacking Doctrine
  • Technical Trademark Use
  • The Supplemental Register
  • Trade Dress
  • Trade Dress Application
  • Trademark Application
  • Trademark Clearance Searches
  • Trademark Disclaimers
  • Trademark Licensing
  • Trademark of Authors, Performing Artists, and Characters
  • Trademark Ownership
  • Trademark Protection In Texas
  • Trademark Settlements
  • Trademark Specimens
  • Trademark Specimens
  • Trademark Use by Related Company
  • Trademark Use in Advertising
  • Trademark Use in Commerce
  • Trademarking a Distinctive Mark
  • Trademarking a Hashtag
  • Trademarks for Musical Artists
  • TTAB Discovery Rules
  • TTAB Proceedings
  • U.S. Service Mark
  • U.S. Trade Dress
  • Understanding Trade Channels
  • Unitary U.S. Trademark
  • Universal Symbols as Trademarks
  • Using Secondary Sources
  • What is an Ex Parte Appeal?
  • Where to Register a Trademark
  • Who Must File a Trademark?


CLIENT MATTERS


5,000+


YEARS OF SERVICE

 25+

Award Winning

Recognized in the legal industry as dedicated board-certified lawyers and Rising Stars.

Expert Team

Your project will be handled by legal experts every time. You will have the most experienced attorneys working for you. 

Quality Representation

You’ll find the support you need to ensure that things run smoothly. We’re here to help with all your legal needs.

Meet Our Team

View All
A building with a sign that says law offices on it
By John Wilson February 12, 2025
Strategic Legal Representation for Complex Business Litigation
A man riding a horse with a bull behind him
By John Wilson January 23, 2025
Understanding Writs of Execution in Texas: A Layperson’s Guide If a court determines that someone owes money to another party, the debtor—referred to as the "judgment debtor"—typically has 30 days to pay off the debt. If the debt remains unpaid after this time, the creditor, or "judgment creditor," can take legal action to enforce the payment through a Writ of Execution . This legal process, governed by Texas law, enables creditors to collect what they are owed by seizing and selling the debtor’s non-exempt assets. What Is a Writ of Execution? Under Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 629 , a Writ of Execution is a court order that authorizes a sheriff or constable to seize the debtor’s property to satisfy the debt. This writ is an essential tool for creditors when voluntary repayment has not occurred. Once the writ is issued, it is handed over to a county constable or sheriff, who is required to act “without delay” in collecting the debtor’s real and personal property. The seized property is then sold, and the proceeds are used to pay off the debt. If multiple writs are filed against the same debtor, the assets are distributed in the order the writs were received. What Property Can Be Seized Under a Writ of Execution? Texas law is very specific about which types of property can and cannot be seized to satisfy a judgment. Exempt Property Certain assets are protected from seizure under Texas Property Code § 41.001. These include: The debtor’s homestead (primary residence) Wages earned from employment Professionally prescribed health aids Workers’ compensation benefits College savings plans Some insurance benefits Personal property valued up to $50,000 for individuals and $100,000 for families Unique to Texas, the law also protects items like family Bibles, two firearms, pets, and for rural residents, livestock (e.g., 12 head of cattle and 120 fowl). This extensive list reflects Texas's cultural heritage and values. Non-Exempt Property Assets that are generally not exempt include: Vacation homes Timeshares Pleasure boats Airplanes Jewelry exceeding certain value thresholds The specific procedures for seizing different types of property are detailed in Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 639 . Can a Writ of Execution Be Avoided? Judgment debtors have a few options to avoid the execution of a writ: Filing a Supersedeas Bond A supersedeas bond can temporarily halt enforcement of the writ. This bond, filed with the county clerk or justice of the peace, preserves the status quo while the debtor seeks further legal remedies. This option is governed by Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 634 . Challenging the Execution Debtors can file a claim for wrongful execution in situations such as: The debt has already been paid Exempt property is being seized The levy is excessive Additionally, courts take extra care to protect property classified as a homestead under Texas Property Code § 41.002(c) . When only one spouse is responsible for the debt, Texas Family Code § 3.202(a) and related provisions provide guidance on levying against community or separate property. The Role of County Officials in Executing the Writ Once the writ is issued, its enforcement falls on county officials, typically a sheriff or constable. These officials must act in accordance with Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 34.072 , which requires them to execute the writ and report back to the court. They must: Give proper notice of the sale of seized property Ensure the proceeds are appropriately delivered to the creditor Avoid overstepping legal boundaries, such as seizing exempt property Failing to execute the writ properly can result in serious consequences, where a sheriff’s refusal to levy on a property initially listed as exempt (but later deemed abandoned) led to court action and damages awarded to the creditor. Preventing Fraudulent Transfers One challenge creditors face is when debtors attempt to hide or transfer assets to avoid collection. To address this, Texas follows the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act under Tex. Bus. & Comm. Code § 24.001 et seq .. This act provides legal remedies to creditors when a debtor’s transfer of assets is deemed fraudulent. Effect of a Defendant's Death on Writs of Execution Under Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 34.072 , the death of a defendant after a writ of execution is issued halts execution proceedings. However, any lien acquired from the writ's levy is still enforceable by the county court when paying off the deceased's debts. Why Proper Execution Of The Writ Is Crucial The rules for filing and serving a Writ of Execution are strict and detailed. Missteps, such as filing the writ in the wrong county, failing to serve the proper parties, or missing key deadlines, can lead to delays or even render the writ ineffective. Both creditors and debtors must ensure compliance with these rules to avoid unnecessary complications. For creditors, failure to properly enforce the writ could mean losing the opportunity to collect on a judgment. For debtors, not responding appropriately to a writ could result in the loss of valuable assets, even those that might have been exempt.
A sign that says jct 17 texas on it
By John Wilson January 17, 2025
Understanding Venue Selection and Motions to Dismiss in Texas Civil Litigation
Show More
Share by: