Anybody a lawyer...I need some advice.

Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM

02/05/2008 04:33:26 PM · #1

I recently recieved an e-mail from a individual who stated that he has a trademark on the name Bliss Photography. I have a small studio business name which is Just Bliss Photography. I am a registered business owner in the state of California...but recently moved to Washington and I am using the same name here in Washington now. He is also in the state of Washington. He states that he will take "action in the court of law" if I do not change my business name. The name of his studio has the word 'bliss' in it, like my studio name does, but his studio is not named Bliss Photography. Is this an actual case that this individual has against me? I have gotten the paperwork to register my name here in Washington but just have not done so yet.

Skip

Canon EOS-1D X

02/05/2008 04:39:34 PM · #2

he may or may not have done everything necessary to lock up his trade name and any and all portions of it in the state of washington, but it is going to cost you to find out. get ready to shell out the money weeding it out and possibly losing, or find another name. sometimes, it really is a matter of who gets there first and how they go about staking their claim and protecting it...

Eyesup

Nikon D300

Sigma 70-200 /2.8 APO EX DG Macro HSM II

02/05/2008 04:43:25 PM · #3

Originally posted by Skip:

I don't know about the stats, but in Canada if a tradename is 'similar' the first owner of the of the name may have a claim. on the other hand (in Canada at least) they would have a hard time pegging you for having parts of their name in yours unless you can be seen as potentially 'passing your self off' as them

02/05/2008 04:43:43 PM · #4

I guess what I am asking is my name is Just Bliss Photography. His studio name has the word "bliss" in it too. I am not able to use the word "bliss" in a studio name if their is a trade mark on that word? The studio names are very different....but we are both using the same word "bliss".

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

02/05/2008 04:46:43 PM · #5

they would have a hard time pegging you for having parts of their name in yours unless you can be seen as potentially 'passing your self off' as them

He is in the business of Architectural Photography. I mostly do children and maternity.

BeeCee

Nikon D40

02/05/2008 04:53:54 PM · #6

Originally posted by njsabs2323:

His is Thomas Bliss, yours is Just Bliss. I believe that if a name is similar enough to cause potential confusion to an average person that there is a possible claim.
Whether that's the case here, I have no idea, sorry. I guess I really wasn't any help, was I? :)

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

02/05/2008 04:55:54 PM · #7

It's been my experience that if the state people give you a license under that name, they don't feel that the name is a conflict, and that should be enough to stave this guy off from any legitimate action.

That doesn't mean that he can't sue you just as a hobby; he just probably won't win.

Question is......is it worth the hassle?

Don'tcha just love people????

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

02/05/2008 04:57:10 PM · #8

If you're referring to Thomas Bliss, Architectural Photographer, he doesn't have a case. He can't lock up a word just because it is his name. You're not using it that way, you're using the very common word "bliss" in a DBA.

R.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G

02/05/2008 05:04:22 PM · #9

If you're referring to Thomas Bliss, Architectural Photographer

Yes....that is who I am referring too. He sent a nasty little e-mail this morning. I guess my next step would be to register my name in the state of Washington. Once registered as Just Bliss Photography....can he do anything?

I have been marketing myself as Just Bliss Photography....and it would be a pain to change at this point.

Nikon D800

02/05/2008 05:05:15 PM · #10

i'm about to graduate law school but have never taken a trademark class, but I would not think he has a case against you. Bliss is a generic word and your name is sufficiently different as to not cause confusion, I would think. In either case, I would not think he would actually go through the trouble of suing you for this. Lots of times lawyers just write letters to scare people :P

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

02/05/2008 05:09:33 PM · #11

I was not sure if this could be a case against me. I agree...the word bliss is a generic name....there are many photography studio's in the USA that use the word bliss in their name. I guess I was targeted by him because we both live in the same state....about 3 hours apart.

trevytrev

Canon EOS-5D

02/05/2008 05:15:52 PM · #12

I'm on the side that he doesn't have a case and is probably just trying you on. Most people probably just back down and change their name and that's most likely what he is trying to get you to do. I'd push back and tell him that you consulted an attorney and that the attorney assured you that you were within your rights to use the name. Ask him for his attorneys name so your attorney can get in contact with his, you'll find out whether he is for real or just bluffing. If he gives you an attorneys name than he probably serious and you have to decide if you want to pay to have an attorny look into the matter. Just my take on it and by no means sound legal advice, I just fall on the side that people throw out "attorney" and "lawsuit" just to intimmidate people to do what they want them to do. Trevor~

Mike_Adams

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

02/05/2008 05:16:24 PM · #13

Understand that whether or not the case has merit does not prevent him from filing suit and creating a case. I don't think he would prevail, but the system allows one to file suit for almost anything at almost any time. First keep all correspondence from him, second get the name registered ASAP. And by ASAP I mean tomorrow morning if possible. All that being said he can still file claim.

Good luck and sorry to hear about your situation!

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

02/05/2008 05:19:31 PM · #14

I have filed for a DBA in the state of California. Does that cover me? Also the small city that I live in does not require a business lincense, so I have not filed in my current city. Do I need to file for a DBA in the state of Washington as well?

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

02/05/2008 05:22:05 PM · #15

Originally posted by njsabs2323:

Until you get a letter from an attorney, I would not even worry about it.

You were registered in CA so you have proof you are not just trying to steal business from him by using a similar name, and your business name is clearly not the same... I doubt he has the word Bliss trademarked. You're good.

And welcome to WA!

AndyMac24

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

02/05/2008 05:23:17 PM · #16

I would say no, he has no case ( and no more WA DPC customers as well I hope )The two words are different entirely, one's a name and one is a feeling.
Mabye this will help

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM

02/05/2008 05:24:18 PM · #17

There is actual already a "Bliss Photography" also in Spokane, WA. Does it's existence infer that he doesn't have a case? I don't know. Just thought it was interesting. It could actually be the whole reason he's all up in arms to start with.

Freaking Washingtonians...

NathanWert

Canon EOS-90D

02/05/2008 05:57:32 PM · #18

Does it make any difference if your business name (in California) came before his?

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

02/05/2008 06:06:03 PM · #19

looks like it is a big, fat 'it depends', but I'm not a lawyer and haven't been to a hotel for a few months

//www.bitlaw.com/trademark/degrees.html

surnames:

Marks that are primarily surnames (such as "SMITH SHOES" or "RODRIGUEZ COMPUTERS") are treated the same as descriptive marks under U.S. trademark law. As a result, surnames are not given protection as trademark until they achieve secondary meaning through advertising or long use. A trademark is "primarily a surname" if the public would recognize it first as a surname, or if it consists of a surname and other material that is not registrable.

Once a surname achieves secondary meaning, the mark is protectable as a trademark. Others cannot use the mark on confusingly similar goods, even if they have the same name. Thus, Jane McDonald could not open a restaurant called "MCDONALDS", nor could Joel Hyatt open a motel under the name "HYATT MOTEL", since the marks MCDONALDS and HYATT have achieved secondary meaning.

thegrandwazoo

Nikon D750

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

02/05/2008 06:10:09 PM · #20

I just searched USPTO for Thomas Bliss Photography and got squat! The name is not Trade marked. Beat him to it and start sending him nasty-grams. :-)

Message edited by author 2008-02-05 18:26:17.

fotomann_forever

02/05/2008 06:25:24 PM · #21

I'm not positive about this, but you can't trademark a human name can you? I know you can't trademark a common word or phrase.

gwe21

Nikon D300

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4.0-5.6G ED

02/05/2008 06:25:47 PM · #22

He doesnt have the name trademarked or copyrighted.

No case.

I wouldnt worry with it.

mjwood0

Nikon D200

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

02/05/2008 06:32:14 PM · #23

Frankly, I don't see he has any case. His last name is Bliss. It's not like you could sue him over his name -- he's just doing business as himself. Likewise, I don't think he could really win a suit against you since he's using it as a proper name and you're using it as a "title".

Definitely file for your name in WA if you have to. Make sure you've got proof you're taking active measures to move your business to their state and I think WA will be more than willing to help out.

Again, I'm not a lawyer, but it's not like you're even competing in the same market.

02/05/2008 06:37:20 PM · #24

Freaking Washingtonians

I know!!!!!!!!!!!