Thread: So I guess RVD owns the right to the name "Rob Van Dam"
View Single Post
Old 05-28-2007, 09:37 AM   #61
Kane Knight
Ron Paul 4 EVA
 
Kane Knight's Avatar
 
Posts: 152,467
Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xero Limit 126
Also, as far as Kip James goes, TNA wasn't in any trouble from what I heard because WWE let the copyright on the name run out.
Trademark, not copyright.

Anyway, a quick hop over to the US Trademark and Patent Office shows that there was never a trademark on the New Age Outlaws. Not by WWE. therés an autopart manufacturer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben
Doesn't Marvel own the rights to the name "Rhino"?
As a super hero, yes. Well, Super Villain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben
If that's the case - why is/was there an issue with Marvel and the WWF over the name "Hulk Hogan".
You mean, aside from the fact that the earliest incarnation of Hulk Hogan involved him coming out from under the ring in green paint? Or "Hulking up?"

There's using a name, and then there's using elements that might leave the average Joe to believe that you're endorsed by the trademark.

See, it's about market confusion, That's why you're more prone to see a suit in wrestling over another wrestler. Because it's within the general purview. It's less common amidst a broader stream of things.
Kane Knight is offline   Reply With Quote