TradeMark Express: It's a Wonderful Small Business Life. USPTO Commissioner David Gooder ----> Please do NOT raise trademark fees. Try a POLICY change instead.

It’s a Wonderful Small Business Life. USPTO Commissioner David Gooder —-> Please do NOT raise trademark fees. Try a POLICY change instead.

Trademark Express Fans, yes you!

At my May 13 USPTO meeting, I gave the Commissioner, David Gooder a 1000 piece puzzle gift from Seneca Falls, NY where they have the It’s a Wonderful Life Museum.

As my blog article series about the need for comprehensive clearance legal research and well done trademark applications, we are getting a clearer picture of how to solve the puzzle small business faces.

Owning a small business can lead to a very wonderful life. Where people can actually trust trademark services and trademark attorneys alike to handle their intellectual property properly.

Sad to say, today’s trademarking experience is more like a nightmare while living in Pottersville.

As on Wikipedia,“Pottersville, an unsavory town occupied by sleazy entertainment venues and callous people.” See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_a_Wonderful_Life.

We can demand more from the people who handle our trademark needs.

Any puzzle can be put back together to become a beautiful picture again.

——————–

How do you change an upside down world of small business trademarking?

FACT: The USPTO refused 48.3% of its new trademark applications. It was 40.9% in 2016. Acceptance is worse now.

FACT: The USPTO receives FEWER new trademark applications now, dropping from 943,928 in 2021 to 737,018 in 2023, despite a booming overall big business economy.

FACT: It takes 10 hours in all to comprehensively clear any given trademark, write a trademark application and have an attorney review it and go back and forth with any client to get everything right before filing any trademark. Do the math.

FACT: NONE of the trademark services at the top of today’s search engines do the job competently, ethically for their clients. Just look at their low fees. Each is scrambling to out price each other, where their cost of marketing will exceed the resources they put into your new trademark filing. These are called scams.

FACT: While the USPTO grapples with the influx of garbage trademark applications, they have had to increase their examining attorney corps from 374 to over 900. Higher costs = Higher fees must be charged.

FACT: The USPTO costs have risen because of all the BAD trademark applications it has received and is trending to receive even more in the future. Is the cycle going to be more and more BAD trademark applications and even higher USPTO fees?

FACT: The USPTO is asking for comment before a proposed fee increase because their costs have risen. Give it to them, here, before today’s May 28 deadline – via the green “Submit a formal comment” button: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/03/26/2024-06186/setting-and-adjusting-trademark-fees-during-fiscal-year-2025..

————

The USPTO has been a steward of ideas, innovation and capitalism for 187 years.

But, does the USPTO work now? If it did, it would not take 8.2 months to reach trademark registration. We’d have more trademark applications filed each year, instead of small businesses giving up filing for more marks. The number of new trademark applications would be trending higher, instead of lower. There would be a nominal increase in Examining Attorneys, not a doubling. With greater efficiency, the USPTO would be considering a fee decrease.

The source of the problem are all the bad trademark applications being filed by the incompetent automated trademark service “mills” and the unethical trademark attorneys dabbling in trademarks – hardly making enough to pay their law school debt.

It all adds up to hurt the fragile small businesses who cannot discern they are being ripped off. I know it. David Gooder knows it. Everybody who does trademarks knows it – even the miscreants.

While everyone else can see the bad filings as public record at the USPTO, the problem makers, rip off artists, hear about it from their clients who are having their trademarks refused – over and over again. Do they improve their intentionally faulty practices? No.

For 14 years, the abusers have persisted – at the top of the internet – to sucker their next victim. There is no PPC cost too high, because beyond that everything is as automated as can be for max profit. So, will they ever improve their intentionally faulty practices? No.

————

IT STARTS WITH THE USPTO. BREAK THE DISMAL TREND.

DEMAND TRADEMARKING FUNDAMENTALS ARE ADHERED TO.

Rather than allow a continuation of things falling apart. Bring meaning back to trademarks from the initial filings. See trademark applicants as human beings. Lets bring back the structure. Let’s connect to small business. They need us. The answers are quite simple. Talk about excellence. Ask for excellence. Demand excellence. Let’s reflect the passion of those we care about, instead of acting indifference. The USPTO is NOT indifferent. They do care.

Let’s appreciate the infinite opportunities trademark applicants are striving to achieve. Let’s heed their unspoken needs. Back up their passion. Invite them into a friendly world where trademark services and trademark attorneys exist to help their businesses flourish.

Break the scam cycle.

The following ideas are elevated from the below March 31 article.

Polices the USPTO could do without raising their fees.

MY IDEA IS: The USPTO should take steps to tamp down the flood of time wasting trademark applications for them and bank account busting for trademark applicants. Show care to small business applicants. Help guide them to a clean, first time filing.

Why should everyone pay more because of the scam artists?

A) Make it well known, all over the USPTO web site, to do COMPREHENSIVE LEGAL RESEARCH before filing any trademark. Much more is needed than this recent post – https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/search/comprehensive-clearance-search-similar-trademarks. Too little. Not worded strong enough. Think everywhere.

B) Charge double for any trademark application being filed without COMPREHENSIVE LEGAL RESEARCH. These are the applicants who are driving up USPTO costs. Charge them at the same time you are reminding them they need COMPREHENSIVE LEGAL RESEARCH.

D) Ask for a copy of the legal research they did – at the time of filing a trademark application. It can be submitted confidentially only to the USPTO. Again, this reminds applicants they need COMPREHENSIVE LEGAL RESEARCH. Say right there what the USPTO means when they say COMPREHENSIVE LEGAL RESEARCH. Spell it out.

E) Yes – Refuse any attorney filed trademark application without COMPREHENSIVE LEGAL RESEARCH. Back up the ethics attorneys are supposed to be bound by. Fact. Attorneys are supposed to address the best interests of their clients. If a client refuses to do the research, then the attorney should refuse the client -or- check a box on the trademark application so the USPTO can automatically charge double. I suggest a flashing red light and siren to let them know they are making a mistake for their clients. Why should the USPTO have more expenses in handling a half-baked application? Frankly, everyone who does trademarks – and I mean everyone – all know it is a great risk to file a blind trademark application. It is not a secret. Clients should not be lied to, or have this information omitted. It is not ethical to lie through omission, especially by an attorney whose obligation and duty exists to truly help their clients. That is why a small business owner chooses to pay more for an attorneys in the first place. The USPTO about two years ago change policy for foreign based trademark applicants to hire a USA based trademark attorney to fight fraudulent applications. Required. Same thing.

F) A trademark application check list pop-up on the first page of any trademark application. I suggested this to the USPTO in March verbally and June 2022 in writing:

On 6/26/2022 6:44 PM, TradeMark Express – Urgent Trademark – TM®SM – Chris DeMassa wrote:

4) Yes, I am way too tardy on the suggestion to Charles and Jason on

March 15, 2022 to detail what the USPTO could have as a pop up on

the trademark application page. The point is to offer all trademark

applicants the chance to double check what they are doing to avoid

USPTO Office Action refusals. Also, to lessen the workload of the

USPTO so they do not need to hire another 200 Examining Attorneys

in a few years. We passed it around the staff to say the following:

MARK DEPICTION

If your design includes plain text only (letters/words), the exact format will be required to be in use for the life of the trademark.

If your design includes a stylized element (a logo), a black & white image is preferred to claim the design and allow flexibility with the colors. A color image may be used to claim specific colors but requires that the exact colors are used for the life of the mark.

GOODS/SERVICES

USPTO descriptions of goods/services are strongly suggested. Pre-approved descriptions are searchable at the Trademark ID Manual. If the description is unacceptable/unclear, the USPTO will require amendment, and additional fees may apply. Goods/services statements on existing marks cannot be added or broadened at a later date, only deleted or narrowed.

SPECIMENS

Each specimen must prominently display the mark in association with the goods/services. Specimens should be clear and present examples of the mark as a customer would interact with it. Website screenshots must be saved as JPG or PDF and must include the date you took the screenshot and the URL.

For goods, potential specimens includes photos of the goods themselves, labels and tags, packaging, sales displays, website screenshots, and others, any of which clearly and prominently display the mark.

For services, potential specimens include business cards, websites, or advertisements, which would offer a description of the services offered in clear association with the mark.

For more information, please visit Specimens | USPTO.

USPTO ALERT: PRIOR COMPREHENSIVE RESEARCH – SAVE COSTS AND TIME AND INCREASE LIKELINESS OF A SUCCESSFUL APPLICATION

A comprehensive clearance search includes looking for similarities in sound, appearance, or meaning in the federal trademark, state trademark, and common-law databases.

In the review period in ~8 months after you have filed, the Examining Attorney will conduct a federal trademark search. If there are similarity conflicts with existing marks, the Examining Attorney will issue a refusal, which often results in additional fees or abandonment of the mark. All USPTO filing fees are non-refundable.

Attorneys and trademark research specialists can conduct comprehensive research before you file your application. Finding conflicts before filing can help you avoid common refusals, additional filing fees, and lost months of time, and therefore is more likely to result in a successful trademark application.

 “Selecting and protecting your trademark is part of building your business. It’s an investment in the goodwill and reputation of your company, so you want to take the time to do it right.”

Hope this is constructive!



Thank you, Chris DeMassa

TradeMark Express – Since 1992 – Founder – 650-948-0530

Zoom Anytime – https://bit.ly/TradeMarkZoomMeeting

Calendly Meeting – https://calendly.com/tmexpress/15min

LinkedIn – https://www.linkedin.com/in/chrisdemassa/

Blog Articles – https://tmexpress.com/trademark-blog

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *