wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) (10/24/85)
What "rights" do you have with respect to your name? Are these any
different if you have legally adopted a different name than the one on
your birth certificate?
For example, I understand that the trademark laws overrule your ability
to use your name in the name of a business that you own. Even if you were
born "Joe Standard", and you have documentary proof of thiry generations
of people named "Standard" from whom you are descended, and you form an
oil company, you cannot name this company "Standard Oil Company",
because the rights to that name are already held by another entity. Is
that correct? Any other details or legal points involved here?
What about your first name (or "Christian" name)? There can be thousands
of people with that name; do you have any "rights" with respect to it?
An example -- just today, I saw a car parked at the curb with the
"vanity" license plate "NADINE" on it (Missouri plate). My
sister-in-law's name happens to be "Nadine". I jokingly suggested to my
wife (to pass on to her sister) that she should find out who owned that
car and sue them, because the car was in terrible shape (dented, rusted,
broken parts, etc.), and thus was a reflection on "her good name", thus
doing her harm. Or suppose someone printed a statement that "all people
named 'William' are deadbeats" -- since my name is William, and I am
defamed by this, is this a libelous statement for which I (and all other
"William"s) would have cause for action? Or are first names considered
so "general" or unspecific that they cannot be construed to apply to any
specific individual (or even a class of individuals)?
Every now and then you read a complaint by people named "Hooker" that
the relatively recent use of that word as a synonym for "prostitute" is
harming them. I tend to agree that they are so harmed, yet it seems that
they have no recourse to such general linguistic defamation. Are these
peoples' "rights" being violated, and, if so, just what "rights" are
being considered here?
Another aspect of names is their use in fiction (either written or
broadcast) -- is the standard statement given at the end of most credits
("all characters portrayed herein are fictional, and any resemblance to
real persons is unintentional and coincidental", or however it goes)
sufficient to absolve the writers/producers from liability in naming,
say, an horrendous villain "John Zeitgeist" and being sued by a real
person named "John Zeitgeist" because his "good name" was defamed?
What if they use a generally-known name? (Say, name the villain "Ronald
Reagan"? Or "Ronald McDonald"? [I would guess they would get in MORE
trouble doing the latter!]) What if they include the disclaimer
statement cited above, but the general audience could tell that they
were REALLY modelling this after someone else, despite their disclaimer;
say by doing a story of an American President performing various illegal
and defamatory actions, and calling him "Ronald Roogan" -- would that
slight misspelling of the name be enough for them to avoid liability?
(Suppose it wasn't a public figure [I think special rules apply in those
cases] -- suppose they do a defamatory story about a car dealer and name
him "John Petersen", and you are a car dealer named "John Peterson"?)
^ ^
Comments on this general topic are welcomed.
Will Martin
UUCP/USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin or ARPA/MILNET: wmartin@almsa-1.ARPAlevy@ttrdc.UUCP (Daniel R. Levy) (11/03/85)
In article <2395@brl-tgr.ARPA>, wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) writes: >What "rights" do you have with respect to your name? Are these any >different if you have legally adopted a different name than the one on >your birth certificate? > >For example, I understand that the trademark laws overrule your ability >to use your name in the name of a business that you own. Even if you were >born "Joe Standard", and you have documentary proof of thiry generations >of people named "Standard" from whom you are descended, and you form an >oil company, you cannot name this company "Standard Oil Company", >because the rights to that name are already held by another entity. Is >that correct? Any other details or legal points involved here? > WARNING AND DISCLAIMER--THIS IS LAYMAN SPECULATION ONLY--- Maybe this is in a different league, but I have seen a similar instance in the Chicagoland area [Chicagoland is a wonderful euphemism for the Chicago metro and surrounding suburban areas, but that's a different subject...] involving competing oriental rug dealerships owned by people with the same last name. The result is that they are called by different names [Schmoe Brothers Inc. and A. B. Schmoe and Sons--I am obviously not using the real name]. So if you are Joe Standard, while you undoubtedly couldn't call your oil firm Standard Oil and get away with it, you might conceivably be allowed to call it the "Joseph Standard Oil Company" or "Standard and Sons Oil Company" or something in a similar vein which would be obviously distinguishable from the other, older firm. You might possibly expect quite a legal battle, however, if you did. It's not unheard of, incidentally, for firms in DIFFERENT business lines to be called by a common name. "Domino" is one such name. Even then, there has been trouble. Domino Sugar sued Domino's Pizza some time ago on this point. In the defense, Domino's Pizza produced a list of a hundred or so other firms that used "Domino" as part of their names, and argued that sugar and pizza had nothing to do with one another (though I'm sure that health food nuts would disagree :-). I think the upstart, however, was that an agreement was hammered out where Domino's Pizza would phase in a different name for their franchises (if I be mistaken, somebody please correct). >[discussion of written works using "fictional names"] >-- would that >slight misspelling of the name be enough for them to avoid liability? >(Suppose it wasn't a public figure [I think special rules apply in those >cases] -- suppose they do a defamatory story about a car dealer and name >him "John Petersen", and you are a car dealer named "John Peterson"?) > ^ ^ I would hope at the least that the writer of such a story, if indeed the coincidence WAS incidental and unintended, would perhaps publicly apologize for the coincidence and certainly publicly point out clearly that a different firm or party than the real one whose name was close to the fictional one named was the firm or party intended. If the writer was requested to do so by the affected firm or party and refused, the writer might be in for quite a battle. --WARNING AND DISCLAIMER--THIS IS LAYMAN SPECULATION ONLY >Comments on this general topic are welcomed. >Will Martin -- ------------------------------- Disclaimer: The views contained herein are | dan levy | yvel nad | my own and are not at all those of my em- | an engihacker @ | ployer or the administrator of any computer | at&t computer systems division | upon which I may hack. | skokie, illinois | -------------------------------- Path: ..!ihnp4!ttrdc!levy
joe@nitrex.UUCP (joe standard) (11/05/85)
In article <2395@brl-tgr.ARPA>, wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) writes: >For example, I understand that the trademark laws overrule your ability >to use your name in the name of a business that you own. Even if you were >born "Joe Standard", and you have documentary proof of thiry generations >of people named "Standard" from whom you are descended, and you form an >oil company, you cannot name this company "Standard Oil Company", >because the rights to that name are already held by another entity. Is >that correct? Any other details or legal points involved here? you can't? :-)
vas@lzaz.UUCP (V.SNYDER) (11/08/85)
My husband's name is William. By the sound of your article, you sound like a schmuck. I would like to sue you for defamation of my hubby's good name. I'd hate to be driving behind you for fear you'd step on you brakes suddenly so you'd be rear-ended. Then you'd sue for whiplash. You sound like the kind of guy who would go to someone's house, drink all their booze and eat all their food, try to drive home, get in an accident, and then try to sue your host. You're the guy who would do a fake 'fall' on someone's property and try to sue. Do you have any friends?? If you met my husband while trying to sue me, you'll be pressing charges against him for assault for sure!