Skip to main content

Understanding Copyright and Trademark Symbols: What They Mean and How They Protect Your Intellectual Property

 Introduction:

Intellectual property law is a vital aspect of protecting one's creative work from unauthorized use. The use of copyright and trademark symbols is an essential tool in this regard. While they may appear simple, these symbols have specific meanings that creators must understand to safeguard their rights. In this article, we will explore the significance of copyright and trademark symbols, how they differ, and their role in protecting your intellectual property.

What is the Copyright Symbol?

The copyright symbol (©) is an identifying symbol that signifies ownership of a particular work. In the United States, it was mandatory to include a copyright notice until 1989. However, creators still use the copyright symbol or notice to protect their legal rights and deter potential infringers. Copyright law gives the owner exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, create derivative works, publicly perform and display their work, and use sound recordings through digital audio transmission.

Copyright and Trademark Symbols

Copyright and trademark symbols are not the same. The copyright symbol is applicable from the moment an eligible work is created, whereas trademarks require registration. The registered trademark symbol (®) can only be used after registration with the appropriate authority. In contrast, the trademark symbol (™) can be applied to any logo you are using as a trademark. While a copyright notice may not be legally required, it can affect the damages you can claim if your work is infringed.

Copyright Infringement and the Law

Unauthorized use of copyrighted work can lead to legal penalties. However, certain exceptions allow limited use of copyrighted works for study, criticism, and other purposes. These exceptions are collectively known as "fair use" rules and are one of the only defences to a copyright infringement claim. Copyright notices that include the owner's name and the year of creation can be useful for copyright owners who want to license their work for a fee.

Trademark Symbols

Trademark symbols serve as identifiers of intellectual property. The registered trademark symbol (®) indicates that a trademark has been registered with the relevant authority. The trademark symbol (™) can be applied to any logo you are using as a trademark, regardless of whether it is registered. Failure to use the appropriate trademark symbol can lead to challenges in defending your intellectual property rights.

Patents

Patent symbols are unique serial numbers assigned when a patent is granted by the relevant authority. If a patent has been applied for but has not been granted yet, the patent is usually accompanied by the phrase "patent pending." Unauthorized use of patented inventions can result in legal penalties. Therefore, it is vital to consult a lawyer for advice on intellectual property laws and how they affect you.

Conclusion

In conclusion, understanding copyright and trademark symbols is vital for creators to protect their intellectual property rights. Copyright symbols signify ownership of creative works, while trademark symbols identify intellectual property rights. Patent symbols signify exclusive rights to an invention. It is important to use the appropriate symbols to safeguard intellectual property rights and avoid legal challenges. Creators should seek legal advice to ensure compliance with relevant intellectual property laws.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NEVER Read the Comments!

The Federal Court this week delivered their judgement on  Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Service Seeking Pty Ltd  [2020] FCA 1040 going all out by handing out whopping fines, legal costs orders and ordering Service Seeking Pty Ltd to establish a, undoubtedly expensive, compliance system to be monitored by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC).  What did they do that was so bad?  According to the Federal Court of Australia, they created a system in which businesses could write their own customer reviews.  With a rating system less defined than what constitutes a 5-star rating in an Uber trip, businesses could write a review, assign a star rating and send it off to their customer for approval. If the customer didn’t respond or even open the email containing the review, then the review was automatically published online after a set period. By estimates of the Court, approximately 80% of the reviews published on the website for the period that this sch
Post a Comment
Read more

Misappropriation of likeness, it's in the game

Misappropriation of likeness, it's in the game With the recent announcement that EA will be venturing back into the world of college sports for one of their upcoming games. It is essential to look at the reasons for its (over a decade-long) hiatus from making college sports games. Several high-profile cases took down a very profitable area of sports gaming almost ten years ago, over a simple but crucial element to the games, the players.  Privacy and personality laws in the United States is an emerging area of law founded on the basis that is based in tort law. It deals with the ideas that a person has rights: 1. To be left alone; 2. To not have public disclosure of private facts; 3. To not be depicted in a false light; and 4. To not have your name and likeness misappropriated.  On these critical tenets, personality laws have become increasingly more prevalent as, due to advances in technologies, it is becoming easier for one's likeness to be copied and distributed.  Th
Post a Comment
Read more

You can take the bread company out of Hawaii, but you can't take Hawaii out of the bread company.

You can take the bread company out of Hawaii, but you can't take Hawaii out of the bread company. What do you do when your favourite company that makes your favourite type of bread makes it bread outside of your favourite state? You take them to court, or at least that is what one man has done.  A man in New York has filed a class action against bread maker, King's Hawaiian over the sweet rolls alleging that the company misled him into believing that the rolls are actually made in Hawaii. Robert Galinsky is pursuing a class-action lawsuit against the company claiming unjust enrichment, negligent misrepresentation, and fraud. King's Hawaiian packaging Galinsky claims that Hawaiian Rolls by itself "does not denote a roll made in Hawaii any more than a 'Moon Pie' can claim to have been baked on the moon." But the company using the original location of its factory, 'Hilo, Hawaii' in its packaging is misleading to customers.  If Galinsky can convince th
Post a Comment
Read more