Listen, let's take this to the Dungeon. This would be better to discuss there. Pretty soon the moderator will probably start deleting posts because they don't have anything to do with a group build.

Here's the link to a thread where we can discuss IP issues further:

• Peerless transformers, trademarks and intellectual property rights

just a quick note... and then I have to finish moving our storage facitlities from point A to point B. Don't ever move...

I don't want to discuss the fine points of law... and I assume your not an attorney with expertise in patents and trademarks and I certainly am not. But I have had an attorney represent us in all matters relating to the assignment and the subsequent reissue of the said trademark and will be contacting him soon for his guidance.

again, this is on a common sense level, very clear... we have used the name in interstate commerce with reference to audio transformers for a number of years and the Peerless mark itself had been in force as early as 1956. And the founders of the company began use of the name Peerless as a mark of a specific brand of transformers as early as 1934.

again, what I find unsettling is the prospect that any number of small specialty audio related business's would appear to not be afforded any protection of their namesake on the audioroundtable unless they can prove to you that they have a federal registration. And as I have shown many of these small firms lack such federal registration.

I thought that given our long usage of the subject trademark and a clear understanding of what it stands for... would have been enough "proof" for you...

I can only imagine how other small companies would make out under the same tests.

Mike

msl

• http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=2kg3hj.1.1

hey...nice post and some good questions for lay people... and interesting fodder intellectually.

you wrote;

:::The final consensus up to this point is that anyone can build a trans just don't name it Peerless.:::

again, I have no problem with Dougie or anyone else who wants to go into the transformer business... but use John Atwood's model... design and build or have built your products identify them with your own name or brand name... and build up your reputation the ole fashion way... by building one quality product after another...

taking or misappropiating the namesake of a company who common sense you know that your mis-using... is the lazy, shyster way of doing business...

just as would be the case if I copied Wayne's designs and called them Pi Dynamics or Pi Sound... it would be an attempt to cash in on Wayne's hard work and good will...

I'm not sure if I follow the "indigenous" part... there has not been to my knowledge confusion such as perhaps clouds the Kleenex trademark... where a registered mark becomes known as designating a generic class or type of goods.

Peerless transformers made a wide range of transformers.... from entry level to reasonably sophisticated. They also made transformers for differing industries (they were not solely an audio transformer manufacturer)...

I've never seen anyone use the phrase "I need a Peerless for my EL84 amp's output stage" as a generic calling that they need an "output transformer" and perhaps they would prefer a Peerless branded output.

msl

If Mike has a lot invested in this, he should definuitely get an IP attorney to make sure his claim to the name is valid.