"LEROC" Trademark
The post is simply to inform the dancing community that a recent application for trademark has been accepted under the following classes.
Class 09:
DVDs, CDs and CD-ROMs; DVDs, CDs and CD-ROMs relating to dancing; downloadable publications.
Class 16:
Paper, cardboard and goods made from these materials, not included in other Classes; printed matter; book-binding materials; photographs; stationery; adhesives for stationery or household purposes; artist's materials; paint brushes; typewriters and office requisites (except furniture); instructional and teaching material (except apparatus); plastic materials for packaging (not included in other Classes); printers; printing blocks.
Class 41:
Education; providing of training; entertainment; sporting and cultural activities; provision of online electronic publications (not downloadable); dance instruction services; provision of dance classes and courses; operation of dance halls; arranging, organisation and hosting of training centres and courses all relating to dancing; booking agency services relating to dance classes and courses; live dance exhibitions; entertainment services; publishing of materials relating to dancing; information, advisory and consultancy services relating to all the aforesaid services.
Proprietor: Billy Cullen
Leroc Ltd, 244 Bath Street, Glasgow, G2 4JW
I guess we'd be safe to refer to it as LaRoc instead.
Some people would have done this as quietly as possible so nobody had a chance to protest. At the very least this would have generated extra bad feeling.
This way anybody who feels that the originators of the name wanted this to be a public domain name and are willing to act on that principle have a chance to do so.
I would imagine that Chrisitne Keeble, who, as I recall, publishes a video using that name, and others that run classes under that banner, might at least object, and perhaps even counter-claim.
This gives the trade-mark office a chance to decide if Leroc is trade-marketable. If it decides not, that should benefit everybody using the name. It will not then be possible for someone to do a sneaky application.
Credit either way to Billy, market savvy with principles.
Billy, is your intention with this trademark to stop other people using the name "LEROC", to licence it, or neither of these things?
I feel that as people have been using the word for about 30 years now, and at least 20 years commercially, it will not be difficult for them to contest your registration. (I am not a trade mark lawyer though.)
Let your mind go and your body will follow. – Steve Martin, LA Story
Let your mind go and your body will follow. – Steve Martin, LA Story
LEROC It's blanlk.
Do I have to turn on the ALT special symbols facility?
I use XP & Firefox.
Last edited by dep; 15th-February-2008 at 02:16 PM. Reason: can't type/spell
I'm not going to look at the applications again. I looked a while ago. However, it seems to me that the application was for the particular logo that Billy uses. He has not, as far as I can see, trademarked the name "LeRoc". If this is the case there is nothing to stop anybody continuing to use the name. They just can't use Billy's logo.
It's a bit like calling your nightclub "SEX" and writing it in a particular way. No other nightclub could write the word "SEX" using that particular style or anything approximating to it in a way that would confuse a member of the public. However, we'd all be able to continue to offer "sex" services (oops, why did I choose "sex"?)
Come on Billy, do you think you now have exclusive rights to use the name "LeRoc"?
Billy, if you want a really wide public debate you might want to consider raising the matter via the Wikipedia editing/discussion forums, as the present entry is quite specific that "today, many unrelated Modern Jive organisations are free to use the term "LeRoc" in their names, as it remains a generic term.".
See LeRoc - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Interesting.
From here:
LEROC - LEROC Trade Mark
It looks like the following are Trademarked:
Note the "®" symbol, rather than "™" - ® is for registered trademarks, whereas ™ is for trademarks that you want to claim. So ® is "stronger" in that sense."LEROC" ®, a registered Trade Mark of: Mr Billy Cullen, Leroc Ltd, and Leroc (Scotland) Ltd,
"LEROC Dance Addiction" ®, a registered Trade Mark of: Mr Billy Cullen, Leroc Ltd, and Leroc (Scotland) Ltd,
"LEROC BIG Dance " ®, is also a registered Trade Mark of Leroc Ltd, and Leroc (Scotland) Ltd,
Looking at the UKIPO, the "LEROC" image is registered in several variants (for example, here),.
But it's not clear whether use of the word itself - with any capitalisation - is trademarked.
Interestingly, "CEROC" has been registered since 1988 (see here), under Class 09, 25 and 41.
Class 09:
Pre-recorded tapes and cassettes, all bearing sound and/or visual recordings.
Class 25:
Articles of dancewear for sales to students attending Ceroc dance instruction courses (and not for sale through retail outlets).
Class 41:
Booking agency services for performing artists; theatre production services; instruction services, relating to dance, the performing arts and physical exercise; all included in Class 41.
Billy, how on earth did you manage to get this trademark? I could understand if you'd got Leroc Scotland trademarked but how did you get Leroc on it's own as:
and you aren't exactly the only company in the UK that is using the term LerocOriginally Posted by UK Intellectual Property Office
Let your mind go and your body will follow. – Steve Martin, LA Story
I think Billy is announcing it in a way that is ambiguous. To me it seems he's trying to imply that he has exclusive use to the word "Leroc". It's a while since I did a course on trademarks, but my take on it is that he's trademarked his logo, not the word "Leroc". If you look here you will see a list of trademarks. A few down from the Leroc trademark you will find a trademark for "Look at me" when you go here you will see that it is written in a stylish way. As far as I can see the only protection is to stop people using their stylish logo - it would be unthinkable to claim that they are the only company that can use the phrase "look at me".
So, to go back to my earlier question and to repeat it in a strident way in the hope of getting an answer. Is Billy claiming that his is the only company that can now use the word Leroc? And, to paraphrase the other trademark "you lookin' at me?"
N.B. I have no plans to start calling my company Leroc. However, I do have the Leroc teaching qualification and would like to be able to use that name on my materials without having to get permission from Billy Cullen
As I understand it, the trademarking applies to the design - the all-caps, the 3D effect, the colours and so on. As Andy says, you're trademarking the logo rather than the term.
If anyone else uses one of those specific designs to promote their classes, presumably that'd be an infringement. But I doubt very much that you can be successfully sued for using the word itself in your business name.
Barry / Trampy, care to comment?
Thanks DJ, I looked a bit more and there are 14 designs to choose from in Billy's Leroc logos, including a black text on orange background one
Well Apple and Intel seem to keep they're legal departments quite busy by going after companies that use the words "pod" and "intel", respectively, as even part of other words.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks