Advantages Of Branding:

The advantages of branding are numerous. For one, you build a strong trusted reputation when a good branding campaign is performed over time. Secondly, branding is advertising that continues on far after an advertising campaign if done right. Branding is having future and present customers remember your company name and/or logo and what business doesn't want that?

Advantages In Points-Format:-

1) Product dies but a good brand doesnt: The firs card T-model is no more but the brand 'FORD' is still alive. 'Pears' soap that was launched some where in the end of 1800 is still alive although they have changed the product.

2) Sales or Mraket share: A brand generates familiarity and trust and hence leads to greater sales

3) Premium price: Becoz of the trust the brand generated, you can charge extra price and people are willing to pay for that

4) Differentiation: Creating a brand is nothing but creating a strong association. And this association clearly differentiates your product from the rest

BRAND-LOYALTY:-

Brand loyalty has been proclaimed by some to be the ultimate goal of marketing.^[1] In marketing, brand loyalty consists of a consumer's commitment to repurchase the brand and can be demonstrated by repeated buying of a product or service or other positive behaviors such as word of mouth advocacy.^[2] True brand loyalty implies that the consumer is willing, at least on occasion, to put aside their own desires in the interest of the brand.^[3]

Brand loyalty is more than simple repurchasing, however. Customers may repurchase a brand due to situational constraints, a lack of viable alternatives, or out of convenience.^[4] Such loyalty is referred to as "spurious loyalty". True brand loyalty exists when customers have a high relative attitude toward the brand which is then exhibited through repurchase behavior.^[2] This type of loyalty can be a great asset to the firm: customers are willing to pay higher prices, they may cost less to serve, and can bring new customers to the firm.^[1][5] For example, if Joe has brand loyalty to Company A he will purchase Company A's products even if Company B's are cheaper and/or of a higher quality.

An example of a major brand loyalty program that extended for several years and spread worldwide is Pepsi Stuff. Perhaps the most significant contemporary example of brand loyalty is the fervent devotion of many Mac users to the Apple company and its products.

From the point of view of many marketers, loyalty to the brand - in terms of consumer usage - is a key factor:

Usage rate

Most important of all, in this context, is usually the 'rate ' of usage, to which the Pareto 80:20 Rule applies. Kotler's `heavy users' are likely to be disproportionately important to the brand (typically, 20 percent of users accounting for 80 percent of usage -- and of suppliers' profit). As a result, suppliers often segment their customers into `heavy', `medium' and `light' users; as far as they can, they target `heavy users'.

Loyalty

A second dimension, however, is whether the customer is committed to the brand. Philip Kotler, again, defines four patterns of behaviour:

Hard Core Loyals - who buy the brand all the time.
Soft Core Loyals - loyal to two or three brands.
Shifting Loyals - moving from one brand to another.
Switchers - with no loyalty (possibly `deal-prone', constantly looking for bargains or `vanity prone', looking for something different).

Factors Influencing Brand Loyalty

It has been suggested that loyalty includes some degree of pre-dispositional commitment toward a brand.Brand loyalty is viewed as multidimensional construct. It is determined by several distinct psychological processes and it entails multivariate measurements. Customers' Perceived value,Brand trust,Customers' satisfaction,Repeat purchase behaviour and Commitment are found to be the key influencing factors of brand loyalty.Commitment and Repeated purchase behaviour are considered as necessary conditions for brand loyalty followed by Perceived value ,satisfaction and brand trust .-^[6]==

Industrial Markets

In industrial markets, organizations will regard the `heavy users' as `major accounts', to be handled by senior sales personnel and even managers; whereas the `light users' may be handled by the general salesforce or by a dealer.

Portfolios of Brands

Andrew Ehrenberg, then of the London Business School said that consumers buy 'portfolios of brands'.^{[citation needed]} They switch regularly between brands, often because they simply want a change. Thus, 'brand penetration' or 'brand share' reflects only a statistical chance that the majority of customers will buy that brand next time as part of a portfolio of brands they favour. It does not guarantee that they will stay loyal.

Influencing the statistical probabilities facing a consumer choosing from a portfolio of preferred brands, which is required in this context, is a very different role for a brand manager; compared with the - much simpler - one traditionally described, of recruiting and holding dedicated customers. The concept also emphasises the need for managing continuity.

Market Inertia

On the other hand, one of the most prominent features of many markets is their overall stability - or inertia. Thus, in their essential characteristics they change very slowly, often over decades - sometimes centuries - rather than over months. This stability has two very important implications. The first is that if you are a clear brand leader you are especially well placed in relation to your competitors, and should want to further the inertia which lies behind that stable position. This will, however, still demand a continuing pattern of minor changes, to keep up with the marginal changes in consumer taste (which may be minor to the theorist, but will still be crucial in terms of those consumers' purchasing patterns - markets do not favour the over-complacent.). But these minor investments are a small price to pay for the long term profits which brand leaders usually enjoy. Only farm-hands make a career out of milking cows, and only fools jeopardise the investment contained in an established brand leader.

The second, and more important is that if you want to overturn this stability, and change the market (or significantly change your position in it), then you must expect to make massive investments to succeed. Even though stability is the natural state of markets, however, sudden changes can still occur and the environment must be constantly scanned for signs of these.

Examples of Brand Loyalty Promotions:Pepsi Stuff

Loyalty For Life - The Consumer View

It is interesting to get the customer or consumer view on brand loyalty. Is it possible? An achievable goal? Or is it a forlorn aspiration for a brand? The following website poses the same question and has managed to draw in contributions from folk around the globe. http://www.loyaltyforlife.co.uk. On the face of it it seems we want brands that change and grow with us. Brands that offer us something at every step. Younger audiences talk about this a lot. They also want to feel that they or their tribe are getting something back from the brand.

People talk about football teams as the ultimate in loyalty. You pin your colours to your chest early on in life and you do not change. No matter how badly they might let you down. Can brands in other catageories match that? It's difficult but you can draw similarities between other high commitment brands, brands that take you from prospect to customer and to advocate in the blink of an eye - take Skoda for example.

For the older audiences the basics have to be in place. The product or service has to live up to the brand promise. Always. And then people want to feel valued. A simple letter will do. A thank-you. When was the last time your bank wrote to you just to say thanks for being a customer?

So is Loyalty for Life possible? Some think so and to get there one contributor says: '"Tune into my aspirations and values; change with me through my life; be easy to find; give me something back; don't ever assume I will come back to you and when I have a problem, surprise me with how easy you are to deal with. Simple really."

The brand, and "branding" and brand equity have become increasingly important components of culture and the economy, now being described as "cultural accessories and personal philosophies". ^[1]

In non-commercial contexts, the marketing of entities which supply ideas or promises rather than product and services (e.g. political parties or religious organizations) may also be known as "branding".

Some marketers distinguish the psychological aspect of a brand from the experiential aspect. The experiential aspect consists of the sum of all points of contact with the brand and is known as the brand experience. The psychological aspect, sometimes referred to as the brand image, is a symbolic construct created within the minds of people and consists of all the information and expectations associated with a product or service.

Marketers engaged in branding seek to develop or align the expectations behind the brand experience (see also brand promise), creating the impression that a brand associated with a product or service has certain qualities or characteristics that make it special or unique. A brand is therefore one of the most valuable elements in an advertising theme, as it demonstrates what the brand owner is able to offer in the marketplace. The art of creating and maintaining a brand is called brand management. This approach works not only for consumer goods B2C (Business-to-Consumer), but also for B2B (Business-to-Business), see Philip Kotler & Waldemar Pfoertsch.

A brand which is widely known in the marketplace acquires brand recognition. When brand recognition builds up to a point where a brand enjoys a critical mass of positive sentiment in the marketplace, it is said to have achieved brand franchise. One goal in brand recognition is the identification of a brand without the name of the company present. For example, Disney has been successful at branding with their particular script font (originally created for Walt Disney's "signature" logo), which it used in the logo for go.com.

Consumers may look on branding as an important value added aspect of products or services, as it often serves to denote a certain attractive quality or characteristic (see also brand promise). From the perspective of brand owners, branded products or services also command higher prices. Where two products resemble each other, but one of the products has no associated branding (such as a generic, store-branded product), people may often select the more expensive branded product on the basis of the quality of the brand or the reputation of the brand owner.

Brand name

The brand name is often used interchangeably with "brand", although it is more correctly used to specifically denote written or spoken linguistic elements of a brand. In this context a "brand name" constitutes a type of trademark, if the brand name exclusively identifies the brand owner as the commercial source of products or services. A brand owner may seek to protect proprietary rights in relation to a brand name through trademark registration. Advertising spokespersons have also become part of some brands, for example: Mr. Whipple of Charmin toilet tissue and Tony the Tiger of Kellogg's.

The act of associating a product or service with a brand has become part of pop culture. Most products have some kind of brand identity, from common table salt to designer clothes.

Brand identity

How the brand owner wants the consumer to perceive the brand - and by extension the branded company, organisation, product or service. The brand owner will seek to bridge the gap between the brand image and the brand identity.^[2] Brand identity is fundamental to consumer recognition and symbolizes the brand's differentiation from competitors.

Brand identity may be defined as simply the outward expression of the brand, such as name and visual appearance.^[3] Some practitioners however define brand identity as not only outward expression (or physical facet), but also in terms of the values a brand carries in the eye of the consumer. In 1992 Jean-Noel Kapferer developed the Brand Identity Prism, which charts the brand identity along a constructed source and constructed receiver axis, with externalization on the one side and internalization on the other. On the externalization side brand identity consists of "physical facet", "relationship" and "reflected consumer". On the internalization side brand identity consists of "personality", "culture (values)" and "consumer mentalisation". In this respect Kapferer positions brand personality as one factor within brand identity.

Brand personality

Brand personality is the attribution of human personality traits to a brand as a way to achieve differentiation. Such brand personality traits may include seriousness, warmth, or imagination. Brand personality is usually built through long-term marketing, as well as packaging and graphics.^[3]

Brand promise

Brand promise is a statement from the brand owner to customers, which identifies what consumers should expect from all interactions with the brand. Interactions may include employees, representatives, actual service or product quality or performance, communication etc. The brand promise is often strongly associated with the brand owner's name and/or logo.

The brand promise may be expressed in a "tag line", for example a dining restaurant may create the following brand promise: "Carl's Steak House -"Our food is the best, but the memories we help you create are even better."" Other brand owners may develop their brand promise into a detailed statement on the values, characteristics and behaviour of their brand. For example BP describes its brand promise as "our fundamental beliefs" which have evolved over time. BP continues "At the core of BP is an unshakable commitment to integrity, honest dealing, treating everyone with respect and dignity, striving for mutual advantage and contributing to human progress." ^[5]

Brand value

Brand equity or brand value measures the total value of the brand to the brand owner, and reflects the extent of brand franchise.

A brand can be an intangible asset, used by analysts to rationalize the difference between a company's "book value" and market value. For example, the market value of a company can far exceed its tangible assets (physical assets owned by the company, such as stock or machinery), and its brand value can account for some of the difference. Up to 85 percent of a company's market value might be intangible (for example know-how, existing client relationships), and Interbrand, a brand consultancy, states that tangible assets may account for less than five percent of a company's market value, for example in the case of Coca-Cola or Microsoft.

Brand value, especially in the case of consumer product brands, may arise out of customer loyalty. Brand value may also arise in terms of staff retention benefits (e.g. the ability of the company to attract and retain skilled and/or talented employees offering competitive salaries).

Brand value can be negatively influenced. For example, in 1999 Nike's brand value was estimated at 8 billion US$. Facing media exposure and consumer boycotts over supply chain issues, Nike's brand value declined in following two years to 7.6 billion US$, and rose back to 9.26 billion US$ in 2004 after Nike addressed its supply chain issues.^[6][7]

Campaigning groups may deliberately target a company's brand value to force a company into adopting a certain position or practices. Some campaign groups have thought to do this by deliberately subverting a brand's image, logo or message, creating a negative association among consumers. This attack may be visual, as pioneered by groups such as Adbusters, or focusing on the message. For example, BP's "Beyond Petroleum" branding is subverted by campaigners into headline such as "BP: Beyond Petroleum or Beyond Preposterous?" or "BP must move beyond petroleum as profits soar".

Brand monopoly

In economic terms the "brand" is, in effect, a device to create a "monopoly" — or at least some form of "imperfect competition" — so that the brand owner can obtain some of the benefits which accrue to a monopoly or unique point of sale, particularly those related to decreased price competition. In this context, most "branding" is established by promotional means. However, there is also a legal dimension, for it is essential that the brand names and trademarks are protected by all means available. The monopoly may also be extended, or even created, by patent, copyright, trade secret (e.g. secret recipe), and other sui generis intellectual property regimes (e.g.: Plant Varieties Act, Design Act).

In all these contexts, retailers' "own label" brands can be just as powerful. The "brand", whatever its derivation, is a very important investment for any organization. RHM (Rank Hovis McDougall), for example, have valued their international brands at anything up to twenty times their annual earnings.

Branding policies

There are a number of possible policies:

Company name

Often, especially in the industrial sector, it is just the company's name which is promoted (leading to one of the most powerful statements of "branding"; the saying, before the company's downgrading, "No one ever got fired for buying IBM").

In this case a very strong brand name (or company name) is made the vehicle for a range of products (for example, Mercedes-Benz or Black & Decker) or even a range of subsidiary brands (such as Cadbury Dairy Milk, Cadbury Flake or Cadbury Fingers in the United States).

Individual branding

Individual branding

Each brand has a separate name (such as Seven-Up or Nivea Sun (Beiersdorf)), which may even compete against other brands from the same company (for example, Persil, Omo, Surf and Lynx are all owned by Unilever).

Attitude branding

Attitude branding is the choice to represent a larger feeling, which is not necessarily connected with the product or consumption of the product at all. Marketing labeled as attitude branding include that of Nike, Starbucks, The Body Shop, Safeway, and Apple Computer.^[1] In the 2000 book, No Logo, attitude branding is described by Naomi Klein as a "fetish strategy".

"A great brand raises the bar -- it adds a greater sense of purpose to the experience, whether it's the challenge to do your best in sports and fitness, or the affirmation that the cup of coffee you're drinking really matters." - Howard Schultz (president, ceo and chairman of Starbucks

"No-brand" branding

Recently a number of companies have successfully pursued "No-Brand" strategies, examples include the Japanese company Muji, which means "No label, quality goods" in English. Although there is a distinct Muji brand, Muji products are not branded. This no-brand strategy means that little is spent on advertisement or classical marketing and Muji's success is attributed to the word-of-mouth, a simple shopping experience and the anti-brand movement. Other brands which are thought to follow a no-brand strategy are American Apparel, which like Muji, does not brand its products.^{[11] [12] [13]}

Derived brands

In this case the supplier of a key component, used by a number of suppliers of the end-product, may wish to guarantee its own position by promoting that component as a brand in its own right. The most frequently quoted example is Intel, which secures its position in the PC market with the slogan "Intel Inside".

Brand development

In terms of existing products, brands may be developed in a number of ways:

Brand extension

The existing strong brand name can be used as a vehicle for new or modified products; for example, many fashion and designer companies extended brands into fragrances, shoes and accessories, home textile, home decor, luggage, (sun-) glasses, furniture, hotels, etc.

Mars extended its brand to ice cream, Caterpillar to shoes and watches, Michelin to a restaurant guide, Adidas and Puma to personal hygiene. Dunlop extended its brand from tires to other rubber products such as shoes, golf balls, tennis racquets and adhesives.

There is a difference between brand extension and line extension. When Coca-Cola launched "Diet Coke" and "Cherry Coke" they stayed within the originating product category: non-alcoholic carbonated beverages. Procter & Gamble (P&G) did likewise extending its strong lines (such as Fairy Soap) into neighboring products (Fairy Liquid and Fairy Automatic) within the same category, dish washing detergents.

Multi-brands

Alternatively, in a market that is fragmented amongst a number of brands a supplier can choose deliberately to launch totally new brands in apparent competition with its own existing strong brand (and often with identical product characteristics); simply to soak up some of the share of the market which will in any case go to minor brands. The rationale is that having 3 out of 12 brands in such a market will give a greater overall share than having 1 out of 10 (even if much of the share of these new brands is taken from the existing one). In its most extreme manifestation, a supplier pioneering a new market which it believes will be particularly attractive may choose immediately to launch a second brand in competition with its first, in order to pre-empt others entering the market.

Individual brand names naturally allow greater flexibility by permitting a variety of different products, of differing quality, to be sold without confusing the consumer's perception of what business the company is in or diluting higher quality products.

Once again, Procter & Gamble is a leading exponent of this philosophy, running as many as ten detergent brands in the US market. This also increases the total number of "facings" it receives on supermarket shelves. Sara Lee, on the other hand, uses it to keep the very different parts of the business separate — from Sara Lee cakes through Kiwi polishes to L'Eggs pantyhose. In the hotel business, Marriott uses the name Fairfield Inns for its budget chain (and Ramada uses Rodeway for its own cheaper hotels).

Cannibalization is a particular problem of a "multibrand" approach, in which the new brand takes business away from an established one which the organization also owns. This may be acceptable (indeed to be expected) if there is a net gain overall. Alternatively, it may be the price the organization is willing to pay for shifting its position in the market; the new product being one stage in this process.

Small business brands

Branding a small or medium sized business (SME) follows essentially the same principle a branding larger corporation. The main differences being that small businesses usually have a smaller market and have less reach than larger brands. Some people argue that it is not possible to brand a small business, however there are many examples of small businesses that became very successful due to branding.

Own brands and generics

With the emergence of strong retailers the "own brand", a retailer's own branded product (or service), also emerged as a major factor in the marketplace. Where the retailer has a particularly strong identity (such as Marks & Spencer in the UK clothing sector) this "own brand" may be able to compete against even the strongest brand leaders, and may outperform those products that are not otherwise strongly branded.

Concerns were raised that such "own brands" might displace all other brands (as they have done in Marks & Spencer outlets), but the evidence is that — at least in supermarkets and department stores — consumers generally expect to see on display something over 50 per cent (and preferably over 60 per cent) of brands other than those of the retailer. Indeed, even the strongest own brands in the UK rarely achieve better than third place in the overall market.

This means that strong independent brands (such as Kellogg's and Heinz), which have maintained their marketing investments, are likely to continue their strong performance. More than 50 per cent of UK FMCG brand leaders have held their position for more than two decades, although it is arguable that those which have switched their budgets to "buy space" in the retailers may be more exposed.

The strength of the retailers has, perhaps, been seen more in the pressure they have been able to exert on the owners of even the strongest brands (and in particular on the owners of the weaker third and fourth brands). Relationship marketing has been applied most often to meet the wishes of such large customers (and indeed has been demanded by them as recognition of their buying power). Some of the more active marketers have now also switched to 'category marketing' - in which they take into account all the needs of a retailer in a product category rather than more narrowly focusing on their own brand.

At the same time, probably as an outgrowth of consumerism, "generic" (that is, effectively unbranded goods) have also emerged. These made a positive virtue of saving the cost of almost all marketing activities; emphasizing the lack of advertising and, especially, the plain packaging (which was, however, often simply a vehicle for a different kind of image). It would appear that the penetration of such generic products peaked in the early 1980s, and most consumers still appear to be looking for the qualities that the conventional brand provides.

History

Although connected with the history of trademarks^[14] and including earlier examples which could be deemed "protobrands" (such as the marketing puns of the "Vesuvinum" wine jars found at Pompeii^[15]), brands in the field of mass-marketing originated in the 19th century with the advent of packaged goods. Industrialization moved the production of many household items, such as soap, from local communities to centralized factories. When shipping their items, the factories would literally brand their logo or insignia on the barrels used, extending the meaning of "brand" to that of trademark.

Bass & Company, the British brewery, claims their red triangle brand was the world's first trademark. Lyle's Golden Syrup makes a similar claim, having been named as Britain's oldest brand, with its green and gold packaging having remained almost unchanged since 1885.

Cattle were branded long before this; the term "maverick", originally meaning an unbranded calf, comes from Texas rancher Samuel Augustus Maverick who, following the American Civil War, decided that since all other cattle were branded, his would be identified by having no markings at all.

Factories established during the Industrial Revolution, generating mass-produced goods and needed to sell their products to a wider market, to a customer base familiar only with local goods. It quickly became apparent that a generic package of soap had difficulty competing with familiar, local products. The packaged goods manufacturers needed to convince the market that the public could place just as much trust in the non-local product. Campbell soup, Coca-Cola, Juicy Fruit gum, Aunt Jemima, and Quaker Oats were among the first products to be 'branded', in an effort to increase the consumer's familiarity with their products. Many brands of that era, such as Uncle Ben's rice and Kellogg's breakfast cereal furnish illustrations of the problem.

Around 1900, James Walter Thompson published a house ad explaining trademark advertising. This was an early commercial explanation of what we now know as branding. Companies soon adopted slogans, mascots, and jingles which began to appear on radio and early television. By the 1940s,^[16] manufacturers began to recognize the way in which consumers were developing relationships with their brands in a social/psychological/anthropological sense.

From there, manufacturers quickly learned to build their brand's identity and personality (see brand identity and brand personality), such as youthfulness, fun or luxury. This began the practice we now know as "branding" today, where the consumers buy "the brand" instead of the product. This trend continued to the 1980s, and is now quantified in concepts such as brand value and brand equity. Naomi Klein has described this development as "brand equity mania".^[1] In 1988, for example, Phillip Morris purchased Kraft for six times what the company was worth on paper; it was felt that what they really purchased was its brand name.

Marlboro Friday

April 2, 1993 - marked by some as the death of the brand^[1] - the day Phillip Morris declared that they were to cut the price of Marlboro cigarettes by 20%, in order to compete with bargain cigarettes. Marlboro cigarettes were notorious at the time for their heavy advertising campaigns, and well-nuanced brand image. In response to the announcement Wall street stocks nose-dived ^[1] for a large number of 'branded' companies: Heinz, Coca Cola, Quaker Oats, PepsiCo. Many thought the event signalled the beginning of a trend towards "brand blindness" (Klein 13), questioning the power of "brand value".

Branding is often made out to be a very difficult task. While I do believe in the time for strategy development and promotional development; I think we often overthink during the process. Here is my personal story of how I developed my own brand. It includes the strengths as well as the weaknesses. If we just take a few moments to personalize and characterize our brand it can save us a great deal of headaches during the processing time.

Most people think that business cards are designed to tell people your name, address, and telephone number. Bill Gallagher points out that in the age of the Guerrilla, this is no longer so.

BRAND-EQUITY:-

Brand equity refers to the marketing effects or outcomes that accrue to a product with its brand name compared with those that would accrue if the same product did not have the brand name ^[1][2][3][4]. And, at the root of these marketing effects is consumers' knowledge. In other words, consumers' knowledge about a brand makes consumers respond differently to the marketing of the brand ^[5][6]. The study of brand equity is increasingly popular as some marketing researchers have concluded that brands are one of the most valuable assets that a company has^[7].

There are many ways to measure a brand. Some measurements approaches are at the firm level, some at the product level, and still others are at the consumer level.

Firm Level: Firm level approaches measure the brand as a financial asset. In short, a calculation is made regarding how much the brand is worth as an intangible asset. For example, if you were to take the value of the firm, as derrived by its market capitalization - and then subtract tangible assets and "measurable" intangible assets- the residual would be the brand equity.^[7] One high profile firm level approach is by the consulting firm Interbrand. To do its calculation, Interbrand estimates brand value on the basis of projected profits discounted to a present value. The discount rate is a subjective rate determined by Interbrand and Wall Street equity specialists and reflects the risk profile, market leadership, stability and global reach of the brand ^[8].

Product Level: The classic product level brand measurement example is to compare the price of a no-name or private label product to an "equivalent" branded product. The difference in price, assuming all things equal, is due to the brand ^[9]. More recently a revenue premium approach has been advocated ^[4].

Consumer Level: This approach seeks to map the mind of the consumer to find out what associations with the brand that the consumer has. This approach seeks to measure the awareness (recall and recognition) and brand image (the overall associations that the brand has). Free association tests and projective techniques are commonly used to uncover the tangible and intangible attributes, attitudes, and intentions about a brand ^[5]. Brands with high levels of awareness and strong, favorable and unique associations are high equity brands^[5].

Any of these calculation are at best approximations. A more complete understanding of the brand can occur if multiple measures are used.

Positive Equity Only?

An interesting question is raised- can brands have negative brand equity? From one perspective, brand equity cannot be negative. Positive brand equity is created by effective marketing including via advertising, PR and promotion. A second perspective is that negative equity can exist. Looking at a political "brand" example, the "Democrat" brand may be negative to a Republican, and vice versa.

The greater a company's brand equity, the greater the probability that the company will use a family branding strategy rather than an individual branding strategy. This is because family branding allows them to leverage the equity accumulated in the core brand. Aspects of brand equity includes: brand loyalty, awareness, association, and perception of quality.

Examples

In the early 2000s in North America, the Ford Motor Company made a strategic decision to brand all new or redesigned cars with names starting with "F". This aligned with the previous tradition of naming all sport utility vehicles since the Ford Explorer with the letter "E". The Toronto Star quoted an analyst who warned that changing the name of the well known Windstar to the Freestar would cause confusion and discard brand equity built up, while a marketing manager believed that a name change would highlight the new redesign. The aging Taurus, which became one of the most significant cars in American auto history would be abandoned in favor of three entirely new names, all starting with "F", the Five Hundred, Freestar and Fusion. By 2007, the Freestar was discontinued without a replacement. The Five Hundred name was thrown out and Taurus was brought back for the next generation of that car in a surprise move by Alan Mulally. "Five Hundred" was recognized by less than half of most people, but an overwhelming majority was familiar with the "Ford Taurus".

The Cadillac Cimarron is frequently cited as an example of a product causing the erosion of brand equity. Although the intention was to create a car to compete in the growing compact luxury segment, many believed the impression of it being a gussied up version of the Chevrolet Cavalier with which it shared its underpinnings severely undermined Cadillac's image. The consequent failure of the Cimarron in the marketplace coincided with numerous widely publicised troubles affecting engines installed in Cadillac's traditional full-size lines, in what is considered to be the least distinguished period in the marque's history.

Discussion citing Differences And Similarities Between Brand And Trade-Mark:

A trademark or trade mark, represented by the symbols ™ and ®,or mark is a distinctive sign or indicator used by an individual, business organization or other legal entity to identify uniquely the source of its products and/or services to consumers, and to distinguish its products or services from those of other entities. A trademark is a type of intellectual property, and typically a name, word, phrase, logo, symbol, design, image, or a combination of these elements.^[2] There is also a range of non-conventional trademarks comprising marks which do not fall into these standard categories.

The owner of a registered trademark may commence legal proceedings for trademark infringement to prevent unauthorized use of that trademark. However, registration is not required. The owner of a common law trademark may also file suit, but an unregistered mark may be protectable only within the geographical area within which it has been used or in geographical areas into which it may be reasonably expected to expand.

The term trademark is also used informally to refer to any distinguishing attribute by which an individual is readily identified, such as the well known characteristics of celebrities. When a trademark is used in relation to services rather than products, it may sometimes be called a service mark, particularly in the United States.

The essential function of a trademark is to exclusively identify the commercial source or origin of products or services, such that a trademark, properly called, indicates source or serves as a badge of origin. The use of a trademark in this way is known as trademark use. Certain exclusive rights attach to a registered mark, which can be enforced by way of an action for trademark infringement, while unregistered trademark rights may be enforced pursuant to the common law tort of passing off.

It should be noted that trademark rights generally arise out of the use and/or registration (see below) of a mark in connection only with a specific type or range of products or services. Although it may sometimes be possible to take legal action to prevent the use of a mark in relation to products or services outside this range (e.g. for passing off), this does not mean that trademark law prevents the use of that mark by the general public. A common word, phrase, or other sign can only be removed from the public domain to the extent that a trademark owner is able to maintain exclusive rights over that sign in relation to certain products or services, assuming there are no other trademark objections.

In order to register trademarks the different goods and services have been classified by the International (Nice) Classification of Goods and Services into 45 Trademark Classes (from 1 to 34 includes goods, and from 35 to 45 services). The idea of this system is to specify and limit the extension of the property right (Intellectual Property), by determining which goods or services are covered by the mark, and at the same time unify the classification system in countries around the World.

Oldest trademarks

Zildjian, the cymbal and gong company, owns the oldest continuously used U.S. trademark -- it should be noted, however, that the first two hundred years of the use of the Zildjian trademark were in Turkey as the family moved to the United States. Venetian glass blowers are thought of as using the longest continuously used trademarks. Wieliczka, a salt mine in Poland, is reported to be the source of the oldest known trademark (circa 1241 A.D.) -- even though this trademark is really appellation of origin. Finally, in trademark treatises, it is usually reported that blacksmiths who made swords in the Roman Empire are thought of as being the first users of trademarks.^[4] Other notable trademarks that have been used for a long time include Löwenbräu, which claims use since 1383, and Stella Artois, which claims use since 1366.

Registered Trademarks involve registering the trademark with the government. The oldest registered trademarks in various countries include:

Australia: 1905 -- a pine tree logo, still in use by Fisons plc. for chemicals.
Hong Kong: 1874 -- Nestle's Eagle Brand for condensed milk.
Japan: 1884 -- a design of a seated figure, registered for pills and wound dressings.
United Kingdom: 1876 -- Bass Pale Ale logo which includes the famous red triangle[1], reportedly had been in use since the 1600s.
United States: 1870 -- an eagle logo used for paints by Averill Paints, which is no longer in use.^[5]

Symbols

The two symbols associated with U.S. trademarks ™ (the trademark symbol) and ® (the registered trademark symbol) represent the status of a mark and accordingly its level of protection. While ™ can be used with any common law usage of a mark, ® may only be used by the owner of a mark following registration with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO or PTO) and designates such. The proper manner to display either symbol is immediately following the mark in superscript style.

Terminology

Terms such as "mark", "brand" and "logo" are sometimes used interchangeably with "trademark". "Trademark", however, also includes any device, brand, label, name, signature, word, letter, numerical, shape of goods, packaging, combination of colours, or any combination thereof which is capable of distinguishing goods and services of one person from those of others. It must be capable of graphical representation and must be applied to goods or services for which it is registered.

Specialized types of trademark include certification marks, collective trademarks and defensive trademarks. A trademark which is popularly used to describe a product or service (rather than to distinguish the product or services from those of third parties) is sometimes known as a genericized trademark. If such a mark becomes synonymous with that product or service to the extent that the trademark owner can no longer enforce its proprietary rights, the mark becomes generic.

Establishing trademark rights

The law considers a trademark to be a form of property. Proprietary rights in relation to a trademark may be established through actual use in the marketplace, or through registration of the mark with the trademarks office (or "trademarks registry") of a particular jurisdiction, e.g., the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. In many jurisdictions, trademark rights can be established through either or both means. Certain jurisdictions generally do not recognize trademarks rights arising through use (e.g. China or European Union). If trademark owners do not hold registrations for their marks in such jurisdictions, the extent to which they will be able to enforce their rights through trademark infringement proceedings will therefore be limited. In cases of dispute, this disparity of rights is often referred to as "first to file" as opposed to "first to use". Other countries such as Germany offer a limited amount of common law rights for unregistered marks where to gain protection, the goods or services must occupy a highly significant position in the marketplace - where this could be 40% or more market share for sales in the particular class of goods or services.

A registered trademark confers a bundle of exclusive rights upon the registered owner, including the right to exclusive use of the mark in relation to the products or services for which it is registered. The law in most jurisdictions also allows the owner of a registered trademark to prevent unauthorized use of the mark in relation to products or services which are identical or "colourfully" similar to the "registered" products or services, and in certain cases, prevent use in relation to entirely dissimilar products or services. The test is always whether a consumer of the goods or services will be confused as to the identity of the source or origin. An example maybe a very large multinational brand such as "Sony" where a non-electronic product such as a pair of sunglasses might be assumed to have come from Sony Corporation of Japan despite not being a class of goods that Sony has rights in.

Once trademark rights are established in a particular jurisdiction, these rights are generally only enforceable in that jurisdiction, a quality which is sometimes known as territoriality. However, there is a range of international trademark laws and systems which facilitate the protection of trademarks in more than one jurisdiction (see International trademark laws below).

Trademark search

To avoid conflicts with earlier trademark rights, it is highly recommended to conduct trademark searches before the trademarks office (or "trademarks registry") of a particular jurisdiction—e.g. US Patent and Trademark Office. It may also be advisable to conduct a broader search as well, including databases that contain names of registered companies and also an Internet search to determine if the desired trademark is either already registered as a domain name or otherwise being used. The reason for this is because trademark offices typically only search issued trademarks and pending applications in order to determine whether a trademark should issue.^[6] For business reasons, however, an applicant may want to consider a different trademark even if it could be registered if the domain name is taken or other businesses are using the trademark as an unregistered name or slogan.

In the United States, obtaining a trademark search and relying upon the results is also very important because it can insulate the applicant from any future finding that you willfully infringed the trademark of another. Essentially, if you obtain a search and in good faith feel the use of a mark would not be infringing it will be virtually impossible for anyone to prove later that you purposefully engaged in infringing activities.^[7]

In Europe and if a community trademark has to be filed, searches have to be conducted with the OHIM (Community Trademark Office) and with the various national offices. An alternative solution is to conduct a trademark search within private databases.

Registrability

In most systems, a trademark will be registrable if it is able to distinguish the goods or services of a party, will not confuse consumers about the relationship between one party and another, and will not otherwise deceive consumers with respect to the qualities of the product.

Distinctive character

Trademark distinctiveness

Maintaining trademark rights

Trademarks rights must be maintained through actual lawful use of the trademark. These rights will cease if a mark is not actively used for a period of time, normally 5 years in most jurisdictions. In the case of a trademark registration, failure to actively use the mark in the lawful course of trade, or to enforce the registration in the event of infringement, may also expose the registration itself to become liable for an application for the removal from the register after a certain period of time on the grounds of "non-use". It is not necessary for a trademark owner to take enforcement action against all infringement if it can be shown that the owner perceived the infringement to be minor and inconsequential. This is designed to prevent owners from continually being tied up in litigation for fear of cancellation. An owner can at any time commence action for infringement against a third party as long as it had not previously notified the third party of its discontent following third party use and then failed to take action within a reasonable period of time (called acquiescence). The owner can always reserve the right to take legal action until a court decides that the third party had gained notoriety which the owner 'must' have been aware of. It will be for the third party to prove their use of the mark is substantial as it is the onus of a company using a mark to check they are not infringing previously registered rights. In the US, owing to the overwhelming number of unregistered rights, trademark applicants are advised to perform searches not just of the trademark register but of local business directories and relevant trade press. Specialized search companies perform such tasks prior to application.

All jurisdictions with a mature trademark registration system provide a mechanism for removal in the event of such non use, which is usually a period of either three or five years. The intention to use a trademark can be proven by a wide range of acts as shown in the Wooly Bull and Ashton v Harlee cases.

In the U.S., failure to use a trademark for this period of time, aside from the corresponding impact on product quality, will result in abandonment of the mark, whereby any party may use the mark. An abandoned mark is not irrevocably in the public domain, but may instead be re-registered by any party which has re-established exclusive and active use, and must be associated or linked with the original mark owner. If a court rules that a trademark has become "generic" through common use (such that the mark no longer performs the essential trademark function and the average consumer no longer considers that exclusive rights attach to it), the corresponding registration may also be ruled invalid.

For examples, see trademark distinctiveness.

The extent to which a trademark owner may prevent unauthorized use of trademarks which are the same as or similar to its trademark depends on various factors such as whether its trademark is registered, the similarity of the trademarks involved, the similarity of the products and/or services involved, and whether the owner's trademark is well known.

If a trademark has not been registered, some jurisdictions (especially Common Law countries) offer protection for the business reputation or goodwill which attaches to unregistered trademarks through the tort of passing off. Passing off may provide a remedy in a scenario where a business has been trading under an unregistered trademark for many years, and a rival business starts using the same or a similar mark.

If a trademark has been registered, then it is much easier for the trademark owner to demonstrate its trademark rights and to enforce these rights through an infringement action. Unauthorized use of a registered trademark need not be intentional in order for infringement to occur, although damages in an infringement lawsuit will generally be greater if there was an intention to deceive.

For trademarks which are considered to be well known, infringing use may occur where the use occurs in relation to products or services which are not the same as or similar to the products or services in relation to which the owner's mark is registered.

Limits and defenses to trademark

Trademark is subject to various defenses and limitations. In the United States, the fair use defense protects uses that would be otherwise protected by the First Amendment. Fair use may be asserted on two grounds, either that the alleged infringer is using the mark to accurately describe an aspect of its products, or that the alleged infringer is using the mark to identify the mark owner.

An example of the first type is that although Maytag owns the trademark "Whisper Quiet", makers of other products may describe their goods as being "whisper quiet" so long as these competitors are not using the phrase as a trademark.

An example of the second type is that Audi can run advertisements saying that a trade publication has rated an Audi model higher than a BMW model, since they are only using "BMW" to identify the competitor. Similarly, a designer impostor perfume may advertise that its product is similar to Chanel No. 5. In a related sense, an auto mechanic can truthfully advertise that he services Cadillacs, and a former Playboy Playmate of the Year can identify herself as such on her website.^[8]

Wrongful or groundless threats of infringement

Various jurisdictions have laws which are designed to prevent trademark owners from making wrongful threats of trademark infringement action against other parties. These laws are intended to prevent large or powerful companies from intimidating or harassing smaller companies.

Where one party makes a threat to sue another for trademark infringement, but does not have a genuine basis or intention to carry out that threat, or does not carry out the threat at all within a certain period, the threat may itself become a basis for legal action. In this situation, the party receiving such a threat may seek from the Court, a declaratory judgment; also known as a declaratory ruling.

Other aspects

Public policy

Trademark law is designed to fulfill the public policy objective of consumer protection, by preventing the public from being misled as to the origin or quality of a product or service. By identifying the commercial source of products and services, trademarks facilitate identification of products and services which meet the expectations of consumers as to quality and other characteristics.

Trademarks may also serve as an incentive for manufacturers, providers or suppliers to consistently provide quality products or services in order to maintain their business reputation. Furthermore, if a trademark owner does not maintain quality control and adequate supervision in relation to the manufacture and provision of products or services supplied by a licensee, such "naked licensing" will eventually adversely impact on the owner's rights in the trademark. This proposition has, however, been watered down by the judgment of the House of Lords in the case of Scandecor Development AB v. Scandecor Marketing AB et al [2001] UKHL 21; wherein it has been held that the mere fact that a bare license (equivalent of the United States concept of a naked license) has been granted did not automatically mean that a trademark was liable to mislead.

By the same token, trademark holders must be cautious in the sale of their mark for similar reasons as apply to licensing. When assigning an interest in a trademark, if the associated product or service is not transferred with it, then this may be an "assignment-in-gross" and could lead to a loss of rights in the trademark. It is still possible to make significant changes to the underlying goods or services during a sale without jeopardizing the trademark, but companies will often contract with the sellers to help transition the mark and goods and/or services to the new owners to ensure continuity of the trademark.

Comparison with patents, designs and copyright

While trademark law seeks to protect indications of the commercial source of products or services, patent law generally seeks to protect new and useful inventions, and registered designs law generally seeks to protect the look or appearance of a manufactured article. Trademarks, patents and designs collectively form a subset of intellectual property known as industrial property because they are often created and used in an industrial or commercial context.

By comparison, copyright law generally seeks to protect original literary, artistic and other creative works. A trademark also does not expire (if it is re-registered), whereas international copyright law (which varies from country to country) usually lasts the duration of the author's lifespan plus 70 years.^[9] This can lead to confusion in cases where a work passes into the public domain but the character in question remains a registered trademark.^[10]

Although intellectual property laws such as these are theoretically distinct, more than one type may afford protection to the same article. For example, the particular design of a bottle may qualify for copyright protection as a non-utilitarian [sculpture], or for trademark protection based on its shape, or the 'trade dress' appearance of the bottle as a whole may be protectable. Titles and character names from books or movies may also be protectable as trademarks while the works from which they are drawn may qualify for copyright protection as a whole.

Drawing these distinctions is necessary but often challenging for the courts and lawyers, especially in jurisdictions where patents and copyrights when they pass into the public domain depending on the jurisdiction. Unlike patents and copyrights, which in theory are granted for one-off fixed terms, trademarks remain valid as long as the owner actively uses and defends them and maintains their registrations with the applicable jurisdiction's trademarks office. This often involves payment of a periodic renewal fee.

As a trademark must be used in order to maintain rights in relation to that mark, a trademark can be 'abandoned' or its registration can be canceled or revoked if the mark is not continuously used. By comparison, patents and copyrights cannot be 'abandoned' and a patent holder or copyright owner can generally enforce their rights without taking any particular action to maintain the patent or copyright. Additionally, patent holders and copyright owners may not necessarily need to actively police their rights. However, a failure to bring a timely infringement suit or action against a known infringer may give the defendant a defense of implied consent or estoppel when suit is finally brought.

Trademark dilution

A trademark is diluted when the use of similar or identical trademarks in other non-competing markets means that the trademark in and of itself will lose its capacity to signify a single source. In other words, unlike ordinary trademark law, dilution protection extends to trademark uses that do not confuse consumers regarding who has made a product. Instead, dilution protection law aims to protect sufficiently strong trademarks from losing their singular association in the public mind with a particular product, perhaps imagined if the trademark were to be encountered independently of any product (e.g., just the word Pepsi spoken, or on a billboard). Under trademark law, dilution occurs either when unauthorized use of a mark "blurs" the "distinctive nature of the mark" or "tarnishes it." Likelihood of confusion is not required. 15 U.S.C §§ 1127, 1125(c).

Sale, transfer and licensing of trademarks

In various jurisdictions a trademark may be sold with or without the underlying goodwill which subsists in the business associated with the mark. However, this is not the case in the United States, where the courts have held that this would "be a fraud upon the public". In the U.S., trademark registration can therefore only be sold and assigned if accompanied by the sale of an underlying asset. Examples of assets whose sale would ordinarily support the assignment of a mark include the sale of the machinery used to produce the goods that bear the mark, or the sale of the corporation (or subsidiary) that produces the trademarked goods.

Most jurisdictions provide for the use of trademarks to be licensed to third parties. The licensor (usually the trademark owner) must monitor the quality of the goods being produced by the licensee to avoid the risk of trademark being deemed abandoned by the courts. A trademark license should therefore include appropriate provisions dealing with quality control, whereby the licensee provides warranties as to quality and the licensor has rights to inspection and monitoring.

Trademarks and domain names

The advent of the domain name system has led to attempts by trademark holders to enforce their rights over domain names that are similar or identical to their existing trademarks, particularly by seeking control over the domain names at issue. As with dilution protection, enforcing trademark rights over domain name owners involves protecting a trademark outside the obvious context of its consumer market, because domain names are global and not limited by goods or service.

This conflict was more easily resolved when the domain name user actually used his website to compete with the trademark owner. Cybersquatting, however, involves no such competition, but instead an unlicensed user registering the trademark as a domain name in order to pressure a payoff (or other benefit) from the lawful mark owner. Typosquatters—those registering common misspellings of trademarks as domain names—have also been targeted successfully in trademark infringement suits. Other types of domain name disputes include the so-called "gripe site," which use a registered trademark in a domain such as "[trademark]sucks.com." There are also disputes arising from the subdomain, when a third party uses a protected mark in a web address such as "[trademark].[legitimatedomain].com." [2]

This clash of the new technology with preexisting trademark rights resulted in several high profile decisions as the courts of many countries tried to coherently address the issue (and not always successfully) within the framework of existing trademark law. As the website itself was not the product being purchased, there was no actual consumer confusion, and so initial interest confusion was a concept applied instead. Initial interest confusion refers to customer confusion that creates an initial interest in a competitor's "product" (in the online context, another party's website). Even though initial interest confusion is dispelled by the time any actual sales occur, it allows a trademark infringer to capitalize on the goodwill associated with the original mark.

Several cases have wrestled with the concept of initial interest confusion. In Playboy v. Netscape, the court found initial interest confusion when users typed in Playboy's trademarks into a search engine, resulting in the display of search results alongside unlabeled banner ads, triggered by keywords that included Playboy's marks, that would take users to Playboy's competitors. Though users might ultimately realize upon clicking on the banner ads that they were not Playboy-affiliated, the court found that the competitor advertisers could have gained customers by appropriating Playboy's goodwill since users may be perfectly happy to browse the competitor's site instead of returning the search results to find the Playboy sites.

In Lamparello v. Falwell, however, the court clarified that a finding of initial interest confusion is contingent on financial profit from said confusion, such that, if a domain name confusing similar to a registered trademark is used for a non-trademark related website, the site owner will not be found to have infringed where he does not seek to capitalize on the mark's goodwill for his own commercial enterprises.

In addition, courts have upheld the rights of trademark owners with regard to commercial use of domain names, even in cases where goods sold there legitimately bear the mark. In the landmark decision Creative Gifts, Inc. v. UFO, 235 F.3d 540 (10th Cir. 2000)(New Mexico), Defendants had registered the domain name "Levitron.com" to sell goods bearing the trademark "Levitron" under an at-will license from the trademark owner. The 10th Circuit affirmed the rights of the trademark owner with regard to said domain name, despite arguments of promissory estoppel.

Most courts particularly frowned on cybersquatting, and found that it was itself a sufficiently commercial use (i.e., "trafficking" in trademarks) to reach into the area of trademark infringement. Most jurisdictions have since amended their trademark laws to address domain names specifically, and to provide explicit remedies against cybersquatters.

This international legal change has also led to the creation of ICANN Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP) and other dispute policies for specific countries (such as Nominet UK's DRS) which attempt to streamline the process of resolving who should own a domain name (without dealing with other infringement issues such as damages). This is particularly desirable to trademark owners when the domain name registrant may be in another country or even anonymous.

Registrants of domain names also sometimes wish to register the domain names themselves (e.g., "XYZ.COM") as trademarks for perceived advantages, such as an extra bulwark against their domain being hijacked, and to avail themselves of such remedies as confusion or passing off against other domain holders with confusingly similar or intentionally misspelled domain names.

As with other trademarks, the domain name will not be subject to registration unless the proposed mark is actually used to identify the registrant's goods or services to the public, rather than simply being the location on the Internet where the applicant's web site appears. Amazon.com is a prime example of a protected trademark for a domain name central to the public's identification of the company and its products.

Terms which are not protectable by themselves, such as a generic term or a merely descriptive term that has not acquired secondary meaning, may become registrable when a Top-Level Domain Name (e.g. dot-COM) is appended to it. An example of such a domain name ineligible for trademark or service mark protection as a generic term, but which currently has a registered U.S. service mark, is "HEARSAY.COM" USPTO Search.

International trademark laws

It is important to note that although there are systems which facilitate the filing, registration or enforcement of trademark rights in more than one jurisdiction on a regional or global basis (e.g. the Madrid and CTM systems, see further below), it is currently not possible to file and obtain a single trademark registration which will automatically apply around the world. Like any national law, trademark laws apply only in their applicable country or jurisdiction, a quality which is sometimes known as "territoriality".

Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights

The inherent limitations of the territorial application of trademark laws have been mitigated by various intellectual property treaties, foremost amongst which is the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. TRIPS establishes legal compatibility between member jurisdictions by requiring the harmonization of applicable laws. For example, Article 15(1) of TRIPS provides a definition for "sign" which is used as or forms part of the definition of "trademark" in the trademark legislation of many jurisdictions around the world.

The Madrid system for the international registration of marks

Madrid system

The major international system for facilitating the registration of trademarks in multiple jurisdictions is commonly known as the "Madrid system". Madrid provides a centrally administered system for securing trademark registrations in member jurisdictions by extending the protection of an "international registration" obtained through the World Intellectual Property Organization. This international registration is in turn based upon an application or registration obtained by a trade mark applicant in its home jurisdiction.

The primary advantage of the Madrid system is that it allows a trademark owner to obtain trademark protection in many jurisdictions by filing one application in one jurisdiction with one set of fees, and make any changes (e.g. changes of name or address) and renew registration across all applicable jurisdictions through a single administrative process. Furthermore, the "coverage" of the international registration may be extended to additional member jurisdictions at any time.

Trademark Law Treaty

The Trademark Law Treaty establishes a system pursuant to which member jurisdictions agree to standardize procedural aspects of the trademark registration process. It is not necessarily respective of rules within individual countries.

Community Trade Mark system

Community Trade Mark

The Community Trade Mark system is the supranational trademark system which applies in the European Union, whereby registration of a trademark with the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (i.e. OHIM, the trademarks office of the European Union), leads to a registration which is effective throughout the EU as a whole. The CTM system is therefore said to be unitary in character, in that a CTM registration applies indivisibly across all European Union member states. However, the CTM system did not replace the national trademark registration systems; the CTM system and the national systems continue to operate in parallel to each other (see also European Union trade mark law).

If you reside outside the EU, you must have professional representative to the procedures before the OHIM. If you are a European resident, you don't have to have professional representation to file an opposition, however, it is strongly recommended by the OHIM.

One of the tasks of a CTM owner is the monitoring of the later applications whether any of those is similar to his/her earlier trademark. Monitoring is not easy and usually requires professional expertise. To conduct a monitoring there is the so-called Trademark Watching service where it can be checked if someone tries to get registered marks that are similar to the existing marks. [TRADEMARK.EU] provides the possibility to conduct this search.

Oppositions should be filed on the standard opposition form in any official language of the European Union, however, the substantive part of the opposition (e.g. the argumentations) can be submitted only in the language of the opposed application, that is one of the working languages of the OHIM, e.g. English, Spanish, German. Worth noting that in most of the cases the opponents file their oppositions in English.

ARRANG-A-TANG GANG AG&COUPE ==Trademark characteristics and "-esque"== Sometimes a characteristic of a creation like an artwork, a design, or a body of artwork is so distinctive that it becomes identified with its creator and is thus considered to be that creator's trademark (whether it meets the legal criteria for a trademark or not).

Occasionally when such a trademark or something similar to it is visible in a work (especially an artwork) by someone other its owner, it is identified by appending the trademark owner's name with the suffix "esque", e.g. "Rubenesque Woman Has Picassoesque Face".^[11] The distinction between the "-esque" characteristic and trademark on an artist's name is subtle and has been litigated.

A branding agency is a type of marketing agency which specialises in creating and launching brands as well as rebranding. Branding agencies create, plan and manage branding strategies, independent from its clients. Branding agencies may also handle advertising and other forms of promotion.

Like advertising agencies, typical branding agency clients come from all sectors including businesses and corporations, non-profit organisations and government agencies. Branding agencies may be hired to produce a brand strategy or, more commonly, a brand identity, which can then be outputted via a branding campaign, which is a type of marketing campaign.

List Of References:-