Intellectual property law is complex. In general, intellectual property
belongs to its creator regardless of whether it has been registered
with the government. Registration gives the registrant a better ability
to enforce their ownership. It does not itself convey ownership.

A piece of artwork is automatically copyrighted, with or without the
c-in-circle mark or any formal copyright procedure. Copyright requires
no vigilance.

A trademark is requires use and vigilance. The easiest way to prove
that a trademark is in use and not abandoned is for it to be registered
with the government. If it is registered, the government will help
defend its use against infringement. But trademark registration does
not itself convey ownership; origination and use does.

The US Patent and Trademark office says: "Although federal registration
of a mark is not mandatory, it has several advantages, including notice
to the public of the registrant's claim of ownership of the mark, legal
presumption of ownership nationwide, and exclusive right to use the
mark on or in connection with the goods/services listed in the
registration."

Ananymous said:
>Trademarks of AFA were cancelled and dead. They been cancelled for
>number of years. AFA never follow up on renewal documents.

IF the logo ceased to be used by the registrant for a period of five
years, the logo could be considered abandoned. There is a form that can
be filed to prevent it from being considered abandoned, but they all
contain language to explain non-use. If the logo has been continuously
used, then it is not abandoned. It still belongs to the original owner,
regardless of whether it is registered or not.

Register trademark on products such as AFA sticker, AFA pin and AFA
Logo
http://www.ferret.org/shopping/people.html
> http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/AmericanFerretAssociation/

These provide good evidence that the AFA logo is not abandoned.

>The federal registration symbol may be not used with marks that are not
>registered in the USPTO. This symbol can't not be used when application
>is pending. You can not used this mark until the mark is registered.

This refers to the R-in-circle mark, which stands for "Registered".
The TM symbol indicates that something is designated a trademark by
the owner, under common law, and can be used whether the trademark is
registered or not. You are correct; the R-in-circle mark should not
be used unless the trademark is registered. The TM mark can be used
regardless.

>Using the trademark registration knowingly and willfully in a attempt
>to mislead your members, this is fraud.

The key here is "knowingly and willfully in a(n) attempt to mislead".
If someone uses a logo without permission but with no intention to
mislead, that is not fraud. An example might be someone who prints a
t-shirt that says "I love Pepsi!" and uses the Pepsi logo. This is
trademark infringement, but not fraud. An example of fraud would be
someone who put the Pepsi logo on their own brand of soda, or sent out
a questionnaire on letterhead that contained the Pepsi logo, leading
people to assume that this was an official questionnaire from Pepsi.

Now, I gather that someone attempted to use or register the AFA logo
when they realized the registration had lapsed. The USPTO site
addresses this in their Q&A: "...there are common law rights in
trademarks that have not been registered. So attempting to register
a name that is being used by another entity on similar goods could
be problematic for you - even if that trademark isn't registered with
the USPTO."

The AFA has the right -- in fact the duty -- to defend its trademark.
They have to, at a minimum, send some sort of official notice to the
infringer. I gather this has been done. It all comes down to
motivation. If the infringement were done in a mistaken belief that
the logo was released into the public domain because it was not
renewed, then the notice should be sufficient and no penalty other
than a cease-and-desist need be applied.

One thing more. The AFA logo is not just a word; it is a work of art.
By default, the artwork is copyrighted by its creator. If the use of
that artwork as a logo were to be abandoned, then I should think the
rights would revert to the artist, and not enter the public domain.

--Claire (who is not a lawyer, just as Sukie is "not a vet". I have
some paralegal experience with intellectual property law, but what I
have expressed here should not be construed as legal advice. )

(PS Bill -- I am attempting to clarify the situation, not fan the
flames. I defer to your judgement, and will not take offense if you
decide not to publish this).

[Posted in FML 7499]