I want to know:
Was it a trademark referencing 'whore'? And if so, what's the rest if it?
Or was it a PATENT referencing 'whore'...?
In which case, what was the patent for?!
Maybe it was just a simple improvement on whore technology.
Anyway on a serious note: let's say whoever holds a whore-based trademark suddenly asks to have their trademark enforced. Can the PTO at that time decide that they cannot/will not enforce? Or would they have to notify the trademark holder ahead of time?
I think the PTO ruled as it did based on an action by an outside group (the young Native Americans). So it's not like the PTO is selectively enforcing anything. They did not 'select'. They were asked to review something and did.
Would they rule similarly if asked to review 'whore' and 'nigger' trademarks?
(Who would have standing in a whore-based trademark dispute? As VERY distinct from African Americans addressing 'nigger' or 'negro').
Was it a trademark referencing 'whore'? And if so, what's the rest if it?
Or was it a PATENT referencing 'whore'...?
In which case, what was the patent for?!
Maybe it was just a simple improvement on whore technology.
Anyway on a serious note: let's say whoever holds a whore-based trademark suddenly asks to have their trademark enforced. Can the PTO at that time decide that they cannot/will not enforce? Or would they have to notify the trademark holder ahead of time?
I think the PTO ruled as it did based on an action by an outside group (the young Native Americans). So it's not like the PTO is selectively enforcing anything. They did not 'select'. They were asked to review something and did.
Would they rule similarly if asked to review 'whore' and 'nigger' trademarks?
(Who would have standing in a whore-based trademark dispute? As VERY distinct from African Americans addressing 'nigger' or 'negro').