Starting a Business Am I entititled go royalties

[Jamestreez]

Jurisdiction

Florida

Ok so I had a friend through a friend working on a new invention that writes on walls using a robot and a vector file (simple). The initial name: Botsy Bedrawn. To me it looked a little too law firmy to me. This meeting was recorded. So if this does come out to me be entitled there would be a legal matter of destruction of evidence. Now I said it sounded like a law firm he kind made a hmph and I said capitalize the B making it Botsy BeDrawn. In my a far clearer picture of the product/service. Now she has a patent pending under that name. Do I have any shot at collecting royalties for essentially making the name nor just intelligable but zippier. Shes a engineer. I'm an Account Manager. She plans on doing this with no marketing experience in the US (Russian Immigrant 12 yrs ago). She did not thank me, promised to do work for me only to text me never to contact her again. Very unorthodox pun unintended for anyone educated enough in eastern bloc culture anyone else, let it wash over your head. Ignorance is bliss and that's what I believe lead to this question. They did not realize by letting me name their robot, that I am the owner of the trademark.

 

[army judge]

No, you don't own a trademark because you utter mere words.
That said, if this was ever litigated, I suspect the other side would deny your Eureka naming moment.

Beyond those potential unpleasantries,unless the idea sells, there will be no royalties for anyone. Most ideas fail at the concept stage, a few make it to prototype, even fewer make it to market, and a very few become profitable.

I might as well get in on this idea.

I suggest Botsy B. Drawin. LOL

 

[adjusterjack]

I said capitalize the B making it Botsy BeDrawn

If "all" you did was suggest that the small "d" be capitalized in a product name that somebody else came up with, then you've got no entitlement to anything.

 

[d1amund]

Go down to your local convenience store and buy a scratch and win ticket; you are more likely to get ahead there.

 

[Michael Wechsler]

You aren't the owner of the trademark because you have nothing to trademark - which is the whole point of trademark. It is a law which protects prevents the likelihood of confusion between the manufacturer of a product or provider of a service using a specific trade name or mark and others who may provide similar goods and services.

So engineer applies for a patent for a toy robot that writes on walls. She is looking for a brand name for that robot. The trademark applies to toys, more specifically a robot that writes on walls. There may be other toy robots on the market. The engineer doesn't want others to use a similar name and have consumers buy a generic robot with a similar name (Betsy Be Drawn) thinking it was the robot they saw and thought was spectacular (Botsy BeDrawn.) You have no product you currently sell that could be associated with the mark you claim to have co-created. The best you might have been able to do theoretically is to file a trademark for an intent to use - but you have no use for the trademark either.

So what did you do? In a good nature you helped a person refine their trade name a little. And for giving her the suggestion to use a lower case letter you actually believe that you should be entitled to a financial windfall? Honestly... where do people get this idea from that the least amount of effort should be rewarded with vast wealth why the one who toiled day and night to create something should be given only partial credit? No matter, you have no intellectual property and no case.

 

[army judge]

Honestly... where do people get this idea from that the least amount of effort should be rewarded with vast wealth why the one who toiled day and night to create something should be given only partial credit?

Pshaw, you say, Professor. LOL

Where? Who says such things?

I wondered the same thing when the current occupant of the White House, and his former Secretary of State uttered similar comments, too.