Thanks for all the feedback both on and off-list. Never a dull
moment on this forum. I’ll make another few points of clarification
and then leave it here.
In my original post, I used what I thought was a little bit of
sarcastic humor in saying that “I’m ONLY using THE periodic table,”
and considered myself to be taking a crack at the fact that no, the
periodic table is by no means new or original. That goes without
saying. My issue is not that someone else is using the reference to
the periodic table. Um, for the sake of clarity let me repeat that
because it wasn’t so clear in my original post: My issue is not that
someone else is using the reference to the periodic table.
I created, with the help of the graphics company who brought all the
elements together (no pun intended), the complete picture, quite
literally, that is my logo. The issue is that certain design elements
from the logo were used that could possibly cause confusion. As I’ve
seen before on this forum, there have been instances where much
larger companies and brands will run you through the ringer for using
any HINTS of similarities to their products, logos or brands. As a
small business owner, why should I behave any differently if I have
chosen to use a certain “mark,” and have taken a number of strongly
recommended business-related steps to secure its use the way I
intend? This is a lot different than just “playing around with it,”
or having “thought about” using it. The point is that, by the books,
the trademarked process on it is almost complete, and according to
the extensive trademark searches I had professionally done prior to,
no other such complete picture/design had been registered. I
registered it and am entitled to all that goes along with that
whether or not I choose to pursue certain possible intentional or
unintentional infringement issues when and if they occur. Without
having to dig out the paperwork at the moment (it’s way past my
bedtime), I do believe that there were a couple of jewelry-related
companies using “Ag” in their logos however, the designs of their
logos bore no similarities whatsoever to mine nor mine to theirs.
The “unique” and “strong” references are, as I was informed by more
than one attorney and through my own research, factors considered by
the USPTO with regard to whether they are likely to either approve or
object to a design submitted for registration.
The whole issue with regard to trademarking and infringement is the
potential for confusion among the customers of merchants using
similar designs and/or elements. So, the periodic table reference by
itself, heck no-I was aware of this throughout the process, and
before finalizing my logo. Design elements/complete design, another
story, no matter how basic the font or color. And because I wasn’t
sure about the extent to which this is the case and can cause
problems with what I intend for my business, I did consult (and am
still in consultation with) my attorneys, and I trust their judgment
as I am not the expert. Based on what they say, I’ll determine
whether or not it’s worth considering further-most of the time, it
probably won’t be. I think that any prudent business person building
a business would/should seek such advice. That’s what the resources
are for.
Why did I even bother to use the PT reference and not my name or
something less “common”? Like a lot of you who’ve considered it
because I liked it, and I connected with it; and despite my business
plans I want to help make the connection accessible for other
people-gag if you want, but a lot of this has to do with my
educational background and some significant things that I experienced
in the process. I love the reaction I get when I explain the PT
reference to people and tell them how enjoyable chemistry and
physics are; or, I love just helping to refresh their memories and
recollections of chemistry. AND, it’s funny because despite
assumptions (including some of my own), a lot of people don’t
automatically “get it,” and I’m talking about all kinds of people
including people who may have not liked or altogether hated
chemistry, people who simply might not have paid attention in
chemistry class from grades five on up, and people who have
university degrees from major universities.
Bringing this part to a close, if the woman had done something a
little different than what I saw, I probably would have given her the
old Hustler’s Handshake and hug, a nice warm smile, and told her how
happy I was that she, too, is a member of the PT Push.
Moving on, my quote about copying for the purpose of learning was
exactly this: “I’ve made many a ‘copy’ of a design through my
learning process from a variety of books and magazines, and as I go
on learning this craft I will continue to; however, I’d never claim
the item as my own design. Even if permission has been granted to
restyle and sell the piece, I’d feel like I was copying if I didn’t
give credit to the originator of the design or idea.Otherwise, I
usually either give the piece away.scrap it for meltdown or refining,
or just keep it.”
The designs that I “copy” are better referred to as processes,
techniques and projects solely for the sake of learning (e.g., from
Lapidary Journal mag and others). I likewise have a library of
excellent books and articles with projects intended for learning that
I will continue to use, and when I pass these freebies off to family
members after I feel I’ve learned something sufficiently, I move on
to learn something else. The recipients of these things know that the
“gift” is nothing but a learning project for me-half the time I tell
them to not even wear the item in public because I don’t want to be
associated with something that wasn’t my own, especially as I advance
in skill level. I do not sell these things and/or claim them as my
own, which I think was Alis’s orginial issue with the copier she
mentioned. There is the exception of things like certain common
handwoven, handmade chains and many other standard industry
components.
To Alis: I had originally considered posting my “rant” under your
thread because it referenced the issue of copying, but then decided
not to as I didn’t feel it was appropriate to detract from your
specific question. I did create a new post called “Piggybacking off
of the Written Code of Ethics” because I had the feeling that my post
might end up leading yours in a different direction. Unfortunately,
my thread did get merged with yours and as a result, I don’t know if
you’ve received all the feedback you hoped to get.
People, please respond to Alis’s post! If you want to address my
issue, please pick up a new thread! I’m SO over it, but knock
yourselves out.
Again, I appreciate all the feedback.
I think I might go now and focus my efforts on acquiring a copyright
for the half-round ring. 
Tamra
Tamra M. Gentry
www.agjewelrydesign.com