I wanted to answer this, but I think it would be best for John or Brett to handle...
I should imagine it depends on the reason it was turned down BUT as DNQuest.com states it would be best for the answer to come from someone like John who is familiar with the inner workings of how trademark law works...
Take a shot at it just to have some fun. Maybe JB will post later, and we can see who came closest and why.
Just my guess, without including all kinds of mitigating circumstances and such (like filing under the wrong USPTO category), the TM by usage wouldn't hold up...
My thoughts exactly. But I'll take a shot anyway.
It boils down to someone being able to demonstrate trademark rights, more so.
When they first started using it as such. But how to show such depends what.
Method of dispute resolution they opt to use, and what it's standards are.
Especially if it's a .com we're talking here, you've got UDRP and the courts. It.
Is the latter that's potentially more complex, depending on where the parties.
Are, what are the court jurisdiction's so-called standards, etc.
Of course, that's simplistically speaking. As you know, things aren't always as.
Simple as they appear...
Then they don't have a Registered Trademark. I would think in a court that showing the USPTO denied them the registration would go a long way to show they do not have rights. It could...they might have attempted to get a registered mark for something too obscure. Yet they might still have rights for the TM if they narrowed their definition of usage. Not really...this is tough to answer. The main question is WHY the registration was denied.
Was it their intention to go after others?..