SWAP'n'GO - a TRADE NAME used in ignorance and we paid the price

A month ago, on this forum, I told the story of how my wife and I had launched a website to help people, especially grey nomads like ourselves, save money on their outdoor BBQ and camping gas bottle refills and swaps.

The moderators closely scrutinised my story and after seeing the benefit to members, agreed I was not sockpuppeting.

The response from members was overwhelming. So many people wanted to look at this money-saving website that it crashed, much the way the census website did.

Not long after, I received a huge official-looking registered mail envelope.

Imagine my horror when I took out a 14 page foolscap document from a big firm of lawyers advising me that my website was "misusing" one of their clients' several registered trade names and images.

To avoid costly legal action, I had two courses of action open to me:

A) delete all instances of the trade names and trademarks

B) add the Registered Trademark Symbol to every occurrence of the trademark/name with the words "S…….O is a registered trademark of ….. Limited".

This would have to appear more than 1,500 times in my database.

Although it cost me money for the changes, I chose option A. I admit I should have done my homework better before creating the website and I acknowledge the company's right to protect its trade marks from any improper use.

I am relating this story as a warning to others, especially as to what you say on social media … the new goldfield for the legal profession.

Related Stores

gasbottlerefills.com
gasbottlerefills.com

Comments

  • +1

    I think you made the right call by removing the infringing text – and who knows, maybe that TradeMark holder will be coming to you asking for an advertising deal in the future.

    Handy website – just wondering if you’ve implemented a way to order the search results by price?

    • railspider that is on the list of "must do" things. It will happen, but still have so much to learn. May I PM you for some ideas?

      • Feel free to PM, but not sure how much help I'll be!

  • +2

    Hmmm. The person changing the data in your DB might be the unreasonable one. I would think it's a one or two line SQL script :) The actual changes required seem fair and reasonable to me.

    • +1

      Frugal Rock is 100% correct. The changes requested were quite fair and reasonable. Just inexperience on the part of the near 80 year old "person changing the data" was the problem. Not critical of the company at all.

    • +3

      UPDATE table_name
      SET field_name = replace(same_field_name, 'unwanted_text', 'wanted_text')

  • +1

    Don't forget to add S…….O is a registered trademark of ….. Limited to your post. :P

    http://www.gasbottlerefills.com/ was the site for those wondering. I can't find where you misused a trademark though?

    • +1

      Company called Elgas that does gas bottles - registered trademark for them since 2004. Awesome website for the OP though - will be making use of t myself come summer :)

      • +1

        But where is the misuse?

        • All been removed as required by the solicitor's letter.

        • @Ranndy Stone: How was it being misused though?

        • @fruit: By not updating each webpage (there are over 1.500 such pages) on our GBR website (and associated Facebook page) to include a statement advising the "R in circle symbol (tradename) is a registered trade mark of (law firm's client)".
          There were other conditions contained in their 14-page document which would add far too much extra wording to this post.
          Simplest solution was to remove all references to their client's trade name and trade marks. They suggested instead of their client's trade name, we use "gas bottle replacement service".
          AS IF!!! We just settled for the use of "swap" or "swap bottle".
          As far as we are concerned, we have done everything requested of us and will make no further public comment on the matter.

  • Not fully the issue of the trademark holder.

    The law also requires them to show they are protecting the trademark, otherwise they could lose it or at least find it difficult to stop others.

    Sort of oopens the defence of, why prosecute me, when you let others do it.

Login or Join to leave a comment