[E-trademarks] Proud Boys trademark

Fri Feb 7 18:44:21 UTC 2025

I was wondering the same thing.

Jessica R. Friedman
Attorney at Law
(917) 647-1884
jrfriedman at litproplaw.com
www.literarypropertylaw.com
________________________________
From: E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> on behalf of Carl Oppedahl via E-trademarks <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Sent: Friday, February 7, 2025 1:38:52 PM
To: For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: Carl Oppedahl <carl at oppedahl.com>
Subject: Re: [E-trademarks] Proud Boys trademark

It's not an opinion, exactly.  It is simply an order of the court, granted due to a default by the defendant.  It came from a state court judge.  My guess is that the lawyer on the plaintiff side drafted up a proposed order and gave it to the judge, who maybe touched it up before signing it.  My guess is that neither the lawyer nor the judge knows anything about trademark law.  What makes me guess this is that the order absolutely nowhere contains any language that looks to me like it conveys the associated goodwill.

For a number of reasons I have to imagine the church would never be in a position to sign the papers needed to carry out a renewal of the registration.

One of the worries of course is what if the Proud Boys simply trot back down to the Trademark Office and file a new trademark application?

Seems to me the church could maintain some measure of control over the situation.  What I would do in their shoes is file half a dozen trademark applications for the same drawing, identifying services that are in the periphery.  An exemplary ID would be "providing a web site with information about XYZ" where XYZ is some sort of content that the church could be comfortable with.  Quotations from scripture that remind the reader of things that are good to know, golden rule, good Samaritan, being kind to strangers, etc.  The kind of trademark application for which a simple web page could be the specimen of use, and it would be easy to do renewals.

And then with these half a dozen registrations in place, hopefully if the Proud Boys (or a new legal entity they create) were to try to re-register, hopefully the Examining Attorney would refuse registration in view of the half a dozen registrations.

On 2/7/2025 10:29 AM, Miriam Richter, Esq. via E-trademarks wrote:

All,

I’ve had a crazy week so it is possible that I’m missing something really basic here because my brain is fried, but, how is an historic Black church in DC going to own the trademark? How will they show use? I found four pending applications and no registrations. All four are owned by different individuals/companies and all but one are 1b.

How can the trademark PROUD BOYS indicate a Black church as the source of the goods/services being provided? Is this a common law trademark thing?

Does anyone have access to the opinion?

Best,

Miriam

Miriam Richter, Attorney at Law, P.L.

Make Your Mark! ®

Trademark, Copyright, and other Intellectual Property Matters
2312 Wilton Drive, Suite 9
Wilton Manors, Florida 33305

954-977-4711 office

954-240-8819 cell
954-977-4717 facsimile

NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 954-240-8819 and delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or anyattachments may not have been produced by the sender.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250207/cf09027f/attachment.html>