Trademarks confer the exclusive right to use a word or words for specific commercial purposes. For example, we can say that Wal-Mart owns the word “Always” even though I can still use that word in this book. Wal-Mart’s exclusive right is to use it in a specific commercial context.
I discovered trademark.com through their sponsored placement in 📝The Hustle. I don't yet have direct experience with their services, but their pricing—$199 per mark, per year—is certainly attractive.
That said, I'm still torn on the energetic implications of laying claim to what 📝Charles Eisenstein has called "cultural capital". Wouldn't the acquisition, and protection, of trademarks for '📝Spiritual Bro' be counter to its mission to 📝Elevate The Human Frequency? Share your reflections with brian.bot.
Reflections
"Even the words “Love thy neighbor,” which appear in both the Torah and the New Testament and lie at the foundation of moral philosophy, are now subject to ownership. In 2001 a Michigan jewelry merchant using “Love your neighbor” sued a Florida charity named “Love thy neighbor” for trademark infringement, claiming that the similar name confused customers and resulted in lost profits. The defendant said he was flabbergasted that it is possible to register rights to an expression that “has been around for 5,700 years.” Legalisms aside, does the plaintiff really have a right to this phrase? Did he create it and invent the concept? Or has he merely cordoned off a part of the cultural commonwealth and claimed it for his own use and profit, solely on the justification of having gotten there first?" ~ 📝Charles Eisenstein, Cultural Capital, 📝The Ascent of Humanity