Columbia Gemhouse Attempts To Trademark The Term, “Fair Trade Gems.”
In what could have major implications for the entire gem community interested in Fair Trade Gems, Columbia Gem House is attempting to trademark the term, “Fair Trade Gems”.
From my understanding of this matter, if any one company owns the term “Fair Trade Gems”, no other company will be able to use it legally in the US.
In reaction to learning this, Greg Valerio, fair trade jewelry activist, founder of Cred Jewelers and a founding Board Member of the Alliance of Responsible Mining, wrote:
“This is contrary to the spirit of fair trade and contrary to the spirit of the movement as a whole. No one person or company can own this language. Therefore, it is a totally inappropriate for Columbia Gem House or any other company to try to trademark these generic terms. It will single handedly undermine any claim to being fair trade.”
“Plus, this language has been used for decades so how can any one company own the language? As one of the worlds leading international fair trade jewelers, I support this term being owned by everyone. This inclusive option is critical to everyone in the fair trade jewelry arena.”
During a search on the US Patent Office website, for Fair Trade Gems, I found this result:
Word Mark FAIR TRADE GEMS
Goods and Services IC 014. US 002 027 028 050. G & S: gemstones and jewelry.
FIRST USE: 20040130. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20040130
Standard Characters Claimed
Mark Drawing Code (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Serial Number 77206368
Filing Date June 14, 2007
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Registration Number 3539053
Registration Date November 25, 2008
Owner: (REGISTRANT) Columbia Gem House, Inc. CORPORATION, WASHINGTON; P.O. Box 820889, Vancouver, WASHINGTON, 98682
Attorney of Record Joseph S. Makuch
Disclaimer NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE “GEMS” APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register SUPPLEMENTAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
It should be noted the both Cred Jewelers and my company, Reflective Images, regularly purchase from Columbia Gem House and fully support that company’s outstanding work in the field of fair trade gems for the jewelry sector and the public.
Wasn’t this registration for Fair Trade Gems already granted to Columbia Gem House?
I would be very surprised if the USPTO permitted trademark of this term. I have communicated extensively with several patent attorneys on this topic, including a few at the USPTO office, and been told that they are extremely hesitant to grant exclusive use of terms that have common application or that represent a good or description. Typically, they require trademarks to contain words that cannot be mistaken for a good/product, but rather demonstrate a brand. For example, using my company as the guinea pig here, “Green Diva” is acceptable as it is a unique brand term, but the “green” in “Green Diva” is nonexclusive, so I’d never be able to have the company name “Green Jewelry” trademarked because that uses common terms to describe a product, not a brand.
I guess I don’t quite understand, from this move, whether CGH is trying to alienate customers or competitors…because in one swift move, they might do both. Has anyone called them to talk through their motives?