The Heads Together Campaign: Activities from April 2016


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Or they checked but thought there was sufficient difference in the categories that it wouldn't be a problem.

Frankly, while IANAL, I don't think the woman has a slam dunk case.
 
I am sorry but seems shotty work. Seems first step of creating a new business or charity should be to make sure the name isn't in use. :ermm:

The royals will argue, oh but we already have all this press and merchandise...

The campaign is great but I would be pissed if they get to keep the name. The woman has had the registered company name for ten years now. She shouldn't have to change it because the charity took the name. If this was any business or charity without a royal or celeb behind, there would be no question who would win.
 
Well, while she may have had the company for 10 years, she applied for the registration in 2014 and it was granted in January 2015.

And I don't think that will be their argument; I think their argument will be that there is no confusion between an HR consulting company in Belfast and a mental health charity in London so both trademarks can co-exist. That would seem reasonable to me.

There is no absolute rule that only one trademark registration can exist for a given mark. For example, there are at least 5 entities in the UK who have a currently registered trademark on the word rainbow right now (probably more, but I only checked the first two pages -out of 60 pages - of results).
 
If she was smarter about this she would use it to her advantage. Potentially millions of people will be googling Heads Together and stumble upon her information by accident. Who knows what could come of that?
 
PetticoatLane said:
If she was smarter about this she would use it to her advantage. Potentially millions of people will be googling Heads Together and stumble upon her information by accident. Who knows what could come of that?
Click to expand...

Really? Do you know how many pages if you google heads together you'd have to browse to accidentally stumble on hers? I stopped after eight.

Hel that isn't how trademarks work. If I wanted to open a business called apple or Microsoft do you think it would be allowed? Microsoft bookstore wouldn't get confused with the computer company would it? But I wouldn't get away with registering it.

There are only two reasons that the charity will get away with it. One because of the patrons. And two because the original owner of the name likely lacks the resources to fight it.

Shotty business practices. Whoever helped come up with the name for the charity should be taken to task. They have a well paid staff, making sure a name wasn't in use wouldn't take long.


There are not five companies called Rainbow. Perhaps they have the word in the nane, but that is not remotely the same thing. Nor is having a rainbow in their logo. As long as it's not an exact copy of another logo. It would be like saying only one company can have coffee in its name. Any company can have coffee in its name, but only one can be registered at
starbucks coffee
 
Last edited:
According to FindLaw, my understanding of how it works would seem to be substantially correct:

Times When It May Be OK to Use a Similar or Identical Name

There are a few situations in which it may be okay to use a name that is already in existence -- just be sure that the name your are using is not famous! For example, if the name that you want to use is already being used by another company, but the other company sells a drastically different product than you plan on selling, then you may be able to move forward with using your chosen name. In addition, geographic location can be another factor that can let you use an identical name. If the business that already has your name is far away and serves only a small population, this makes it safer for you to use the name.

The key question that you have to answer is, "is it likely that a customer would be confused about the origins of the product or service if I used the same, or a similar name." For example, suppose that a business called "X-Y-Z" already exists and sells candy in Oregon. If you want to open a business called "X-Y-Z" that repaired computers, it would probably be pretty safe. If you wanted to open your business in Florida, it would be even safer.

Starting Your Business: Business Name Availability - FindLaw
Click to expand...
 
Given the royal connection that brand identification for this name is now more associated with them rather than with the lady who used it first and thus it would substantially affect her.

I remember many years ago know that a store in a small town in NZ was called Harrods after the family that established it way back when. It operated for years and years and then along came Harrods in the UK and tried to shut them down even though no one would really think this little store was in anyway connected. The New Zealand store was a restaurant. British law operates in many of his former colonies and is different to the law in other countries. The reason why Al Fayed backed off (it was 1986/7) was because he was mocked in the UK press (and the Australian and New Zealand press as well). Had it gone to court he would have won. http://www.itnsource.com/jp/shotlist//RTV/1986/06/16/BGY602020176/?s=south+bank+show

The example of Oregan and Florida would suggest that this is American law which doesn't necessarily apply the same in other countries.
 
Last edited:
My understanding is that "Heads Together" is not a charity. It is the name of the campaign which brought 8 mental health registered charities together.

The issue may be resolved by using Team Heads Together which was used as logo on Sunday.

The need to register now is obv because the campaign has proved so successful and they want to continue.

Or they dont register - they have been using it for a year and nothing was said until now.
 
Glad to see that she responded to this fake story involving her and her company.
 
Love the new Cambridge Family photo!
 
Read William's whole interview, and, I must say, I was totally blown away by it. William not only talked about mental health but, also very deeply about his mother, her death- his reaction and the public and media reaction. He also touched on her relationship with the media and the games that were played by both sides. He talked about his own family are the future of the monarchy.

If you want to read an interview from a very open and honest Prince William...this is it!
 
So often, we as royal watchers, need a big electric prod on the back of the front to really come to grips as to how much those that we watch and admire are just as human as the rest of us are.

I know some people have really criticized both William and Harry for "speaking out" on the trauma they've suffered and how they both were affected by it and the time it took to come to a realization of how to process it. I don't. For me, the work that is being done to raise awareness of the need to address and deal with mental issues is all the more poignantly stressed as we realize that it can and does affect any of us no matter what our background or position in life. No one is immune.

We're seeing the upcoming "face" of the monarchy becoming more and more relevant to the people because we're starting to *know* and see these figures as real human beings and not clothes horses or gongs on the chest or titles and rank.

Its long been a truism for me that one can only communicate to another person in a language that they can understand. William and Harry's openness about what they went through resulting from the untimely death of their mother reaches out to us all at a human level and even allows us to identify with them more fully and appreciate what they're trying to do not only for themselves, but for everyone around them.
 
Osipi said:
So often, we as royal watchers, need a big electric prod on the back of the front to really come to grips as to how much those that we watch and admire are just as human as the rest of us are.

I know some people have really criticized both William and Harry for "speaking out" on the trauma they've suffered and how they both were affected by it and the time it took to come to a realization of how to process it. I don't. For me, the work that is being done to raise awareness of the need to address and deal with mental issues is all the more poignantly stressed as we realize that it can and does affect any of us no matter what our background or position in life. No one is immune.

We're seeing the upcoming "face" of the monarchy becoming more and more relevant to the people because we're starting to *know* and see these figures as real human beings and not clothes horses or gongs on the chest or titles and rank.

Its long been a truism for me that one can only communicate to another person in a language that they can understand. William and Harry's openness about what they went through resulting from the untimely death of their mother reaches out to us all at a human level and even allows us to identify with them more fully and appreciate what they're trying to do not only for themselves, but for everyone around them.
Click to expand...

Osipi, what a great comment and I couldn't agree more. I'm truly impressed by what the Cambridge's and Harry are doing with Heads Together and I fully support this campaign journey. There's a lot of work to do.

This interview was an eye opener for sure. I'm surprised there's not a lot of reaction to it so far.
 
I'm just picking up on the fact that the Heads Together Campaign was The Duchess of Cambridge's idea. It wasn't something the media picked up on nor highlighted. William and Harry mentioned this in the video the trio made on mental health.
 
Thanks so much for posting those videos. Both William and Harry stress how important it is to work together for the good of all. Its very true that the sum of the whole is greater than its parts and drawing focus on mental health awareness is necessary just about everywhere.
 
I would hope the media and everyone else will start acknowledging that this whole campaign was brought about by Catherine and it has grown to this amazing campaign. I don’t think she’s given much credit by the media. I’m glad William has mentioned this though.
 
I noticed that too. It was a wonderful idea and perfect to utilize and draw together various organizations to all work together on this.
 
Osipi said:
So often, we as royal watchers, need a big electric prod on the back of the front to really come to grips as to how much those that we watch and admire are just as human as the rest of us are.

I know some people have really criticized both William and Harry for "speaking out" on the trauma they've suffered and how they both were affected by it and the time it took to come to a realization of how to process it. I don't. For me, the work that is being done to raise awareness of the need to address and deal with mental issues is all the more poignantly stressed as we realize that it can and does affect any of us no matter what our background or position in life. No one is immune.

We're seeing the upcoming "face" of the monarchy becoming more and more relevant to the people because we're starting to *know* and see these figures as real human beings and not clothes horses or gongs on the chest or titles and rank.

Its long been a truism for me that one can only communicate to another person in a language that they can understand. William and Harry's openness about what they went through resulting from the untimely death of their mother reaches out to us all at a human level and even allows us to identify with them more fully and appreciate what they're trying to do not only for themselves, but for everyone around them.
Click to expand...

So eloquently stated Osipi. I too didn’t know it was Catherine’s idea for Heads Together. It’s wonderful to watch the “face” of the monarchy evolve. One can only feel pride and look forward of things to come
 
Terrible picture quality....can't make out much about the dress or Kate either one!

Very glad she is out in public again!


LaRae
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LadyFinn
Finnish State Visit to Sweden: April 23 - 24, 2024
Replies
1
Views
702
LadyFinn
LadyFinn
iceflower
State Visit from Luxembourg to Belgium: April 16- 18, 2024
Replies
19
Views
1K
Adda
Adda
M
Family Bylaws Concerning the House Law of the House of Luxembourg-Nassau
Replies
1
Views
405
Tatiana Maria
T
Blog Real
King Vittorio Amadeo II (1666-1732) and Spouses (Anne Marie d'Orléans & Anna Canalis)
Replies
2
Views
377
Blog Real
Blog Real
Blog Real
King Carlo Alberto (1798-1849) and Queen Maria Theresa of Austria
Replies
2
Views
518
Blog Real
Blog Real

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom