Alfredo wrote: think of Apple Computers. You are still free to discuss, sell, and advertise for apples. But you cannot use the word "Apple" to sell computers that are not Apples (or otherwise attempt to profit from their mark). And this is only fair, no? So unless you were thinking of calling your dharma center, book, etc. "Short Moments," this doesn't affect you.
Actually, a long time trademark dispute was finally settled between The Beatles' Apple
label, and Apple Computers. Until last year, I think, you couldn't get Beatles music on an ipod.
Years ago, the terms "Thick' n ' chewy" and "thin 'n' crispy" became registered trademarks of Pizza Hut.
It was pointed out that any copyright or trademark for "short moments" and its variations only really matter if someone is using it specifically for a similar purpose. However, copyright & trademark laws are not written in stone. So, really, it only matters if a lawsuit is filed by Candice O'Denver and the balanced view organisation, and if they can prove that the purpose that someone else has used these terms was to create confusion in the mind of the public (an interesting concept, for a buddhist)
and purposeful misrepresentation. In other words, if you started your own group and called something like it balanced view, and you used these catchy phrases, and it was obvious that you were manufacturing a counterfeit. Like a fake designer purse.
But, as mentioned above, these terms were already in use, and it can be easily shown that they were in use.
So, while technically they may hold a copyright, it is a pretty damn' flimsy copyright.
Their copyright page opens with this goofy statement:The copyright and trademark protections of this website ensure that all members of human society have access to high quality, complete, plainspoken, free information about the exact nature of humans and of open intelligences inexhaustible beneficial potency.
I just feel sorry for anyone who gets taken in by this scammer /nut job. But I wouldn't worry.
Looking at their logo, I wonder if:
1. anybody in their organization has an original idea
2. They plan to sue the President of the United States for trademark infringement
3. They run a racket where they copyright other people's stuff and then try to sue for trademark violation
4. They are actually misrepresenting themselves because they are obviously unbalanced!!!
The very fact
that these time-honored expressions were trademarked by her organization should be a warning sign.