http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html
McCanns: Madeleine McCann - Trade Mark No. 2456061?, 12 April 2011
McCanns: Madeleine McCann - Trade Mark No. 2456061? Day Trading (German) http://dengruo.info/201104/mccanns-madeleine-mccann-markenamt-nr-2456061/
By A DAY TRADER
Published: 2011/04/12
Perhaps one of the most bizarre aspects of the case of missing Madeleine McCann is that, within days of her disappearance, her parents submitted a trade mark application on her behalf.
Trade marks are typically used to protect commercial property rights, so that, in this bizarre case, it seems that not only was Madeleine perceived as a missing daughter, but also as a future commercial concern, the rights of which were required, to protect the commercial interests of Team McCann.
In a way, it's easy to see why Madeleine's image attracted substantial sums for the interested parties.
Personally the thought of a 'trade mark' for a missing child sounds pretty sick to say the least, and brings a certain disgust at the whole question of her loss.
But what is your opinion
Is it customary to mark a missing child this way?
Was the McCanns' child an exception, whose name needed to be trade marked in the circumstances? Source: ipo.gov.uk
Note: It should be pointed out that the trade mark relates specifically to the activities of the 'Madeleine's Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned' company and not Madeleine McCann herself.
Case details for Trade Mark 2456061 Intellectual Property Office http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tm/t-find/t-find-number?detailsrequested=C&trademark=2456061
FOOTNOTE:
McCanns: Madeleine McCann - Trade Mark No. 2456061?, 12 April 2011
McCanns: Madeleine McCann - Trade Mark No. 2456061? Day Trading (German) http://dengruo.info/201104/mccanns-madeleine-mccann-markenamt-nr-2456061/
By A DAY TRADER
Published: 2011/04/12
Perhaps one of the most bizarre aspects of the case of missing Madeleine McCann is that, within days of her disappearance, her parents submitted a trade mark application on her behalf.
Trade marks are typically used to protect commercial property rights, so that, in this bizarre case, it seems that not only was Madeleine perceived as a missing daughter, but also as a future commercial concern, the rights of which were required, to protect the commercial interests of Team McCann.
In a way, it's easy to see why Madeleine's image attracted substantial sums for the interested parties.
Personally the thought of a 'trade mark' for a missing child sounds pretty sick to say the least, and brings a certain disgust at the whole question of her loss.
But what is your opinion
Is it customary to mark a missing child this way?
Was the McCanns' child an exception, whose name needed to be trade marked in the circumstances? Source: ipo.gov.uk
Note: It should be pointed out that the trade mark relates specifically to the activities of the 'Madeleine's Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned' company and not Madeleine McCann herself.
Case details for Trade Mark 2456061 Intellectual Property Office http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tm/t-find/t-find-number?detailsrequested=C&trademark=2456061
FOOTNOTE:
There is NO copyright in a NAME, TITLE, SLOGAN or PHRASE - these may be eligible for registration as trade mark http://tinyurl.com/3eovdb6
