Sold under Trade-mark

Discussion:

(too old to reply)

Mirza Ahmad Sohrab

2009-09-05 12:16:58 UTC

Sold under Trade-mark (132)

"Baha-O-Llah and Abdul Baha lived in prison, suffered and gave their
teachings *free* for the religious unification of mankind in order that,
in 1928, these spiritual heavenly teachings be monopolized, and sold
under trade-mark to an unsuspecting public as so much *goods*, similar
to *Blue Sunoco, G. Washington coffee, Twenty Mule Team Boraxo* or *the
new, blended with Havana, Whilte Owl Cigar* (it's milder)!" (132).

-- EXCERPTS from Mirza Ahmad Sohrab. Broken Silence: The Story of
Today's Struggle for Religious Freedom. New York: Universal Publishing,
1942. Reprinted. H-Bahai: Lansing, Michigan, 2004. Sohrab's entire book
may be downloaded in one click.
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/SohrabEx.htm
--
Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship

Chicago Tribune. Baha'i rift. Baha'is upset with Orthodox Baha'i Faith
May 18, 2009
http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2009/may/18/local/chi-bahai-18-may18

All my comments posted to The Chicago Tribune Forum on one page:
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Chicago_Tribune.html

Yahoo Group - ReformBahai
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ReformBahai

Reform Bahai Faith
Rochester, Michigan USA
www.ReformBahai.org

JG9

2009-09-06 16:29:12 UTC

Permalink

Post by Mirza Ahmad Sohrab
Sold under Trade-mark (132)
"Baha-O-Llah and Abdul Baha lived in prison, suffered and gave their
teachings *free* for the religious unification of mankind in order that,
in 1928, these spiritual heavenly teachings be monopolized, and sold
under trade-mark to an unsuspecting public as so much *goods*, similar
to *Blue Sunoco, G. Washington coffee, Twenty Mule Team Boraxo* or *the
new, blended with Havana, Whilte Owl Cigar* (it's milder)!" (132).
-- EXCERPTS from Mirza Ahmad Sohrab. Broken Silence: The Story of
Today's Struggle for Religious Freedom. New York: Universal Publishing,
1942. Reprinted. H-Bahai: Lansing, Michigan, 2004. Sohrab's entire book
may be downloaded in one click.http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/SohrabEx.htm
--
Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Consciencehttp://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship
Chicago Tribune. Baha'i rift. Baha'is upset with Orthodox Baha'i Faith
May 18, 2009http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2009/may/18/local/chi-bahai-18-may18
All my comments posted to The Chicago Tribune Forum on one page:http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Chicago_Tribune.html
Yahoo Group - ReformBahaihttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/ReformBahai
Reform Bahai Faith
Rochester, Michigan USAwww.ReformBahai.org

This trademarking of the Greatest Name is really an outrage and I
would like it to be stopped because it cheapens it and is
disrespectful (not to mention that it is questionable legally).
Baha'i is not a brand of soap or cola. Anyone who understands what is
a trademark should see that it is wrongful to try to apply it to the
Greatest Name.
================
From the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office:
"What is a trademark or service mark?

"* A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a
combination of words, phrases, symbols or designs, that identifies and
distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of
others.
"* A service mark is the same as a trademark, except that it
identifies and distinguishes the source of a service rather than a
product."

BASIS FOR FILING

The application should include your "basis" for filing. Most U.S.
applicants base their application on their current use of the mark in
commerce, or their intent to use their mark in commerce in the future.

What is "use in commerce"?

For the purpose of obtaining federal registration, "commerce" means
all commerce that the U.S. Congress may lawfully regulate; for
example, interstate commerce or commerce between the U.S. and another
country. "Use in commerce" must be a bona fide use of the mark in the
ordinary course of trade, and not use simply made to reserve rights in
the mark. Generally, acceptable use is as follows:

For goods: the mark must appear on the goods, the container for the
goods, or displays associated with the goods, and the goods must be
sold or transported in commerce.

For services: the mark must be used or displayed in the sale or
advertising of the services, and the services must be rendered in
commerce.

If you have already started using the mark in commerce, you may file
based on that use. A "use" based application must include a sworn
statement (usually in the form of a declaration) that the mark is in
use in commerce, listing the date of first use of the mark anywhere
and the date of first use of the mark in commerce. A properly worded
declaration is included in the USPTO standard application form. The
applicant or a person authorized to sign on behalf of the applicant
must sign the statement. The application should include a specimen
showing use of the mark in commerce.

What is "intent to use"?

If you have not yet used the mark, but plan to do so in the future,
you may file based on a good faith or bona fide intention to use the
mark in commerce. You do not have to use the mark before you file your
application.

An "intent to use" application must include a sworn statement (usually
in the form of a declaration) that you have a bona fide intention to
use the mark in commerce. A properly worded declaration is included in
the USPTO standard application form. The applicant or a person
authorized to sign on behalf of the applicant must sign the
statement.

==================
Obviously, the Greatest Name is not a mark used in commerce to
identify goods or services, or it SHOULDN'T BE!

Jeffrey

Mirza Ahmad Sohrab

2009-09-10 00:11:36 UTC

Permalink

Jeffrey,

You're absolutely right about how bogus the trademark of the Greatest
Name is. Like most of their claims about trademarks and copyrights, it
existed for so many decades prior to some underling rubber-stamping
their meaningless application, there's nothing to worry about. It would
never hold up in a copyright court. The corrupt nsa does these things to
harass and intimidate the uninformed. And delude itself.

Haven't your colleagues told you all this?

Bahai regards,

FG
--
Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship

Chicago Tribune. Baha'i rift. Baha'is upset with Orthodox Baha'i Faith
May 18, 2009
http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2009/may/18/local/chi-bahai-18-may18

All my comments posted to The Chicago Tribune Forum on one page:
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Chicago_Tribune.html

Yahoo Group - ReformBahai
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ReformBahai

Reform Bahai Faith
Rochester, Michigan USA
www.ReformBahai.org

Post by JG9

This trademarking of the Greatest Name is really an outrage and I
would like it to be stopped because it cheapens it and is
disrespectful (not to mention that it is questionable legally).
Baha'i is not a brand of soap or cola. Anyone who understands what is
a trademark should see that it is wrongful to try to apply it to the
Greatest Name.
================
"What is a trademark or service mark?
"* A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a
combination of words, phrases, symbols or designs, that identifies and
distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of
others.
"* A service mark is the same as a trademark, except that it
identifies and distinguishes the source of a service rather than a
product."
BASIS FOR FILING
The application should include your "basis" for filing. Most U.S.
applicants base their application on their current use of the mark in
commerce, or their intent to use their mark in commerce in the future.
What is "use in commerce"?
For the purpose of obtaining federal registration, "commerce" means
all commerce that the U.S. Congress may lawfully regulate; for
example, interstate commerce or commerce between the U.S. and another
country. "Use in commerce" must be a bona fide use of the mark in the
ordinary course of trade, and not use simply made to reserve rights in
For goods: the mark must appear on the goods, the container for the
goods, or displays associated with the goods, and the goods must be
sold or transported in commerce.
For services: the mark must be used or displayed in the sale or
advertising of the services, and the services must be rendered in
commerce.
If you have already started using the mark in commerce, you may file
based on that use. A "use" based application must include a sworn
statement (usually in the form of a declaration) that the mark is in
use in commerce, listing the date of first use of the mark anywhere
and the date of first use of the mark in commerce. A properly worded
declaration is included in the USPTO standard application form. The
applicant or a person authorized to sign on behalf of the applicant
must sign the statement. The application should include a specimen
showing use of the mark in commerce.
What is "intent to use"?
If you have not yet used the mark, but plan to do so in the future,
you may file based on a good faith or bona fide intention to use the
mark in commerce. You do not have to use the mark before you file your
application.
An "intent to use" application must include a sworn statement (usually
in the form of a declaration) that you have a bona fide intention to
use the mark in commerce. A properly worded declaration is included in
the USPTO standard application form. The applicant or a person
authorized to sign on behalf of the applicant must sign the
statement.
==================
Obviously, the Greatest Name is not a mark used in commerce to
identify goods or services, or it SHOULDN'T BE!
Jeffrey

NUR

2009-09-10 03:47:34 UTC

Permalink

One day the Baha'i organization as a whole will find itself in court
to face charges of false advertising of its symbol being the Greatest
Name.

JG9

2009-09-10 15:20:41 UTC

Permalink

Post by NUR
One day the Baha'i organization as a whole will find itself in court
to face charges of false advertising of its symbol being the Greatest
Name.

Of course not! Baha'is believe it is the Greatest Name. We have the
legal and God-given right to believe as we choose about the Greatest
Name even if we are wrong.

Jeffrey

NUR

2009-09-11 03:15:32 UTC

Permalink

Post by JG9

Post by NUR
One day the Baha'i organization as a whole will find itself in court
to face charges of false advertising of its symbol being the Greatest
Name.

Of course not! Baha'is believe it is the Greatest Name.

Baha'is are wrong.

Post by JG9
We have the
legal and God-given right to believe as we choose about the Greatest
Name even if we are wrong.

Including forcefully to the point of criminal interference trying to
silence people and disappear information online which disputes this
and shows that the Greatest Name (al-ism al-a'zam) has a longer
antiquity with a different image and usage than the silly image
Baha'is have only recently called their own - as the Baha'i Internet
Agency did on Wackopedia in 2008. When the time comes, that is a fight
I am willing to take on against the whole lot of you -- and I will win
it too!

W

JG9

2009-09-11 14:16:41 UTC

Permalink

Post by NUR

Post by JG9

Post by NUR
One day the Baha'i organization as a whole will find itself in court
to face charges of false advertising of its symbol being the Greatest
Name.

Of course not! Baha'is believe it is the Greatest Name.

Baha'is are wrong.

Post by JG9
We have the
legal and God-given right to believe as we choose about the Greatest
Name even if we are wrong.

I support your right to express your belief about the Greatest Name.
That is not a fight I wish to have with you. But I will fight anyone
who attempts to limit my right to express my own belief.

Jeffrey

JG9

2009-09-10 15:19:37 UTC

Permalink

Post by Mirza Ahmad Sohrab
Jeffrey,
You're absolutely right about how bogus the trademark of the Greatest
Name is. Like most of their claims about trademarks and copyrights, it
existed for so many decades prior to some underling rubber-stamping
their meaningless application, there's nothing to worry about. It would
never hold up in a copyright court. The corrupt nsa does these things to
harass and intimidate the uninformed. And delude itself.
Haven't your colleagues told you all this?
Bahai regards,
FG
--
Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Consciencehttp://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship

Frederick,

The Wilmette NSA already has a judgment of a federal court that
upholds their supposed trademark of the Greatest Name, and even says
that their version of the Baha'i Faith is the only one. As outrageous
as that is, that Judgment stands at least as against the Remey
organization and any of its successors. As you know, the entire court
action to date has revolved around the question of whether the OBF and
the BPUPC are legally successors to Remey and therefore subject to
that outrageous Judgment. As wrong as it is under the law, the
Wilmette NSA managed to get a Judgment entered and this is very
dangerous.

What everyone must remember is that despite what the law of the United
States stands for, if someone takes you to court and you fail to
assert your rights for whatever reason (say, for example, that you
don't have hundreds of thousands of dollars for lawyer's fees), a
default Judgment can be entered against you and it will become binding
upon you. It is certainly possible that the Wilmette NSA could sue
you and others and unless you are able to fight them in court, your
rights will be lost.

This is dangerous and they must be stopped by all people of good
will. The Wilmette NSA is an enemy of freedom of speech and freedom
of religion, and they have so much money that they can throw around
that they are positively dangerous.

Jeffrey

Mirza Ahmad Sohrab

2009-09-11 00:01:30 UTC

Permalink

Post by JG9

Frederick,
The Wilmette NSA already has a judgment of a federal court that
upholds their supposed trademark of the Greatest Name, and even says
that their version of the Baha'i Faith is the only one. As outrageous
as that is, that Judgment stands at least as against the Remey
organization and any of its successors. As you know, the entire court
action to date has revolved around the question of whether the OBF and
the BPUPC are legally successors to Remey and therefore subject to
that outrageous Judgment. As wrong as it is under the law, the
Wilmette NSA managed to get a Judgment entered and this is very
dangerous.
What everyone must remember is that despite what the law of the United
States stands for, if someone takes you to court and you fail to
assert your rights for whatever reason (say, for example, that you
don't have hundreds of thousands of dollars for lawyer's fees), a
default Judgment can be entered against you and it will become binding
upon you. It is certainly possible that the Wilmette NSA could sue
you and others and unless you are able to fight them in court, your
rights will be lost.
This is dangerous and they must be stopped by all people of good
will. The Wilmette NSA is an enemy of freedom of speech and freedom
of religion, and they have so much money that they can throw around
that they are positively dangerous.
Jeffrey

It seems to me that the Judge Sykes and Bauer understand quite well in
the audio clip the court made available just how "dangerous" of "an
enemy of freedom of speech and freedom of religion" the Haifans are:

Februrary 20, 2009 - 3-minute Mp3 Recording
7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judges hammer NSA's attorney
Judge Diane S. Sykes: "Clearly raises some Constitutional concerns"

7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judges hammer NSA's attorney 2-20-09
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/USCourt_Appeals09.htm

Mp3 file, three minutes:
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/archives/US_Court_of_Appeals_2-20-09.mp3
--
Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship

Chicago Tribune. Baha'i rift. Baha'is upset with Orthodox Baha'i Faith
May 18, 2009
http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2009/may/18/local/chi-bahai-18-may18

All my comments posted to The Chicago Tribune Forum on one page:
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Chicago_Tribune.html

Yahoo Group - ReformBahai
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ReformBahai

Reform Bahai Faith
Rochester, Michigan USA
www.ReformBahai.org

JG9

2009-09-11 14:15:15 UTC

Permalink

Post by Mirza Ahmad Sohrab

Post by JG9

Frederick,
The Wilmette NSA already has a judgment of a federal court that
upholds their supposed trademark of the Greatest Name, and even says
that their version of the Baha'i Faith is the only one. As outrageous
as that is, that Judgment stands at least as against the Remey
organization and any of its successors. As you know, the entire court
action to date has revolved around the question of whether the OBF and
the BPUPC are legally successors to Remey and therefore subject to
that outrageous Judgment. As wrong as it is under the law, the
Wilmette NSA managed to get a Judgment entered and this is very
dangerous.
What everyone must remember is that despite what the law of the United
States stands for, if someone takes you to court and you fail to
assert your rights for whatever reason (say, for example, that you
don't have hundreds of thousands of dollars for lawyer's fees), a
default Judgment can be entered against you and it will become binding
upon you. It is certainly possible that the Wilmette NSA could sue
you and others and unless you are able to fight them in court, your
rights will be lost.
This is dangerous and they must be stopped by all people of good
will. The Wilmette NSA is an enemy of freedom of speech and freedom
of religion, and they have so much money that they can throw around
that they are positively dangerous.
Jeffrey

It seems to me that the Judge Sykes and Bauer understand quite well in
the audio clip the court made available just how "dangerous" of "an
Februrary 20, 2009 - 3-minute Mp3 Recording
7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judges hammer NSA's attorney
Judge Diane S. Sykes: "Clearly raises some Constitutional concerns"
7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judges hammer NSA's attorney 2-20-09http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/USCourt_Appeals09.htm
Mp3 file, three minutes:http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/archives/US_Court_of_Appeals...
--
Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Consciencehttp://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship
Chicago Tribune. Baha'i rift. Baha'is upset with Orthodox Baha'i Faith
May 18, 2009http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2009/may/18/local/chi-bahai-18-may18
All my comments posted to The Chicago Tribune Forum on one page:http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Chicago_Tribune.html
Yahoo Group - ReformBahaihttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/ReformBahai
Reform Bahai Faith
Rochester, Michigan USAwww.ReformBahai.org

It remains to be seen how they will rule.
Jeffrey