There are mainly two types of trademark, a standard one and a stylized one.

A standard one (called a standard character mark) establishes your trademark rights to the written words of the mark whereas a stylized one (called a stylized/design mark) to the expression of the words in a certain way.

For example, “Coca-Cola” is a brand name of a certain soda drink, registered to the Coca-Cola Company. But you more often see the name in a particular style as shown here.

Nowadays, the use of stylized logos and designs is very common because it effectively sets apart the company/brand from competitors’.

A common choice is Standard Character.

Although virtually all companies use at least some design/style elements in their trademark, still most of the companies register their trademark in a standard character format. Why?

1. They don’t want their trademark right to be limited to a specific design. In fact, if you registered your brand name in a standard character format, any style/design of that registered name can’t be used by your competitors.
2. Also, once registered as a stylized/design mark you can’t change the design or style of the mark. Companies often update their design and style elements to modernize them.

Thus, it’s is a rule of thumb that a standard character format affords a better protection.

A Styled/Design Mark works a bit differently.

Let’s say IPfever registered a stylized trademark: After a few years, a website devoted to teaching Japanese language and culture dubs itself Japanese Fever, “JP fever” in short, and starts using this logo:.

Do you see any problem? Although they changed a letter, they look too similar. There’s likely an infringement case.

However, if IPfever were registered as standard character, it would’ve been a different story. Because “fever” in Japanese Fever can be considered as a descriptive word for passion and enthusiasm for Japanese culture, it likely has a leeway.

But it should be noted that stylized/design marks have their own limitation. If Japanese Fever  , I say this one differs in style so much to escape from a potential trademark infringement claim.

You have to choose, but choose wisely.

You might say you would just register both standard character and design marks. Problem solved? Well, it’s not that simple.

You can’t claim “the coffee house” trademark for your coffee house because that’s what people call any coffee house. It’s reserved for everyone. But you may register this stylized/design mark.

You probably need to disclaim rights to the words, (meaning that others can literally use the same name) but it still protects you from something like this knock-off.

So, figure out what’s the strength and weakness of your mark, and then choose wisely.

Let’s take a look at an interesting story:

By the time Apple Inc. debuted iPhone in January 2007, the prefix “i” had already become a thing of Apple. The inauguration of iMac series dates back in 1998. In 2003, iPod was a mega hit.

Lesser known than Apple, however, there was a startup called InfoGear Technology Corporation, which developed an internet phone technology, called “iPhone.”

Yes, iPhone™ by InfoGear.

Of course, there’s nothing suspicious about Apple’s iMac; the iMac trademark was first registered in 1995 by Digi International Inc. which assigned the trademark to Apple in 1998. Here, Apple did a right thing; it bought the iMac trademark before announcing iMac.

But, how about iPhone? Based on the USPTO’s record, InfoGear used the iPhone trademark from 1997, and it was registered in 1999. Apple filed its iPhone trademark application in January 8th, 2007. (Steve Jobs unveiled iPhone to the world the next day).

Can Apple do that? Absolutely “NO” said Cisco who brought a lawsuit against Apple based on its iPhone trademark purchased along with InfoGear.

In all fairness, if Cisco proved its seriousness about iPhone in the court, we might now have “iPod 4G LTE Advanced” instead of “iPhone 7.”

Who knows what Steve Jobs said to Cisco, but Cisco somehow agreed to a concurrent use of the iPhone trademark. (Apple probably challenged Cisco’s iPhone trademark by saying that “i” prefix had been associated with Apple product even before Cisco’s registration.) Well, assuming Cisco had a valid and enforceable trademark right, what could’ve happened?

Cisco would say the iPhones sold by InfoGear and Apple were both communication devices, and customers would likely be confused. Of course, Apple would say they are totally different devices; but Apple likely loses on this account.

As a counter, Apple could’ve argued that Cisco stopped using the trademark (thereby lost its right). Then, the followings become relevant: How many iPhone Cisco sold? How many people bought, used, knew or seen iPhone by Cisco? Had Cisco advertised iPhone? My guess is that Cisco purchased the iPhone trademark, but it really didn’t think about using it much.

So, be aware that to own a trademark, you have to actually use it, which means placing your goods/services (bearing that mark) in the market.

Trademark registration provides security. For example, companies often file intent-to-use (“ITU”) applications before making and selling new products. Without the ITU, mobile phone companies won’t be able to announce a flagship model months earlier than actual release, nor can they push an advertising campaign for a new product before they make sales. (Announcing or even advertising is not enough to establish a use of trademark under the trademark law.)

Trademark registration provides security. For example, companies often file intent-to-use (“ITU”) applications before making and selling new products. Without the ITU, mobile phone companies won’t be able to announce a flagship model months earlier than actual release, nor can they push an advertising campaign for a new product before they make sales. (Announcing or even advertising is not enough to establish a use of trademark under the trademark law.)