united-states intellectual-property trademark
Does a registered trademark end if the owner throws it away?
<p>If somebody registers a trademark for their company name and the name of its flagship product, and uses this names for a while, but then one day decides to stop using it and publicly announce they will never use the old name again, is the trademark still theirs, or is it automatically terminated?</p>
<p>If not immediately, is it terminated after some period of time where the owner does not use it?</p>
<p>Does it matter that the owner publicly proclaimed they'd never use it again?</p>

<h2>A trademark must be used</h2>
<p><a href="/questions/tagged/australia" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-australia-tooltip-container">australia</a></p>
<p>Use is inherent in the <a href="https://manuals.ipaustralia.gov.au/trademark/1.-what-if-a-trade-mark-is-not-used-" rel="nofollow noreferrer">definition</a> of a trademark: “the owner intends, and does, use the trade mark to distinguish its goods or services from goods or services dealt with or provided by others.”</p>
<p>Anyone can apply to have a disused trademark deregistered. The application can be opposed by the owner who bears the onus of proving it is still in use.</p>
<p>An owner who made a public announcement that they would no longer use it would have a hard time proving they still were. Also, they might be estopped from opposing the application at all.</p>

<p>Well, a registered trademark is a <em>registered</em> trademark because it's <em>registered</em>. So to make it available again, that registration would need to be deleted. A simple announcement that it will no longer be used is not sufficient. Of course, the company could refrain from suing anybody for using the trademark, but that's a bit a risky path for anyone to rely on.</p>
<p><a href="/questions/tagged/switzerland" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;switzerland&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;switzerland&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-switzerland-tooltip-container">switzerland</a> (and probably many European countries)</p>
<p>There's a rule that a trademark is only valid as long as it's in use. If, for more than 5 years, the registered owner appears to be no longer using it, anyone can request its deletion for a small fee and some evidence that the trademark is not being used. If the trademark belongs to a company that no longer exists, that is a strong indication that it is no longer used. <a href="https://blumgrob.ch/update/neues-verfahren-zur-loeschung-von-nicht-gebrauchten-marken-ab-1-januar-2017/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Source</a></p>

<p><a href="/questions/tagged/united-states" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-united-states-tooltip-container">united-states</a></p>
<p>In the U.S., a registered trademark has to be periodically renewed with a statement stating that it continues to be used in interstate or international commerce, and if this ceases to happen, it lapses by operation of law.</p>
<p>In the fact pattern of the question, announcing it will no longer be used would probably be a good defense to a trademark infringement suit from the registered trademark owner, at a minimum, as a common law estoppel or waiver, and as a defense to the affirmative case on the ground that there are no damages and that there is no possibility of confusion.</p>
<p>On the other hand, it someone tried to mislead the public into thinking the the no longer used trademark that they were now using was still being used by a successor to the original owner, that could be grounds for a suit to enjoin the use to defraud the public if it harmed the registered owner of the trademark that had not yet lapsed by operation of law.</p>
<p>It is possible to file a form with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) prospectively cancelling a registered trademark. Often this would be done as part of a settlement of a litigation dispute involving the trademark.</p>
