The Mc"Clans" are In Danger

[The Guy in the Kilt at UC]

So if Ms. McCluskey's company is granted the trademarks rights to "McFest", and later on someone else files a trademark request for "McFeste", and McCluskey's company chooses to file an objection to the request for trademark, is she being a bully?

Or is it bullying only if the objections are filed by large corporations?

Depends on the situation. Is there evidence of attempted "stolen corporate identity"? Is the new trademark seeker in your example looking to profit off of her idea? Or is it a totally unrelated product/service/event, where no reasonable person would confuse the two?

That's what will make it a difference between a reasonable case and bullying. Trademarks exist for the purpose of protecting a company's business from fraudulent behavior. But when there's no possible evidence of fraud, and not even a reasonable case to be made that the newcomer's name will damage the trademark holder's business, there's no sensible reason to deny the newcomer his or her own unique trademark.

I think this is going to get confusing, with trademark infringement cases depending on the situation. When things get complex, I try to make a diagram or an equation to figure everything out. So here goes:

poor people = good
rich people = bad

So in our case, McDonald's is bad because they are rich. They are using their wealth to bully a poor person (who is good). Now MoR's hypothetical situation would only cause outrage if McFeste is poor and McFest is bad. So if her charity organization had grown and McCluskey had used the profits for lavish fundraisers and such, then that would be the same as being rich (which is bad).

The only complexity is if 2 poor people are involved, in which case I think it is settled by a cage match.