Getting a COA registered

[SlackerDrummer]

Kenneth, I am afraid you are in error. Provided you are the owner of the copyright of the original piece, you also hold an equal copyright to any other pieces derived from the original. With regards to arms based on, or "derived" from, arms already in use (ie: chiefly arms) you need to remember that the letters patent issued by the granting authority are prima facie evidence that the arms depicted on the document are, in fact, uniquely the sole property of the individual named on the document. Thus, each act of a substantive granting authority creates a new and unique piece that can be copyrighted if the recipient so chooses.

As far as heraldry is concerned, yes, we all agree your arms are unique. As far as copyright law is concerned, however, the protection "extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any exclusive right in the preexisting material." So if you agree that the arms of Makclenand of yt ilk dating from the 16th century are protected, then the difference between them and yours (blue stars rather than red) is what is unique and therefore that change is what is covered in your protection under the law. In no context, I think you are absolutely correct in your assertions, but in the greater context of heraldry, I'm not convinced. Of course this is all intellectual debate as there is no historical context in which to place it (in the US court system).

No, it's not irrelevant, it is 100% on point. Unless I have misunderstood you, you had suggested that copyright covered the exact image, without variation. With a book it isn't the size (hard back, trade edition, or mass market paperback) but rather the intellectual content which is copyright. The same applies to the arms; it is the intellectual content of the blazon which is copyright, not the size and shape of the shield, or the manner in which it is depicted on the letters patent.

If your intent is to copyright the text of your grant, by all means keep using the example of the book. But the "intellectual content" of the blazon of a coat of arms is too abstract to be protected under copyright law. In other words the concept of a white shield with a red lion between two red bars with three blue stars in chief isn't subject. From the law: "In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work."

Rather than go into a really looooooong description of tradmarking in the USA (which really is off topic), I would suggest that anyone who wants to do this first read the Wikipedia article on trademark (which is a very good overview), and take away the understanding that (1) you can file for your trademark before you go into commerce, and (2) that virtually anything can (and probably has been) trademarked. The basic requirement is that the trademark is intended be used in commerce; merely placing your arms on your calling card qualifies for a trademarking.

While placing the arms on a business card (not a calling card) does provide a good faith effort to show that you intend to use the mark in commerce and is good enough to register the mark, you must specify what goods you intent to sell under the mark or what services you intend to provide. The mark is only protected for the things listed on your application and according to the US Patent and Trademark Office, "If you list vague terms, such as 'miscellaneous services' or “company name,” your application will be considered void and you must file a new application."

Just out of curiosity, Scott, if you could register your arms as either a copyright or a trademark (which you can't), would that make them substantive in your mind?