Loading...
Answers
MenuWhen is the best time to trademark a logo or name? Does the order matter? We are launching our beta site in a few weeks. Should we do it now or wait?
This question has no further details.
Answers
The answer is: as soon as possible. Trademarks can take 1-2 years before you go through the entire process. You can apply for a trademark yourself on the USTPO site. Might help to have a lawyer or paralegal help you if you are inexperienced. A simple filing costs a few hundred in fees depending on the nature of the filing. (not legal advice).
Here's the simple rule: you want to be the first person on the planet to realize that there is value to your brand, at which point you should trademark it.
A trademark is like a gun: much better to have one and never need it than to need it and not have it.
To determine if you should trademark your brand, you should visualize that you have built a successful business around your brand. Everything is just the way you hoped it would be. And then ask yourself 3 questions:
1. Would it be worth fighting in court if you were to receive a demand letter from a lawyer representing someone else and claiming that THEY own your brand, and that you should immediately rebrand?
2. Would it be worth fighting in court if you were to see your competitor use YOUR brand to advertise THEIR stuff?
3. Would there be any value to your brand if you were to sell, license or franchise out your business?
If your answer to ANY of these 3 questions is YES, trademark your brands ASAP. It will be the cheapest brand insurance you have ever had.
Hi! I'm Humberto Valle, serial entrepreneur/international coach and MBA.
The order itself doesn't matter. Why you want to do first is test the brand value with your market. See how well they engage with:
1. Lifestyle proposition
2. Design & Color
3. Copy (wording if you have words or phrase in your logo and branding)
Propose that value to your market along with your product, how well does that engage? Often times the logos suck just on design or copy and often too they just promote the wrong sense of value nothing in relation to the product or mission of the company.
A logo or brand itself can be associated with literally anything you want- once you spend a ton of money and resources in marketing this brand alongside a product. The Nike logo could of been for a dishwasher but due to ton of marketing the logo grew in value as it piggy backed the success of the shoe wear. Now the logo in itself it worth millions if not billions. The key is to realize that a logo doesn't make a brand, the lifestyle and community it brings together does. If you're bootstrapping it, hold on to this as it can be pricey and distract you from what matters at the beginning.
Happy 'Trepping
Humberto Valle
www.Unthink.me
I've founded a few startups over the years, and as a glutton for punishment I'm doing it again now. I've not trademarked anything for any of them though, and here's why.
As you doubtless already know, startups are really hard. If you're just going into beta you will have more than enough work on your hands just managing your test, and when you do get free time you should be spending that on new tech and features for your site.
All this assumes that you're a small bootstrapping team of hackers of course. If you have enough time and money, it might be an avenue worth considering, but even then over 90% of startups fail, so you'll be trademarking something that might not even exist in 12 months.
At the end of the day your logo and name really don't matter as much as your product, which really doesn't matter as much as your passion. Focus on quality and traction and you'll build a successful business.
I'd be happy to schedule a call and talk more through it - just let me know.
The answer will depend on whether you have actually started using the logo to sell goods and services or if you'd like to make your claim on the mark and begin using it in the near future. The process itself can take anywhere from 4-24 months, depending on the strength of the mark and whether there are any objections filed.
The order doesn't matter.
Before you trademark the name, which is moderately expensive, let's take a look at the brand name / domain and ensure that it's really the identity / web address you'd ideally be married to for the next 5+ years.
Quite possibly the name you're working with is perfect for you. But it's worth scheduling a checkup with an expert while your site is in beta. I can give you a green light or point out issues if there are any.
Even if the brand name is ideal, your domain might not be the best implementation of that brand name. And even when the domain and brand name match closely, there can be other domain-related risks from which a trademark won't necessarily protect you.
I don't want to scare you unduly about the name. Just take that "car" to a "mechanic" before you go on a gigantic "road trip" with your startup site, including advertising costs, trademark, etc. Have it looked at.
You'll be doing it after beta, for the simple reason that it takes months, more like 18+ months. No sweat because market validation is most important. Good luck!
Focus on validating your idea and finding partners that will provide you with good feedback and case studies. That will be more valuable when going to market.
I'd like to offer a different perspective from someone who's started a company, launched it, trademarked and lived to regret it!
1. Consider what happens if you have to rebrand for some reason? You spend all that money trademarking and then you have to spend the money all over again because something happens along the way and your trademark has no value anymore. In my case, we discovered that we had a much bigger audience for our products than we originally modeled and the name of our company and product (and trademark protection) was for a name that men wouldn't ever buy (original products were designed exclusively for women and then the men came calling). We had to rebrand out entire company which cost thousands and then go through all the expense of trademarking again.
2. For most startups, money is scarce and you are going to need every dollar you can find to be able to get your company up and running and pay for your operating expenses. Spending money at this stage on protecting something that currently has little to no value is a waste of money in my opinion because if you don't have enough money to operate and grow your business, your trademark will have no value.
3. Most important, in my opinion, think about how much it's going to cost you to defend that trademark in the event there is an infringement. Do you want to spend your money defending your trademark OR on growing your business.
4. It's easy for people who don't have any "skin in the game" to advise about what to do in this situation and I mean no disrespect by that, but it's YOU that has to write the check for everything your business does and you're on the hook if you fail because you run out of money so you have to make the tough decisions about what you're going to spend your money on because you can't do everything at this stage.
5. Most of the comments pertain to situations where you have value in the company and the brand and trademark and you have growth in the company that makes it worth it to have a trademark because it's something that can be licensed but keep in mind, the only way you get to licensing your trademark is if you have a lot of name recognition that can be leveraged by a bigger company that would benefit from licensing your trademark. So, again, you need to keep your money to grow your business to a point where you have wider name recognition and most important, a lot of revenue. Of course, there is a risk of someone coming along and trademarking your name, but at this early stage, it's highly unlikely because you aren't showing any financial value in the market. Remember, you can ways do it at a later date when it's justified.
6. This is all just my opinion.
Related Questions
-
Business partner I want to bring on will invest more money than me, but will be less involved in operations, how do I split the company?
Cash money should be treated separately than sweat equity. There are practical reasons for this namely that sweat equity should always be granted in conjunction with a vesting agreement (standard in tech is 4 year but in other sectors, 3 is often the standard) but that cash money should not be subjected to vesting. Typically, if you're at the idea stage, the valuation of the actual cash going in (again for software) is anywhere between $300,000 and $1m (pre-money). If you're operating in any other type of industry, valuations would be much lower at the earliest stage. The best way to calculate sweat equity (in my experience) is to use this calculator as a guide: http://foundrs.com/. If you message me privately (via Clarity) with some more info on what the business is, I can tell you whether I would be helpful to you in a call.TW
-
How much equity should I ask as a C-level executive in a new startup ?
As you may suspect, there really isn't a hard and fast answer. You can review averages to see that a CEO typically becomes a major shareholder in a startup, but your role and renumeration will be based on the perceived value you bring to the organization. You value someone's contribution through equity when you think that they will be able to add long-term benefits, you would prefer that they don't move company part way through the process, and to keep them from being enticed by a better salary (a reason for equity tied to a vesting arrangement). Another reason is when the company doesn't have salary money available but the potential is very strong. In this situation you should be especially diligent in your analysis because you will realize that even the best laid plans sometimes fall completely short. So to get the best mix, you have to be very real about the company's long-term growth potential, your role in achieving it, and the current liquidity necessary to run the operations. It should also be realized that equity needs to be distributed. You cannot distribute 110% and having your cap table recalculated such that your 5% turns into 1% in order to make room for the newly hired head of technology is rather demotivating for the team. Equity should be used to entice a valuable person to join, stay, and contribute. It should not be used in leu of salary that allows an employee to pay their bills. So, like a lot of questions, the answer is really, it depends. Analyzing the true picture of your long-term potential will allow you to more easily determine the correct mix.DH
-
How do I hire a good Copywriter?
Kudos to you for seeing the value in great copy. I love that you mentioned 37signals, which is an organization that's made copywriting part of almost everyone's jobs (or so they've shared on their blog). MailChimp and Zendesk are two others that people often point to re: great copy that builds a brand and differentiates; Groupon is another awesome example of really, really tonal copy that people actually read (which is more than half the battle). MailChimp has in-house copywriters, including Kate Kiefer (https://twitter.com/katekiefer), and so does Groupon. I'm not sure who writes for Dropbox or Zendesk, though searching companies on LinkedIn can often reveal little-known in-house geniuses. The startups you mention have a certain style and tone that I have to say is different from what you'll normally get with a "direct response" copywriter, though by all means check out the link David Berman submitted to you because you never know. I recommend that, to achieve the slightly funky, funny-ish copy you're looking for, you seek out a conversion-focused copywriter with a creative and UX background. You need someone who's totally at ease adopting a new voice / tone and using it appropriately across your site and in your emails; less experienced copywriters might be heavy-handed with the tone, which often gets in the way of the user experience (e.g., button copy that's tonal can lead to confusion). Be careful, of course, not to push your writer to be exceptionally creative -- because a little touch of tone goes a loooong way for busy, scanning eyes. Here are some great freelance copywriters you could consider: http://copyhackers.com/freelance-copywriters-for-hire/ The link to Neville's Kopywriting peeps is also great. Before hiring, ask to see a portfolio or get a) links to websites they've written and b) a zip of emails they've written; if a writer is accepting clients, they'll usually showcase their work on their website. Check out their blog and tweets to see if their voice comes through in their own writing. Don't hire bloggers or content creators for a job a copywriter should do. Don't hire print copywriters for web work unless they do both. And when you find a great copywriter, trust them... and don't let them go - because 10 bucks says, they're in demand or about to be.JW
-
For every success story in Silicon Valley, how many are there that fail?
It all depends on what one decides to be a definition of a "success story." For some entrepreneurs, it might be getting acqui-hired, for some -- a $10M exit, for some -- a $200M exit, and for others -- an IPO. Based on the numbers I have anecdotally heard in conversations over the last decade or so, VCs fund about 1 in 350 ventures they see, and of all of these funded ventures, only about 1 in 10 become really successful (i.e. have a big exit or a successful IPO.) So you are looking at a 1 in 3500 chance of eventual venture success among all of the companies that try to get VC funding. (To put this number in perspective, US VCs invest in about 3000-3500 companies every year.) In addition, there might be a few others (say, maybe another 1-2 in every 10 companies that get VC investments) that get "decent" exits along the way, and hence could be categorized as somewhat successful depending on, again, how one chooses to define what qualifies as a "success story." Finally, there might also be companies that may never need or get around to seeking VC funding. One can, of course, find holes in the simplifying assumptions I have made here, but it doesn't really matter if that number instead is 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10000. The basic point being made here is just that the odds are heavily stacked against new ventures being successful. But that's also one of the distinguishing characteristics of entrepreneurs -- to go ahead and try to bring their idea to life despite the heavy odds. Sources of some of the numbers: http://www.nvca.org/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ven... https://www.pwcmoneytree.com/MTP... http://paulgraham.com/future.html Here are others' calculations of the odds that lead to a similar conclusion: 1.Dear Entrepreneurs: Here's How Bad Your Odds Of Success Are http://www.businessinsider.com/startup-odds-of-success-2013-5 2.Why 99.997% Of Entrepreneurs May Want To Postpone Or Avoid VC -- Even If You Can Get It http://www.forbes.com/sites/dileeprao/2013/07/29/why-99-997-of-entrepreneurs-may-want-to-postpone-or-avoid-vc-even-if-you-can-get-it/MB
-
A tech startup fully outsourced. What problems would be in this situation?
The ideal way would be to hire the engineer while the project is still under development. You and the engineer should follow up with the outsourced partner in the process. This will give hold to the engineer and later more staff can be trained in upgrading or follow on versions of the product/service.SM
the startups.com platform
Copyright © 2025 Startups.com. All rights reserved.