On Trademarks
General mountain dulcimer or music discussions
Having had zero awareness of your use of the phrase "extended range" prior to this conversation, I have used the phrase countless times to describe dulcimers with...an extended range. It is a basic description of an instrument feature, much like how "Kentucky dulcimer" denotes the region of Appalachia where a certain style was popularized and possibly originated.
It made sense to me that these words in this context, therefore, are most likely not subject to ownership, which is what was stated in response to the comment where someone claimed that you have protected rights to the phrase "extended range" as it pertains to a dulcimer. I thought that would be the end of it.
I have always and will continue to admire your dulcimers for their aesthetics and quality. You have been making beautiful and well built dulcimers for much longer than I've been alive.
Claiming ownership of the phrase "extended range dulcimer" really rubs me the wrong way, since those are just the most basic literal words that could be used to describe the function of adding extra strings to the bass end of a dulcimer. Especially when you said "you can sue someone for using your trademarked design if...it is unauthorized and infringes on your trademark rights." then said " I have done nothing but promote the dulcimer community throughout my 50 years of dulcimer building" then said "I will let your conscience guide you as to whether to leave those comments up...."
To my sensibilities, claiming ownership of basic descriptions of dulcimers and stating that you could sue others for using them, then trying to moralize that others should be ashamed of disagreeing is not a good way to promote the dulcimer community. Especially not concepts that you certainly did not invent, and by your own admission you do not '“actively and continuously” engage in commerce for' which is the legal standard you presented in this original post.