The Red Devil wood processor has been in the market for decades. Its trademarks are well-known, and it’s a very popular product. However, some question the company’s rights to use the name. The company, which is a New Jersey corporation, has sued its competitors for trademark infringement.
Red Devil trademark rights
In order to protect its goodwill, a wood processor may be able to register the Red Devil trademark. This New Jersey company has been making and selling painters’ and glaziers’ tools for over 100 years. Its trademark dates back to 1902, and the company has extensive advertising campaigns in all 50 states and abroad. In recent years, the company has spent upwards of $300,000 on advertising. Its main customers are wholesale hardware stores and paint outlets.
The devil’s logo has changed over time, but it is still an iconic representation of the company. The original version, from the first half of the 20th century, does not include a pitchfork or a smile. It also does not have long fingernails and claws, but a barbed tail that forms the letter “W,” the abbreviation for William. Additionally, the lettering spits small flames. This logo is based on an older, but still iconic version of the devil, which was changed in 2008.
Tip Top Brush Co., Inc.
The Tip Top Brush Co., Inc. is a corporation in New Jersey that manufactures and sells paint brushes under various brand names and trademarks. The company was established in 1961, succeeding a former corporation of the same name based in New York. In the early 1960s, the manufacturing plant was relocated to Jersey City.
The company is headquartered in New Jersey, and also manufactures putty knives, wall scrapers, zippers to open stuck windows, and window putting tools. However, its primary business is making and selling paint brushes, under several unregistered trademarks. The company began operations in New York in 1926 and moved to New Jersey in 1961.
The acquisition of Tip Top and Essex by Beatrice violated the Clayton Act. The law prohibits a company from owning a monopoly in the production of manual paint applicators. After the acquisition, Beatrice divested its shares in Essex. In addition, it agreed to divest all paint roller facilities. Beatrice’s attorneys argued that these actions were legal and that they benefited the public.
The Commission found that Tip Top was a manufacturer of rollers and brushes. However, its products were sold directly to consumers and to others. The Commission’s order does not appear to encompass the firms that resell their products, but Commission counsel interpreted the order to cover only firms that produce rollers and brushes for the relevant lines of commerce.