For the past four years we’ve worked with Brand® with Tagline™. We have probably spent 80+ hours proofing and making revisions in order to make certain that the register mark and trademark appear each time the name or tagline appear. It was my understanding that the symbol only needed to be used in the first instance (per page) of that name and/or tagline—and was not required subsequently. OK this makes sense.

But my frustration with countless hours of proofing and changes has led me to ask… Do these symbols actually mean anything? Or, are they just cluttering an already jam-packed visual environment? How does this protect a name, or a tagline? Is this really going to dissuade anyone from illegally using it? It has proven difficult to combat piracy (what we people call sharing) of music, movies, software, and games… do companies actually believe they can protect their brands with these annoying little symbols of overly-litigious capitalistic consumer culture? How’s that for some triple alliteration?.

My watch has a very distinguished logo right at high-noon… let me check to see if it is protected. Huh… there is no ® mark. Maybe… that’s why a cheap copy of it is sold on Canal Street for about $40… hmmmm. I think I’m starting to see how important it is to protect the value of a brand. I get it.

OK… now that I get it… let me apply my newfound understanding.
Apple… this idea is for free. Consider it a gift for creating so many beautifully designed products that we appreciate so much.

It is a fact that Family Courts are stacked against men. Yes, I know that there is the issue of “Deadbeat-Dads” and the biological pre-programming that makes women more nurturing than the their testosterone-laden counterparts. But the courts have traditionally felt that barring alcoholism, drug addiction, prostitution, and/or extreme mental instability—children should always stay with their mother. How many fathers in custody fights have argued that—the issue is not whether “she” is a bad parent—but who is the better parent? Let’s be positive… what if the mother is a good mom, but the father is slightly better? Where do the courts stand on that situation? They probably would ask if the mother is a crack addicted prostitute—if no—mom gets the kids.

So in comes Kevin Federline. This marginal character in pop-culture… the guy that everyone thought would be “history” and a nobody (again) once Britney came to her senses. And what does he do? He wins custody of his kids. Unbelievable. Is Kevin Federline a role model for all men embroiled in custody battles? Or is Britney Speares a meth-addicted prostitute? Hmmmmm.