Talk:Trade name

message: :Image:Pyat rublei 1997.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 11:36, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Pyat rublei 1997.jpg

message: I removed the external links to extraneous websites. Widefox (talk) 18:42, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: I removed:
While there is no federal registration of trade names, state and federal laws do provide protection against trade name infringement. At the federal level they are regulated by the Lanham Trademark Act (15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq.). At the state level, trade names are regulated by that state's intellectual property statutes and various common-law doctrines
Which federation? Which states? Wikipedia is international.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.217.70.125 (talk) 06:42, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia is international 

message: Reading the articles "trade name" and "doing business as", they cover identical topics. Possibly the intention is that a "doing business as" name is explicitly different from the legal/registered name, whereas a "trade name" may be identical to the legal name. But if that's the difference, it merits one line in a merged article, not two articles. jnestorius(talk) 11:36, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I think a merger with re-direct is warranted. Both fail to offer a complete world-wide view of the subject that would be provided if they were combined. But I also think the legal complexity of DBA is great enough, at least in some jurisdictions, as to merit more than one line. Doing-business-as and variants seem to be the preferred term in the United States, with trading-as and variants the most common in the rest of the Anglosphere. That much is clear. But a reading of both articles also make it clear that legal recognition and official requirements vary greatly by country and within sub-national borders, and I can testify to that from my own experience of business regulation in my state. Reducing dba to one line would give the reader the impression that the American practice is less complex than it actually is. Rules governing use and registration/non-registration of DBAs vary greatly by state, and even by county and city within a state, as well as by industry type and format ("brick and mortar" vs. mail order, etc.). This article should be merged with the current DBA content intact, and if anything, expanded.Jpbrenna (talk) 19:04, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: Those sections need to go.  That issue is adequately covered elsewhere and Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NOT#DICT).  At most, there should be a See also at the bottom or a See also disambiguation note at the top. Any objections before I take out the trash? --Coolcaesar (talk) 11:59, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. Done. Snori (talk) 03:16, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Just noticed. Thank you! --Coolcaesar (talk) 01:43, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The sections on "trade name" as used in pharmaceutical nomenclature are inappropriate 

message: Aim is 182.190.208.1 (talk) 08:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nad. .e. Ali 

message: Very good morning 182.190.208.1 (talk) 08:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  But you are