--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > <snip> > > > If it WAS in common use, they couldn't have made it a trademark > > > > BTW, Transcendental Meditation couldn't be > > trademarked in the U.K. and several other > > countries precisely *because* it was > > considered to be too common a phrase. > > (Not an *everyday* phrase, certainly, but > > common enough, presumably in spiritual > > circles.) > > P.S.: I'm not suggesting that what the non-MMY > term referred was the same as TM. And come to > think of it, it isn't impossible that he stuck > in "deep" at first to distinguish what he was > teaching from whatever else was being taught or > referred to as transcendental meditation. >
Again, it was NOT a common phrase with or without deep before MMY started using it. The UK law precludes the trademarking of words that are simply descriptions of the product service, but prior to MMY, "transcendental meditation" and "transcendental deep meditation" were NOT common phrases. Show me where the Transcendentalists (for example) used either phrase. Lawson
