I think I've figured out where I was getting balled up. Dodger, perhaps you can tell me if I'm right or if I'm more confused than I thought. The name, or a catch phrase, or a symbol like the Nike swish that identifies the company on its products would come under be a trademark, and is only protected on established uses (IT'S products). But, for instance, someone could sell Nike... looks around desk Veterinary Ear Cleaning Solution (don't ask) and not have a problem. (Unless the planets are aligned oddly and Nike has already claimed Vet supplies as well.) On the other hand, the artwork in a logo, such as the Harley Davidson shield or eagle, would come under copyright protection, and putting that on anything would be a no-no. Which is why, for instance, the Harley at DAZ is kosher; it has the name, which for the sake of argument we're assuming had not been previously trademarked for 3D graphics models, but it does NOT have the shield or eagle (that I can see in the ads). Am I on the right track, or should I just go take some aspirin and stop hurting my head like this?