Actually "Toyoda" is an old Japanese family in Nagoya, one member of which is the founder of Toyota. What we know as Toyota today grew from "Toyoda Automatic Loom Works" so the name wouldn't really by an issue. It would be hard to argue there is dilution here because in his case the public knows from his family name where he is from and his relation to Toyota.
http://www.bitlaw.com/trademark/dilution.html
The public already has the power to submit a request to the USPTO, to reexamine a patent; it includes submitting prior art not on the record (not already submitted by the patentee.) The procedure is called "Ex Parte Reexamination." Details about this are included in the patent examination guidelines and is actually a part of the code of federal regulations (CFR):
"37 CFR 1.510 Request for >ex parte
(a) Any person may, at any time during the period of enforceability of a patent, file a request for an ex parte reexamination by the Office of any claim of the patent* on the basis of prior art patents or printed publications cited under 1.501. The request must be accompanied by the fee for requesting reexamination set in 1.20(c)(1)."
*In US Patent Law each claim in a patent stands on its own as valid or invalid.
Unfortunately, it involves a fee (ahem, $2500. ..), which already throws it in the big-companies-with-deep-pockets sandbox. One would have to have considerable investment tied up in something to go that route (take that route if you can use the additional prior art, and even then it might be easier and quicker to divert your attention to coming up and implementing a design around.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually "Toyoda" is an old Japanese family in Nagoya, one member of which is the founder of Toyota. What we know as Toyota today grew from "Toyoda Automatic Loom Works" so the name wouldn't really by an issue. It would be hard to argue there is dilution here because in his case the public knows from his family name where he is from and his relation to Toyota. http://www.bitlaw.com/trademark/dilution.html
The public already has the power to submit a request to the USPTO, to reexamine a patent; it includes submitting prior art not on the record (not already submitted by the patentee.) The procedure is called "Ex Parte Reexamination." Details about this are included in the patent examination guidelines and is actually a part of the code of federal regulations (CFR): "37 CFR 1.510 Request for >ex parte (a) Any person may, at any time during the period of enforceability of a patent, file a request for an ex parte reexamination by the Office of any claim of the patent* on the basis of prior art patents or printed publications cited under 1.501. The request must be accompanied by the fee for requesting reexamination set in 1.20(c)(1)."
.), which already throws it in the big-companies-with-deep-pockets sandbox. One would have to have considerable investment tied up in something to go that route (take that route if you can use the additional prior art, and even then it might be easier and quicker to divert your attention to coming up and implementing a design around.
*In US Patent Law each claim in a patent stands on its own as valid or invalid.
Unfortunately, it involves a fee (ahem, $2500. .
No. I Am Not A Patet Examiner.