I’m sure this question has been asked before and, if so, my apologies:
In what ways and to what extend may an individual’s arms be used for / incorporated into the arms or logo of a Private Business said armiger owns?
Carl Alexander Roth;100889 wrote:
I’m sure this question has been asked before and, if so, my apologies:
In what ways and to what extend may an individual’s arms be used for / incorporated into the arms or logo of a Private Business said armiger owns?
They may be used as the armiger wishes, but be aware that if you make your arms your trademark and then sell the company (or, God forbid, go bankrupt), you are likely to find that your arms are now the property of the new owner.
Second Joe’s caveat. You might consider differencing your personal arms in some way for company use to avoid losing them altogether in case of change of ownership.
You could just design new arms for the business. Any excuse for a new design project :D
(If you do design arms for your business, could you then impale your personal arms with those of the business as its owner?)
You could just design new arms for the business. Any excuse for a new design project :D
(If you do design arms for your business, could you then impale your personal arms with those of the business as its owner? That way you don’t risk "commercializing" your private arms, but you still get to use them in connection with the endeavor.)
steven harris;100900 wrote:
You could just design new arms for the business. Any excuse for a new design project :D
(If you do design arms for your business, could you then impale your personal arms with those of the business as its owner?)
It doesn’t seem like impaling the arms would be kosher since that isn’t the purpose of impaling.
J. Stolarz;100904 wrote:
It doesn’t seem like impaling the arms would be kosher since that isn’t the purpose of impaling.
What is? (Socratic question.)
Impalement of a man’s arms with his wife’s originally signified that he was the owner of her property. Impalement with the arms of an office signifies that he owns the office. The English common law defined an office as a type of property. Even though the founding fathers rejected that theory, the historic concept is still reflected in the use in letters patent of appointment to civil office the same core legal formula used in land deeds: "to have and to hold the said [office or tract of land] unto him the said [grantee] for [however long]."
So the same logic would apply, I believe, to ownership of a business. Although I personally wouldn’t do it.