Owning a trademark provides rights in the property, just as owning any other type of property. Like real property for example, other people are allowed to use your property as long as you give them permission. In the world of trademarks, a "lease" is called a "license." Some of the most successful businesses in the world have resulted from "controlled" global licensing, sometimes called franchising. "Controlled" licensing permits a third party to use the mark according to the terms of a contract made between the licensee and the trademark owner. Examples of controlled licensing are MCDONALDS and TACO BELL. The rationale behind all trademark protection is protection of the consuming public from "likelihood of confusion."<br><br>A licensing program is a very effective business strategy to build a global brand, provided proper contracts are in place protecting the mark. The licensee acquires no legal rights in the mark and use by the licensee insures to benefit the licensor. The law protects the practice of controlled licensing, so long as the licensor exercises "quality control" over the goods and services of the business. The customers of DENNY'S or MCDONALD'S from New York have the right to assume that the quality of food and service will be the same when they go to one of these restaurants containing the same mark in California.<br><br>While controlled licensing is applauded, uncontrolled can result in a complete loss of rights. Uncontrolled licensing occurs when a trademark owner allows a licensee to sell goods and services without regard to their quality. The public can be deceived since the goods and services may not only be inferior, but also may not be from the same source. A company can allow others to use their marks, but only if they maintain the right to control the quality of their licensees' goods and services. A simple example might be a distributor who, without proper contractual restrictions, might use a more famous mark to promote unrelated goods and services.<br><br>Another way rights can be lost is by granting rights in a trademark without the accompanying "good will", commonly called an "assignment in gross." Since trademarks symbolize the good will of a business (a legally protected asset in and of itself), trademarks and the good will cannot be separated. For example, provisions have recently been added to new artist recording agreements. The artist is asked to sign their rights away to ownership of domains containing the group name, without any rights of quality control in the group or right to recapture the rights upon the termination of the agreement. These types of provisions are a potential land mine for future litigation since it could be considered an assignment in gross. While these artists have retained rights to their name for live performances, they may well have made an assignment in gross of a portion of the business. Good will should remain in the owner's control with provisions for "controlled" licensing, not an outright assignment of less than the entire business.