Jeremy Peter Green is a fourth-generation Jewish lawyer who helps businesses protect and expand their brands as an entrepreneurship attorney.
Green has been profiled on USA Today, CNBC, CNN Money, NPR's Morning Edition, WIRED, MSNBC, the New York Daily News, HLN, CNN Politics, DCist, Vox.com, CNET, Mic.com, NBC News, Refinery29, the Globe and Mail, and several other news sources. He graduated from Northwestern University School of Law on a full scholarship.
Green is also Co-Founder, General Counsel, and a member of the Board of the DC-Maryland-Virginia App-Based Drivers Association. In addition, he serves as General Counsel and Webmaster for Teamsters Local 922, Lesbians Who Tech, and Include.io as well.
Green is a member of the For-Hire Vehicle Accessibility Advisory Committee, the group officially responsible for making policy recommendations for wheelchair accessibility in Washington, D.C.’s taxi and rideshare industries.
You may contact him at email@example.com.
The Evolution of JPG Legal as a Website
and as a Law Firm
Me editing an abandoned JPG Legal trademark page concept in late 2016.
A Good Small Firm Attorney Is a Good Web Designer
Glenn Beck writes about how I cybersquatted on ClintonKaine.com and put “Hillary Potter” fan fiction on the page.
Before then I had been contracting as the Director of Strategic Initiatives (a title I made up and got approved) at a small Department of Defense office, where I had to deal with a terrible boss, large and unpredictable gaps in my employment, and my own moral qualms about being an active participant in the genocidal military-industrial complex of a global hegemony.
Rachel Maddow discusses my Hillary Potter fanfiction on July 22, 2016, the day Clinton chose Kaine as her running mate.
JPG Legal Begins
This windfall from my quirky domain name escapade was the spur I needed to finally get myself out of that situation and strike out on my own.
JPG Legal’s website on September 28, 2016.
As you can see from the screenshot above, I had a barren website a year ago. I had just designed a logo for myself in Adobe Photoshop, and jpg.legal was simply an online listing for people who had heard about me through personal referrals and wanted to contact me. I was licensed in New York, living in Washington, D.C., and waiting for my D.C. Bar paperwork to come through, so I was uncomfortable with the idea of actively promoting myself online.
I had filed about eight trademark applications total and I was taking any work I could get, from LLC operating agreements to L-1 business visas to personal injury cases on contingency. I was also doing landlord-tenant work pro bono for anybody I met in D.C. whose landlords were trying to screw them. I worked out of a Cove co-working space that I paid $125 a month to use, a major expense for me at that time.
JPG Legal’s website on November 10, 2016.
JPG Legal’s website on November 14, 2016.
I had very few clients during those months and a ton of down time, so I tried to make good use of that free time by building out my solo practice’s website. In the screenshots above, you can see a version of jpg.legal that has more of a resemblance to the current page, but still has a long way to go.
Around that time, I found that I enjoyed trademark work and I decided it would be a good niche for finding clients online, so I focused my website development on that area of law. The background picture in the screenshots above is a photograph of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office I had grabbed from Flickr under a free-for-commercial-use license.
JPG Legal’s main page on November 15, 2016.
JPG Legal’s trademark landing page on November 21, 2016.
By late November, I had finally arrived at a website design that looked reasonably attractive and professional, and I had ditched the USPTO photograph for something that worked better for aesthetics. I had also made a separate landing page just for trademark clients, which contained an online form through which potential clients could hire me. At that point, I still hadn’t yet decided to offer a Filing-and-Monitoring-Only Package for entrepreneurs who either didn’t need or couldn’t afford a full search package.
JPG Legal’s trademark landing page on November 24, 2016.
Now I was cooking! Above you see the background image I now currently use for my trademark landing page, minus the YOU HAVE NO EXCUSE™ overlay on the iPad. You can also see that I was charging $200 for my basic package at first. If you look really closely, you can see the trademark price sheet of LegalZoom (my biggest competitor) open in one of my browser’s tabs.
I had a pretty good landing page at this point. Unfortunately, I was almost broke (even after doing a few weeks of miserable legal document review temp work), and couldn’t afford to experiment with Google Ads, so I had no way to promote my new website. Around this time, Teamsters Local Union 922 came to me and offered me a job as their new taxi union attorney and lobbyist. I gratefully took the job (on the condition that they allow me to keep running my solo practice on the side), and after my first week there I convinced them to change my title from “Attorney” to “General Counsel” (to make me a more compelling lobbyist, of course). I also built a little website for them and gave all the staff members custom email addresses at Teamsters922.com.
JPG Legal’s trademark landing page on May 2, 2017.
JPG Legal Takes Off
After four months at this job I managed to save up $5000, and then I received a $3000 advance retainer from one of my few solo practice clients. With this bankroll, I was ready to launch my Google AdWords campaign. I quickly finished building out the functionality of my website forms and I started an ad campaign in April of 2017. I was right to wait until I had saved up $8000, because I blew through almost my entire bankroll before I actually hit on a profitable ad campaign formula in May. That month or so during which I was burning through my savings and tinkering with my ads was stressful, but also a lot of fun. After that initial month, I was getting so much business that it was clear that I was going to have to transition out of my role as in-house counsel at the Teamsters.
Fortunately, I was able to work out a transition plan with them and I now still serve as outside counsel. I’m also helping to build a new labor union for Uber and Lyft drivers in my free time.
JPG Legal today (October 1, 2017).
At some point I decided my landing page still looked awkward, so I came up with the “You Have No Excuse” slogan, designed some branding for it in Photoshop, and filed a trademark application for it. I also incorporated it into the slideshow on the enormous display monitor I run with an RKM Android mini-computer in my strategically located office at the WeWork Apollo here in Northeast Washington, DC.
And there you have it! I’ve filed over 225 trademark applications so far. I never could have imagined that my firm would be taking off so quickly. Dreamed, maybe, but not imagined.
The Future of the Trademark
The Trademark Industry Is a Racket
Sometimes people ask me how my business model is profitable, or what my edge is. I find it hard to answer them without making it sound like I’m cutting corners, but the truth is that JPG Legal’s edge is simply that we’re cheaper than all of the good services and better than all of the cheap services. We’re an actual law firm that performs actual legal work while still charging as little as or less than the online “legal services” factories like LegalZoom.
The two primary trademarking models — both the traditional law firm model and the no-frills online “legal service provider” model — are rackets. Conventional lawyers are bad at client acquisition, so they tend to exploit the clients they do manage to get, billing as many hours to their clients as they can.
In reality, it simply doesn’t take much time to perform due diligence on trademarks, or to file trademark applications. However, on the other end, there are also all of these cheap, no-frills online service providers who don’t seem to be bound by any ethical obligations and who mislead people about their likelihood of success or the hidden back-end costs of their trademark applications. I’m trying to bridge that gap with my firm.
JPG Legal’s Growth, Margins, and Profitability
My growth in the past few months has been phenomenal, and I’m going to need to start hiring help soon. However, it’s very important to me that JPG Legal stay an actual law firm and not become a corporate middleman like LegalZoom. I believe that the margins are high enough at my price point to keep giving professional-level service to clients and avoid selling out; I’m going to make sure that my clients’ cases are handled by actual, knowledgeable attorneys who are employees of JPG Legal (as opposed to independent contractors).
Monthly profits in U.S. dollars since launching Google ads in April 2017.
The screenshot of my accounting spreadsheet above shows my recent monthly profits in U.S. dollars since I first finished building out my website and launched Google ads in April. This is after accounting for advertising costs ($10,000 in May, $4,500 in June, and $3,500 in July), office expenses ($1,123 in July, the month I moved into my current office), and filing fees ($5,500 in May, $7,250 in June, and $18,000 in July).
Last month, I filed about 70 trademark applications, and I’m at maybe 30% capacity. Once I reach 70% or 80% capacity, I’ll hire an associate attorney for my firm. My model is very scalable; it’s profitable enough that I could keep hiring attorneys and give them good salaries and benefits ad infinitum.
Most of my income now comes from repeat clients and referrals, so the growth is going to keep compounding. The jump from $4,500 in June to $12,000 in July, in particular, was stunning. I now find myself in the enviable position of figuring out how to scale my firm sooner than I had expected.
Trademark Websites Are Lying About the Amazon Brand Registry
How long does it take to get on Amazon’s Brand Registry?
Disclaimer: This post arguably constitutes legal advice and in a way I am your lawyer now. At the end of this post, I will no longer be your lawyer, unless I already was before.
It takes at least eight months from the time you file a U.S. trademark application to get on the Amazon Brand Registry. Apparently other online trademark services are telling people things such as, “As far as we know, Amazon will accept proof that you’ve filed your application”, at least according to some clients of mine.
This is wrong. Amazon updated their trademark rules a few months ago. If you want to protect your brand from infringers on Amazon by being on Amazon’s Brand Registry, you need a fully registered trademark.
Again, this will take at least eight months from the time you file the application. Anyone telling you otherwise is either being dishonest or, at best, willfully ignorant.
Should I Trademark My Amazon Brand?
What is the Amazon Brand Registry?
Disclaimer: This post arguably constitutes legal advice and in a way I am your lawyer now. At the end of this post, I will no longer be your lawyer, unless I already was before.
Amazon has recently changed its standards for their Brand Registry, which is the in-house trademark database they maintain for sellers. This is the main resource Amazon sellers have for stopping people who counterfeit and infringe on their brands. Indeed, I’ve been getting so many clients who sell on Amazon in the past few months that I’ve decided to make it a major part of my trademark filing practice.
Unfortunately, Amazon has made it much harder to get on their Brand Registry and stop other sellers from stealing your brand name. The roughest thing about it is that Amazon only seems to recognize trademarks that are fully registered, and not ones that are still in the process of being registered. The smallest amount of time you can hope for between filing of the application and registration of the trademark is eight months, and that’s when everything goes right.
(Nov 7 2017 UPDATE: Amazon has loosened its requirements and now also accepts stylized words as well as logos as long as they have the wording of the brand name in them.) Further, Amazon isn’t accepting logos and stylized trademarks. According to Amazon, “the Mark Drawing Type must be equal to ‘4 – STANDARD CHARACTER MARK’ or ‘1 – TYPESET WORD(S)/LETTER(S)/NUMBER(S).” So anybody who has a registered logo trademark, even if the logo has the name of the brand in it, is ineligible for the Brand Registry.
Is it worth going through the whole trademarking process?
It’s definitely worth it for Amazon sellers to file trademark applications for their brands. Having the power to kick counterfeiters and infringers off of Amazon is massive, and arguably essential, for an Amazon seller. I’ve even had a couple of clients who are in the unfortunate position of having to fight a counterfeiter or brand infringer who filed a USPTO trademark application before the legitimate seller filed their own. Now they are mired in long-term legal struggles just to have the right to use their own brand name.
So yes, if you sell products on Amazon, you should trademark your brand. The sooner a seller files an application, the better, before a Chinese-owned LLC registered in Wyoming files one first. I’m biased, but I recommend hiring JPG Legal (my law firm), using our online form, to do this.
Are Negligence and Recklessness
the Same Thing?
Negligence v. Recklessness
I frequently see people use the terms “negligence” and “recklessness” interchangeably, including people with legal training. The difference between recklessness and negligence — particularly criminal or gross negligence — can be subtle. While both terms refer to the accidental causation of harm, they are indeed different things.
A negligent person fails to exercise the care that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in similar circumstances. The person does not know that their action is likely to harm somebody in that situation, but the accident is still at least partially the negligent person’s fault because a reasonably careful person would not cause the same result, or would make the result significantly less likely. Negligence can make somebody liable for civil damages in a lawsuit, but most negligent acts don’t warrant jail time in the US.
Example: A driver who stops at a crosswalk with a stop sign, looks briefly around, and then accelerates their car and hits a jogging pedestrian who has just started crossing, is probably negligent without being criminally or grossly negligent. The driver thinks they aren’t endangering anybody when they accelerate, maybe even reasonably so, but a prudent person in the same situation would either check more carefully before accelerating, or would recognize that their reflexes are not good enough to be driving a car. The pedestrian or the pedestrian’s estate will probably be entitled to monetary compensation for this accident, but the negligent driver is unlikely to face jail time.
A criminally negligent person shows such an unacceptable lack of foresight and causes such a bad result by committing the negligent act — usually another person’s death, or harm to a child the person is responsible for —
that society deems the person’s action worthy of serious criminal punishment.
Example: A driver sees a red light 20 feet ahead at a fairly busy urban intersection, glances around and establishes to their own satisfaction that nobody is about to cross the street, and then hits a crossing pedestrian after failing to stop or slow down at the red light. While the driver might be considered reckless in harsher states or non-criminally negligent in more lenient states, I believe the most accurate term for this accident is criminal negligence. The driver genuinely believes they are not endangering anybody, but a driver exhibiting even a basic level of care would avoid that accident by either stopping at the red light, or at least doing a better job of establishing that no pedestrians are about to cross the street. The driver might go to jail if the pedestrian is killed or badly hurt. This accident might be considered gross negligence as well.
A reckless person knows that an act has an unacceptably high chance of harming or killing others, but disregards that danger and commits the act anyway.
Example: A driver notices a red light at a bustling downtown intersection out of the corner of their eye, but is too absorbed in a novel to bother stopping or even looking around for pedestrians. Instead, the driver pushes harder on the gas petal because they are kind of hungry and want to get home faster. This driver is not just negligent, but reckless. The driver knows that speeding through a red light at a busy intersection creates a large risk to the lives of others, but the endangerment of others’ lives carries little to no weight in the driver’s decision-making.
A grossly negligent person commits an act without technically being aware of the risk to others’ lives, but the lack of awareness is so unacceptable and inexcusable that it would be recklessness if an ordinary person committed the act. Gross negligence overlaps with criminal negligence, and many acts that involve one also involve the other, but they are separate concepts. A person can be criminally negligent without being grossly negligent, and a person can be grossly negligent without being criminally negligent.
Example: A driver stops at a crosswalk with a stop sign, looks around thoroughly, and sees no pedestrians except magician David Blaine, who is about the cross the street. The driver screams, covers his eyes, and accelerates his car because he genuinely believes that David Blaine is a malicious and invulnerable demon. He is probably grossly negligent rather than reckless; he does not disregard the risk to human life in this situation because he truly believes that David Blaine is both invulnerable and non-human, meaning that there is no significant risk to human life for the driver to regard or disregard. While the driver should have known he was creating a significant danger to others, he technically didn’t, even though almost any other person would have known and therefore been reckless if they had done the same thing.
Negligence Vs. Recklessness Can Be Purely About Mentality
Another example in contrast with the reckless driver described earlier: If a driver speeds through a red light at a busy intersection without looking because he reasonably believes that his apartment is being robbed and he wants to get there before the burglar escapes with all of his material possessions, that driver is probably not reckless. Rather than disregarding the significant risk to human lives, this driver probably regards that risk substantially and decides that the risk to pedestrians is outweighed by the increased chance of saving all of his possessions. A prudent person would regard the risk to human lives and err in favor of safety, while a reckless person would disregard the risk to human lives as trivial. This driver was neither prudent nor reckless; he was negligent.
This post arguably constitutes legal advice and in a way I am your lawyer now. If my answer turns out to be wrong and something horrible happens as a result, remember that I cannot go to jail for it because it would at worst be negligence, like I said in the answer. At the end of this sentence, I will not be your lawyer anymore, unless I already was before.
The Trademark Industry Is a Racket Sometimes people ask me how my business model is profitable, or what my edge is. I find it hard to answer them without making it sound like I’m cutting corners, but the truth is that JPG Legal’s edge is simply that we’re cheaper than all of the good services and better than all of the cheap services. We’re an actual law firm that performs actual legal work while still […]
How long does it take to get on Amazon’s Brand Registry? Disclaimer: This post arguably constitutes legal advice and in a way I am your lawyer now. At the end of this post, I will no longer be your lawyer, unless I already was before. It takes at least eight months from the time you file a U.S. trademark application to get on the Amazon Brand Registry. Apparently other online trademark services are telling […]
What is the Amazon Brand Registry? Disclaimer: This post arguably constitutes legal advice and in a way I am your lawyer now. At the end of this post, I will no longer be your lawyer, unless I already was before. Amazon has recently changed its standards for their Brand Registry, which is the in-house trademark database they maintain for sellers. This is the main resource Amazon sellers have for stopping people who counterfeit and […]
Negligence v. Recklessness I frequently see people use the terms “negligence” and “recklessness” interchangeably, including people with legal training. The difference between recklessness and negligence — particularly criminal or gross negligence — can be subtle. While both terms refer to the accidental causation of harm, they are indeed different things. Negligence A negligent person fails to exercise the care that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in similar circumstances. The person does not know […]