>That's a tough situation. My understanding is if you own a trademark, and don't take action to protect it, you can lose it.

Which seems to be true, but it is a stupid thing.

I mean, if you own something, you own it. Period.
You can't be cognizant of every single POSSIBLE infringement that may be happening 'out there' and you shouldn't have to spend good money just to protect against 'loss' of something you own. I wonder where one would go to show that a close facsimile of some trademark has been in use for years at such-and-such a place and because the owner took no action to prevent it the trademark is now lost.

I would say this may be one of those urban legends, used at some time in the past as justification for going after some petty 'misuse' of some trademark. It just doesn't make any sense to me that 'protect it or lose it' is a real fact.

cheers