You should be OK.
What you have here is a classic example of a non-unique copyrighted name. Another example is "mustang". Most people probably think of the Ford Mustang however Ford does not have exclusive rights to that word. There is the mustang guitar, the Mustang Ranch, or the P-51 Mustang airplane, to name a few. Or it could just refer to the animal.
Conversely, "Viagra" is a unique copyright. It's a made up word and didn't exist before pfizer copyrighted it. You could not name a character in a book "Viagra" and expect not to get sued.
Well. . . .the "you should be OK" is good.
For your "mustang" examples, Ford may not have an exclusive use of the word mustang, but Ford has exclusive use of the word mustang to identify a car style, and Ford can prevent all others from using the word as the name for a car. Because Mustang is a Ford trademark, you must be careful how you use it, just as you have to be careful how you use
any trademark. Because Mustang has gained a secondary meaning in the marketplace to identify a type of car, it is afforded the greatest protection allowed under trademark law - as the word applies to cars.
That said, you could name a cat "Mustang" and probably not run into any problems.
The same applies to the word "Viagra." You can name a cat "Viagra" and you can use the word "Viagra" to describe the product or, as we are doing here, to identify the product we are talking about. No lawsuit
should result - although the use of any trademark in
any manner can attract the attention of the trademark holder and his lawyers and could result in a threatening letter.
No one else can name their same or similar product or service using the same or similar trademark as one already in use in commerce without legal risk, although the same or similar trademarks
can exist peacefully. Trademark law centers on consumer confusion and, if a consumer is likely to be confused by the dual use of a name, an infringement suit by the first user of the mark against the second user of the mark is also likely.
I can (probably) name a hardware store "McDonald's" without a problem but I cannot name a fast food restaurant (or really any restaurant) "McDonald's" without (great) risk of a lawsuit.
Legal actions spawned by infringement of trademarks are much different than legal actions spawned by copyrights. For one thing, there are no
statutory damages awarded under trademark law. A trademark owner could potentially prevent further use of their mark by another and a trademark owner could potentially collect money damages from the infringer. An award of monetary damages will usually depend on the amount of provable actual harm suffered by the trademark owner (provable profits made by infringer, provable losses suffered by the trademark holder). In addition, under some circumstances, there can be an award of punitive damages, fines and attorney fees.
You also have dilution of trademarks, unfair competition claims, etc., that can be filed against a trademark infringer by a trademark holder.
So, the bottom line is that Wassdeet will probably not run into any problems naming his cat character "Bellini," based strictly on what he has posted here. But he should have his children's story reviewed prior to publication to make sure he is not stepping on anyone else's rights in any way.
