Introduction
Many people have raised questions about the role of a name, be it in a person, place, or organization. While the majority of them think that a name does not matter and that institutions or people are free to use any name of their choice, the case differs when it comes to business. A business name is crucial for the effective branding of business ventures. It is a unique identifier of a particular business. For a business to move on and create a big brand name, it must begin by having a great business name. Nevertheless, what does the law say when it comes to getting a business name? Are businesspersons free to use any name of their choice in their businesses?
Having a business name is the first step towards marketing and growing a business. However, various challenges come into play when one is naming his or her company. A company must produce a name that is not misleading, inappropriate, and offensive. The name must be easy to recall, it should not mislead clients on the goods or services that are offered. Customers and the community should also not be offended by the name. A good business name will therefore require research and understanding of the community around the location of the business. According to Norambuena (2012: 118), the branding person must understand the language of the people, as well as how they interpret words and symbols.
Such knowledge will enable the business to choose a name that is not offensive to the people. An appropriate name will fit well with the consumer’s needs. It will also score high on consumer liking and identifying with it. A good business name is creative and does not limit itself to certain boundaries unless it is very specific in its reach. The name is also appropriately short and easy to remember. There has been confusion in developing good business names. Some names have been so long, offensive, inappropriate in their setting. Following these challenges, the business names registration act 2011 was established with the sole agenda of curbing the vices as addressed in the study.
The Business Names Registration Act 2011
According to Morgan, Kathrine, and Rosanne (2011: 24), the business registration act 2011 was put in place on November 3, 2011, to ensure strict adherence to the national registration scheme that has the authority to guarantee that all businesses that are not operating under their actual entity names have registered their names and other details. Registration is done nationally. It ensures that everyone doing business with such a company can know the business by name and the people behind it. The Act also ensures that businesses are registered under names that are not offending the community or people from the area in which it is operating. Business registration Act 2011 also ensures that the names that businesses use and are registered by are appropriate.
It enables the distinctiveness of the operators of business to be easily identified. Every business is required to acquire the Australian Business Number (ABN) before it is fully registered. According to Partridge (2013: 36), the acquisition of a unique business number at the national level will ensure a slow elimination of the previous territory business numbers that have been limiting the scope of businesses. Morgan, Kathrine, and Rosanne (2011: 24) point out how the ABN enables securities to track down the entity behind the business in case of any business misconduct. The ABN contains both the name and the number of the owners of the business in full.
Each business number in Australia is unique. No single business that is registered with a number has been issued to another business. Unique business numbers, as provided for by the Act, have enabled registration authorities to register businesses across states. It is, therefore, possible to have businesses that carry out similar businesses though having different identification numbers. Numbers are also easy to handle. Instead of using a long and cumbersome name, a business number is shorter and easier to use. It is also the mandate of the Act to oversee the registration of names that are proper for the suctions that the business undertakes.
Through the business registration Act 2011, the government can ensure that businesses do not use misleading names. Some names that businesses adopt mislead the public about the services and items they offer. Over the years, companies have used deceptive names to attract customers. In such cases, businesses register using names that depict their values and mission only to practice a contrary agenda.
For example, companies are registered as Christian organizations only to hide their identity from those who want to trade with them. Such companies then end up practicing fraud and other business vices. It was also realized that some companies that operated with the names of Non-Governmental Organisations had such names that triggered their ease of getting funds from donors. These businesses would then trade with the goods and funds that they received as donations. Such actions are against business ethics. Business Act 2011 would therefore ensure that misleading names are not registered as company names.
According to Waterhouse (1999), the process of registering a business in Australia involves a thorough application procedure where the applicant for the business registration is required to submit various documents. Such documents include the owner’s identification number and the business number of the particular business. It is also a requirement of the Business names and registration Act 2011 that the applicant for business registration provides a clear description of the location of the business. Sometimes, the registration officials visit the site of the business to verify the information provided by the applicant. According to Partridge (2013: 36), details on the location of the business make it easier for the business to be traced, and even for the customers and investors to locate it.
The Act also allows for investigations and scrutiny of business names and the actual owners of businesses to ensure that there is congruency between the name and the business itself. The Act paves the way for investigation and searching of the registration database to ensure that the name that a certain business uses is accurate. The business registration Act has also created a new business register that has eliminated compliance and difficulties that emanate from business registration in various territories. It has enabled businesses to register only once. The other purpose of the Business registration Act 2011 is to ensure that it creates a register for all businesses in the nation.
Cerviñlo and Cubillo (2004: 463) argue that a national register ensures that the inconveniences that people went through when registering businesses are eliminated. There existed various obstacles in the process of registering businesses in Australia. Such barriers and compliances to meet were majorly experienced when registering businesses in various states of territories and states in Australia. According to Waterhouse (1999), Australian states had different regulations. Therefore, carrying out any business across them was almost impossible. The business registration Act 2011 was therefore a remedy to regulate business registration to ensure similarity in compliance.
With the Act in place, business registration across all the six states in Australia is now similar. The Act has therefore ensured that, once a business is registered at the national level, it can carry out its mandated functions across the nation. Business registration Act 2011 ensures the elimination of individual territory regulation measures in business registration. Lopes and Casson (2012: 287) affirm how it has therefore become possible for businesses to register only once and operate in many states in Australia. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) is therefore controlling national registration. The legislature of Australia plays an oversight role in ensuring that the mandate of the Act is properly implemented.
Through the consent of the business registration Act 2011, the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) is given authority to cancel identical business. Cerviñlo and Cubillo (2004: 463) affirm that the Act works in conjunction with Business Names Determination 2011 in ensuring that there is no duplication of names registered in the territories with the names registered at the national level. Suter (2009: 409) asserts that the business names and registration Act were meant to replace various business registration Acts that had been enacted in different states in the previous years.
For example, it replaced the Business Names Act 1962, Business names Act 1962 (TAS), Business names Act 1963 (ACT), and Business Names Act 1996 (SA). The Business Registration Act 2011, therefore, ensured that all the supporting laws to the territory Acts were discredited. The country was therefore able to have a similar business identifier that was applicable in all the states of Australia. One can therefore argue that the business registration Act 2011 also unites people and various territories in Australia. All these are the purposes of the Business registration Act 2011.
This Act, which is administered by the national treasury, was passed by the parliament of Australia to ensure proper identification of business entities, and to eliminate inconveniences of business names that were previously caused by laws of various territories within Australia. There were other reasons that the Australian parliament had in establishing and passing the business registration and regulation Act. Such reasons included avoiding the confusion of identical business names by making sure that ambiguous business names were not registered. The other reason was to make sure that undesirable business names were not registered in Australia.
For example, names that were offensive to the culture of Australia did not find their way into the registration books. The parliament of Australia has the duty of defending the people (customers) of Australia from being deluded. The legislators, therefore, enacted the business name and registration Act 2011 to ensure that businesses used appropriate names. The parliament then mandated the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) to oversee the implementation of the Act. Suter (2009: 409) affirms that the (ASIC) therefore plays a supervisory role in the implementation of the Business names and registration Act 2011 in all the territories of Australia.
The (AISIC) operates in every state to ensure that there is uniformity in business names and registration in Australia. Such uniformity and compliance ensure that various states of Australia are united. Conducting businesses across various states in Australia is also made easy and possible. However, one would wish to know it helps in avoiding misleading names. The next section unravels the puzzle.
How does it help to prevent misleading, inappropriate, and offensive names?
The business and registration Act 2011 was a necessary venture in the conduct of businesses in Australia. Through the Act, the confusion that existed in business names registration has been eliminated. According to Lopes and Casson (2012: 290), before the enactment of the Act, businesses were limited by territorial names from conducting businesses outside their states. This limitation was big to economic growth in Australia.
Businesses were required to undergo a tedious registration process in different states to be allowed to conduct businesses. Other companies conducted businesses using disingenuous names. Some businesses would use names to deceive customers about their values and concerns for the environment and social good (Coutrelis, & Corre 2011: 118). For example, businesses that trade in cigarettes and alcohol would use names that make the customer perceive them as health-friendly businesses. Such misleading names have been eliminated through the application of the business names and registration Act 2011.
The Act requires the mandated authority in business names and registration to scrutinize the business being registered before issuing a name. Upton (2011: 163) asserts that, if a business uses a deceptive name, it is deregistered completely besides being authorized to close its entire business branches. The enactment of the Business names and registration Act 2011 was therefore of great importance in ensuring that businesses are conducted under the most appropriate names. Before a business is registered the applicant is now required by the Act to provide proper and sufficient acknowledgments on the business entity by making it mandatory for the applicant to acquire a business number that acts as a more advanced identity of the business entity in the whole nation as hinted before.
According to Aboulian and Charnley (2007: 108), the appropriateness of the name is also evaluated through the kind of business that the applicant wants to conduct. If the name is not appropriate for a particular business, it is not registered. Before the enactment of the business names and registration Act 2011, various businesses conducted their affairs with the wrong names. For instance, some businesses that had a national reach had registered themselves in localized names such as names of states.
Such geographical limitations also acted as hindrances to the scope of businesses for such victim entities. The registrars of businesses, therefore, have to ensure that they play an advisory role to business registration applicants. In Australia, businesses are therefore registered under the most appropriate names for them in the conduct of business. Flaherty (2010: 152) argues that, although the act dictates that the name of the business must not necessarily depict the product or service that the business offers, it makes the applicants use the right names for the right businesses.
According to Vixie (2011: 38), the appropriateness of the business names and registration Act 2011 is that it has been able to ensure that businesses do not use odious names. Previously, before the Act was enacted, various businesses in Australia conducted businesses under distasteful names that could not be acceptable by certain communities since they targeted much on offending the communities or their (communities’) businesses. According to Howard (2010: 8), offensive names were found to violate the spirit of liberty in the conduct of business in Australia. The Act has also enabled business ventures to avoid the use of arrogant names (Vixie 2011: 38).
Such business names are no longer registered today. It is also the mandate of the ASIC to ensure national cohesion. Names that appear nasty to some regions and that seem to target certain groups negatively in the country are not registered. Through the business names and registration Act 2011, the ASIC has been able to foster national unity in Australia. Therefore, ASIC has the sole duty to protect the dignity and integrity of business conduct in Australia.
According to Flaherty (2010: 152), before a business is registered, the ASIC conducts a thorough search on the register to ensure that there is no other identical name. Business name applicants are also discouraged from using closely related business names to avoid confusion. Before the enactment of the Business names and registration Act 201, there was much confusion in the choice of names. Some names issued at the state level were duplicated in other states.
For example, businesses were named after historical occurrences such as ‘the new millennium’. Others were named after time for example ‘December hotel’ while others were named after animals. All these businesses had similar names in different states. Such a coincidence of names has been eliminated. Many businesses also had a crush on the use of marketing words like new, fresh, best, for you, extra, free, and classic. Sweeney (2012: 6) affirms that the coincidence of names has therefore been eliminated using the Business names and registration Act 2011. The Act literary ensures that no business is registered under a similar name to the other. It is through searching and scrutiny that the Act ensures that businesses get unique names.
The business names and registration Act 2011 gives the minister in charge of business registration the authority to determine whether a business name is desirable or undesirable. The Act dictates that business names should depict the true spirit of unity of the Australian populace. Business names must therefore be attractive to the people of all states in Australia. The names should not put off some people. The Act ensures that all names are pleasing to all Australians.
According to Coutrelis and Corre (2011: 116), business names should not limit businesses to certain regions. Rather, they should reflect the diversity of the Australian people. It is out of such factors that the business names and registration Act 2011 mandate the minister with the responsibility of determining whether the names in the business applications are as per the provision of the Act. Abelian and Charnley (2007: 107) affirm that, if the names deviate from the Act’s provisions, the minister cancels them or refuses to register the business until the applicant comes up with an appropriate name.
It is a requirement of the business names and registration Act 2011 that businesses make their names public. Sweeney (2012: 6) confirms that business names are supposed to be properly displayed where the business is operating. Proper display of a business name ensures that the activities carried out by the particular business are easily identified. Businesses should be responsible for their actions. It is the responsibility of every business to be registered, and after registration make the name known to the public. Businesses should also be easy to recognize through their products. The quality of certain business products should be synonymous with it.
Business name and registration Act 2011 ensures that, in every product that comes from a certain registered business, there is a business name inscribed in it. The business trademark and patents should also be visible to the customer (Bowers (2011: 1310). Publication of business names enables customers to have a preference when buying products. If a certain business offers poor quality products or products that are below the required standards, customers should be able to identify them by such products. The act makes it mandatory for businesses to display their names on their products and services. Gardner (2012: 319) affirms that the name of a business is part of the business identity.
The products that come from a particular business are also part of the business identity. A business should be easily identified through its products. The color and artifacts of a company should be part of the corporate identity of the business. When customers see these features of business identity, they should be able to link them with a certain business entity. In addition, Upton (2011: 163) affirms that publicizing a business name also makes the business benefit by having its name common in the mind of the customers. Publication of the business name is part of business advertising (Marinković, 2012: 30). Business name enables personal and direct selling easier.
When one is doing personal selling, it becomes easier if the target customer is already aware of the business venture. Registration of businesses makes it impossible for fraudsters to use a registered name to carry out their actions. Bowers (2011: 1309) affirms that, under the business name and registration Act 2011, a business name is issued only to one company in the whole nation. It would therefore mean that, if another organization or business entity operates in a similar name, it is fake and fraudulent.
It, therefore, becomes easier for investigation departments to nub the fraudsters. For example, various fraudulent business entities have been easily discovered when they make fake cigarettes and market them in the guise of British American Tobacco Ltd (BAT). According to Norambuena (2012: 119), the unique identifiers of the business enable investigators to nub fake products. It is due to the above factors that the business names should be properly publicized.
The requirement that business names and identities be properly displayed also enables customers to spot products that come from a certain business. When customers gain the ability to identify products of a certain business, it becomes very difficult for them to buy fake ones of a similar type. Briggs (2012: 21) affirms that customers will know the unique features of products made or supplied through a certain business entity. Such identification is through names, business numbers, trademarks, color, and packaging. The design of packaging and display is also an identifier of a business entity.
Marinković (2012: 29) posits that, when a business name is made public, many people know it across a wide area. When businesses advertise their products and or make their names popular, customers and investors can classify them. Other entrepreneurs and business people also realize that such business names exist and that they cannot operate individual businesses or corporations with similar names Briggs (2012: 21) since other names have been similar because the originator of the name did not publicize it. Some business names become coincidental because they have seasonal names or names of popular language.
With such names, it is therefore easy for the names to be duplicated in a variety of businesses. According to Briggs (2012: 21), the publication of a new business name makes it possible for others to learn about it and thus avoid it when naming their businesses. One can therefore argue that the requirements of the business names and registration Act 2011 have enabled businesses to acquire unique business names.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the above argument has made it clear that the registration and management of business names aim at averting chances of registering deceptive names, being out of place, and distasteful, and to afford a business with an exceptional name. One of such registration and regulation measures that have been implemented in the business world is the Business names and registration Act 2011. The act was enacted by the parliament of Australia in the year 2011 to regulate business names. Through the business names and regulation Act 2011, Australia has been able to achieve unique names for its businesses.
The country has also been able to achieve unique business numbers for businesses across its various states. According to Howard (2010: 8), the Act has also been able to unite various states in Australia by eliminating the differences and confusion that previously existed in the registration of businesses. Businesses across various territories in Australia can have a similar point of registration. The business name and registration Act 2011 also mandated the ASIC to implement its recommendations. Bowers (2011: 1309) affirms that businesses in Australia have no cases of duplication of business names due to scrutiny and thorough search of both business names and numbers that are guaranteed by the Act. It is also due to proper business names and registration that the use of offensive names has been reduced in Australia.
Names that are not desirable have also been eliminated in the field of businesses through the business registration and regulation Act. No names are targeted at certain groups or regions. Through the registration of business names, Australia has also achieved its national cohesion goals. Gardner (2012: 319) affirms that the business names and registration Act have also enabled Australia to register the most appropriate names in businesses.
It is through business names and registration that the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) has been able to offer business advice to businesspersons. Business name applicants are also advised on how to choose names that are not limiting in nature. The Act has also made it mandatory for business names to be made public to lessen the likelihood of duplication. For that reason, Businesses have managed to get names that are not inappropriate, misleading, and offensive through the help of the Act.
Bibliography
Aboulian, L & P Charnley, ‘The Trade Marks (Relative Grounds) Order 2007 and its impact on trade mark owners and applicants’, Journal of Brand Management, vol. 15, no. 2, 2007, pp.146-149.
Bowers, M, ‘Implementing an Online Dispute Resolution Scheme: Using Domain Name Registration Contracts to Create a Workable Framework’, Vanderbilt Law Review, vol. 64, no. 4, 2011, pp. 1265-1309.
Briggs, K, ‘The name of the game’, Keeping Good Companies (14447614), vol. 64, no. 1, 2012, pp. 21-23.
Cerviñlo, J & M Cubillo, ‘A Resource-Based Perspective on Global Branding: An Analysis of Trademark Registration Data’, International Journal of Management, vol. 21, no. 4, 2004, pp. 451-463.
Coutrelis, N & Y Corre, ‘The Protection of a Name registered as a Protected Geographical Indication (PGI) under the simplified Procedure against a Trade Mark’, European Food & Feed Law Review, vol. 6, no. 2, 2011, pp. 116-120.
Flaherty, S, ‘Application Strategies for Concurrent-Use Registration’, Journal of Contemporary Legal Issues, vol. 19, no. 1, 2007, pp. 152-156.
Gardner, L, ‘Survey of Domain Name Cases’, Business Lawyer, vol. 68 no.1, 2012, pp. 319-323.
Howard, J, ‘The Transformation of the Australian Economy’, Quadrant Magazine, vol. 54, no. 3, 2010, pp. 8-10.
Lopes, S & M Casson, ‘Brand Protection and the Globalisation of British Business’, Business History Review, vol. 86, no. 2, 2012, pp. 287-310.
Marinković, A, ‘On Domain Names and Trademarks’, Journal of Internet Law, vol. 15, no. 12, 2012, pp. 29-36.
Morgan, W, B Kathrine, G Rosanne, ‘Changes to business name registration in Australia’, Keeping Good Companies (14447614), vol. 63 no.1, 2011, pp. 24-25.
Norambuena, P, ‘Staking a claim on the dot brand frontier: A brand Perspective’, Journal of Brand Strategy, vol. 1 no. 2, 2012, pp. 118-125.
Partridge, M, ‘The Right to Expand Your Brand’, Restaurant Hospitality, vol. 97 no. 3, 2013, pp. 36-38.
Suter, K, ‘The Continuing ‘Wonder Down Under’, Contemporary Review, vol. 291, no. 1695, 2012, pp. 409-416.
Sweeney, D, ‘Protect Your Business Smart’, Business Orange County, Vol. 1, no. 3, 2012, p. 6.
Upton, M, ‘Protecting your hotel brand from online brandjacking’, Travel Law Quarterly, vol. 3, no. 4, 2011, pp. 283-286.
Waterhouse, R, ‘The Vision Splendid: Conceptualising the Bush, 1813- 1913’, Journal of Popular Culture, vol. 33, no. 1, 1999, pp. 23-34.
Vixie, P, ‘Arrogance in Business Planning’, Communications of the ACM, vol. 54, no. 9, 2011, p. 38.