The USPTO reviews many relevant factors and evidence before reaching a conclusion regarding the approval of a trademark. In cases where the USPTO believes that the requested mark could lead to confusion between the consumer and a previously registered trademark, the USPTO will place significant weight on an agreement between the applicant and the registered trademark holder. However, the approval agreement should be sufficiently detailed, with concrete reasons and evidence indicating that the parties involved do not foresee consumer confusion and the explicit steps they will take to further minimize them. The «naked» approval agreements (which contain only permission to register the trademark and a brief statement that confusion is unlikely) are much less persuasive to the USPTO. In the end, a high probability of consumer confusion due to extremely similar brands may even null and void the most detailed consent agreement. A co-existence agreement is a contract and, as such, it must meet the legal requirements of a contract — offer, acceptance, consideration, meeting spirits, benefit, etc. Due to the nature of trademark and registration procedures, co-existence agreements are written. A simple approval agreement is generally cheaper because it includes less time and resources for the project. However, you will receive what you pay and a co-existence agreement will certainly offer more protection. A party that is clearly a disciple brand user (not the first party to use a trademark) may have no choice but to seek an acceptance agreement from the older user of the mark (the first party that usually uses and registers a trademark in the trade). However, if the bargaining power between the parties is more regular, a co-existence agreement detailing the issues important to both parties is probably in the interest of all. The bargaining power for the use of the trademark can be created by the status of an older user, by a known or known brand, or by the ownership of additional trademarks that the other party may be interested in limiting. In trademark law, co-existence contracts are contracts for which two trademark holders accept the use of their similar trademarks, but restrictions.
For example, both owners may agree that their respective goods or services are offered in different geographic areas.