Meaning they're relying almost entirely on "maker" to provide distinctiveness.
If the USPTO has any inkling of sense they'd realise "maker" is a standard English word that is being used for its ordinary meaning (someone who makes things), and does not give any indication of a specific origin.
You can't prevent people using common words, with their ordinary meaning, to describe their own products by registering those words (that's common across all TM systems). Any attempt to sue someone for running their own maker fair using the words maker fair should be dismissed by asking the judge to look up the two words in the dictionary.
What's curious to me is that the mark actual has a disclaimer (https://www.uspto.gov/trademark/laws-regulations/how-satisfy...) on "faire", the only slim element of distinctiveness in the mark.
Meaning they're relying almost entirely on "maker" to provide distinctiveness.
If the USPTO has any inkling of sense they'd realise "maker" is a standard English word that is being used for its ordinary meaning (someone who makes things), and does not give any indication of a specific origin.
You can't prevent people using common words, with their ordinary meaning, to describe their own products by registering those words (that's common across all TM systems). Any attempt to sue someone for running their own maker fair using the words maker fair should be dismissed by asking the judge to look up the two words in the dictionary.