Search the Community

Summary In a recent tweet, Framework Laptops stated that they have received a cease and desist from Lenovo's legal team over the design of their 3D printed motherboard chassis. The given reason is brand recognition issues due to similarities between the chassis' power button and the logo for Lenovo's "Legion" brand. In response to the order, Framework is changing the button and, as part of the process, will host a community competition to design the new button, with a Framework laptop motherboard as the grand prize. Quotes My thoughts I guess Lenovo had nothing better to do than go after a single part, not even manufactured by the company itself, used by a minuscule number of people in a completely different market. Sources https://www.tomshardware.com/news/lenovo-trademark-infringement-framework-case

I saw this article and thought it was kind of funny... According to a ruling in a US Federal Appeals court, Google will be allowed to keep the trademark to the name Google. Apparently at issue is whether the term google has become so predominate in usage that it would preclude you from having a search engine without using the term 'googling' to describe a search. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/05/genericide-assault-to-nullify-the-google-trademark-fails/ I guess this could be considered good news for Microsoft as they now have no chance of worrying about losing a trademark for Bing. EDIT: I've added a poll for those interested...

The company tried to sue an Etsy user who sells clothing featuring bitcoin. Cease and desist letter: I think this is really stupid since the company obviously doesn't own bitcoin so they shouldn't be able to trademark the term. It would be like if i trademarked yen ¥ and if anyone uses a yen symbol I try to sue them. https://www.ccn.com/uk-company-acquires-bitcoin-trademark-threatens-etsy-store-over-btc-themed-items/

Well - I too would be confused if I was looking for an iPhone handbag by Apple. Source: http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2016/05/04/apple-loses-an-iphone-trademark-battle-in-china/?mod=e2fb

Sadly, TheFineBros are kinda screwed over by all the backlash from other youtubers. However, it was basically their fault, with how they phrased everything. If anything, they should have discovered what they said in their video was dumb, and taken it down to revise it. Instead, however, they tried desperately to save their subscriber base by making an apology video. I will admit, the youtube community has been pretty rough on them lately, which sucks for them because their videos are their livelihood. I don't really know if their apology video will work, but how can you really recover from the backlash people have against you because you tried to trademark the word "react"... The sad thing is, all those youtubers that were bashing on them have large fanbases, which tend to follow whatever they say. These vicious fanbases have been attacking TheFineBros relentlessly. The thing is, we have to see both sides of the situation, but it is easy to just look at TheFineBros and judge them immediatly, based on something that a youtuber you like said. I don't necessarily support TheFineBros in their decision to trademark their video format, but I do challenge you to make up your own mind about what you think of them, instead of circle-jerking other people's opinions about, in a massive horde of people attacking them.

Samsung is known to release multiple variants of many of its flagship devices, that too under slightly different names. The Galaxy S4 Zoom and Galaxy S4 Active are prime examples from last year, different variants of the primary flagship, the Galaxy S4. It appears that the next crop of variants might feature “Neo” , as the company has filed to obtain a trademark for Samsung Galaxy S Neo. This isn’t the first we’ve been hearing about the possibility of a Samsung device bearing the Neo moniker. Recently the company announced a device called the Galaxy Grand Neo, as well as a dual-SIM Galaxy S III Neo+, which was launched in China. Moreover, Samsung is also expected to launch a new variant of the Galaxy Note 3, called the Galaxy Note 3 Neo. There’s enough precedent now to support the theory that a future device might carry the Neo moniker, though the trademark filing covers more than just smartphones and phablets, it extends to portable computers, wireless headsets, digital cameras and other similar devices and accessories. The idea of a new Samsung brand identify is interesting, but so far it’s not entirely clear what the intention is. With the Note 3 Neo, for instance, we’re looking at essentially a “Lite” version of the namesake device, with heavily dialed-back specs and a more compact size. On the other hand, while the ATIV S Neo did make a few small sacrifices compared to the ATIV S itself, they weren’t nearly so severe. For the moment, that means we don’t know if Neo will become the new Lite, or Mini, or if it could represent some different spin on Samsung hardware. It’s also interesting to note that this trademark is just for the Galaxy S Neo, and not something more specific, like the Galaxy S 5 Neo. That has us wondering if – regardless of what the name has meant in the past – Neo could soon become the face of Samsung’s lower-end handsets; at least that would avoid dragging the GS5 down with it. Here's the trademark application : http://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=86174875&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch Source : http://www.ubergizmo.com/2014/01/samsung-galaxy-s-neo-moniker-to-be-trademarked/ Not another Samsung device...when will they stop?

I always find it odd how companies fight over some random names of products pointlessly... Hate to see big companies only seek more and more money especially from other large companies. In a way it is comical. Source: http://www.theverge.com/2013/7/31/4574878/microsoft-skydrive-name-change-bskyb?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+WinRumors+%28WinRumors%29&utm_content=FaceBook

So the infamous "candy" trademark fiasco is apparently over as far as the US copyright system is concerned as King has abandoned it's application to trademark the word 'candy" after buying Candy Crusher to try to subvert the copyrights of other games from other developers. That said, King does have the trademark to the word 'candy' in Europe. Source: http://kotaku.com/candy-crush-makers-dont-want-to-trademark-candy-anym-1530680632

There is something wrong with the current trademark system. King is at it again and is now targeting a person who opposed the trademark of Candy Crush Saga. In short there is a game called CandySwipe (2010), which is very similar to Candy Crush (2012), and the creator Albert Ransom was in opposition of the trademark (I feel it is important to note that the games are really similar, as can be seen on the CandySwipe website http://candyswipe.com/ccs.pdf). To fight off the trademark dispute King has gone out of their way to purchase the trademark Candy Crusher from another company (in January 2014) and guess what they are doing with it. Having bought Candy Crusher they sought to reinforce the claim of Candy Crush and invalidate CandySwipe. As an fyi Candy Crusher is more like tetris. An exert from http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=91210162&pty=OPP&eno=9 End of page 4 and beginning of page 5 To me this is just disgusting behaviour by King. It is crazy the lengths they will go to crush the small guy....Buying a trademark only to invalidate someone elses is just horrible. The makers of Candy crusher didn't seems to have a problem with CandySwipe...but given how Candy Crush has been shown to cause confusion with CandySwipe I would love to see King talk their way out of this one (to the press...I guess legally as sleazeball as it is they might have the right to do this) Anyways here is the CandySwipe's open letter to King http://www.candyswipe.com/king.html They also provide links to their opposition towards the trademark, and I believe an actual article.

As you all know, people all over the internet have been losing their minds over the trademark patent of Half-Life 3 which was filed in Spain. Unfortunately this trademark was redacted soon after. However, another was filed by Valve on October 2nd for Portal 3. While I am once again disappointed by the lack of Half-Life 3, I am still very much interested in what becomes of this. What are your thoughts on this? Source: http://wccftech.com/portal-3-trademark-filled-legit/