Nvidia trying to trademark..... numbers?

[Stefan Payne]

...and they got punk'd...

 

AMD goes back to their old Naming that was never really scrapped:
first two numbers tell you what it is, maybe another one (50) for something in between or a Zero - and it ends with a Zero.

 

Thus: RX5700 was born...

Well, ähm, yeah. Didn't see that coming...

[aaradorn]

On one hand it's annoying but on the other hand it gives costumers a clear idea of how good a processor is. the 3-5-7 system is also known by non tech-guys. When they adopted that system it became a lot clearer for the consumers. The whole GPU thing is just funny. It's only easier for consumers. 

 

Think about this:

BMW makes 3 new cars with 3 different engines.

V6

V8

V10

 

We all know what V(number) means, imagine that the naming system becomes easy to understand for everyone, everyone knows a V8 is faster then a V6 and a V10 is the fastest of them all. And suddenly BMW Trademarks the system. Costumers already know the V(Number) System so why try anything else?

[rickymohk]

26 minutes ago, aaradorn said:

On one hand it's annoying but on the other hand it gives costumers a clear idea of how good a processor is. the 3-5-7 system is also known by non tech-guys. When they adopted that system it became a lot clearer for the consumers. The whole GPU thing is just funny. It's only easier for consumers. 

 

Think about this:

BMW makes 3 new cars with 3 different engines.

V6

V8

V10

 

We all know what V(number) means, imagine that the naming system becomes easy to understand for everyone, everyone knows a V8 is faster then a V6 and a V10 is the fastest of them all. And suddenly BMW Trademarks the system. Costumers already know the V(Number) System so why try anything else?

Non-tech guys believe "larger number is better" even across different manufacturers... That's the problem.

[RejZoR]

40 minutes ago, aaradorn said:

On one hand it's annoying but on the other hand it gives costumers a clear idea of how good a processor is. the 3-5-7 system is also known by non tech-guys. When they adopted that system it became a lot clearer for the consumers. The whole GPU thing is just funny. It's only easier for consumers. 

 

Think about this:

BMW makes 3 new cars with 3 different engines.

V6

V8

V10

 

We all know what V(number) means, imagine that the naming system becomes easy to understand for everyone, everyone knows a V8 is faster then a V6 and a V10 is the fastest of them all. And suddenly BMW Trademarks the system. Costumers already know the V(Number) System so why try anything else?

You can't trademark cylinders number marking because it's a widely used thing by all manufacturers.

[Jurrunio]

On 5/25/2019 at 7:50 PM, leadeater said:

I'd love it if AMD had zero intention of using those namings and Nvida was a victim of 'tech media' hype bs lol

dream come true, congrats

 

should have made you promise to do something when it does come true

[Bouzoo]

On 5/27/2019 at 11:44 AM, Jurrunio said:

dream come true, congrats

 

should have made you promise to do something when it does come true

I was about to quote him on that, should've promised to drink a whole bottle of Sriracha or something. 

[Guest]

On 5/25/2019 at 12:57 PM, RejZoR said:

Well, numbers are trademarkable. For example, Peugeot has a trademark on numbering scheme with single or double zero in the middle like: 106, 206, 306, 406 etc and double zeroes like 3008, 4008, 5008 etc. No other car manufacturer can use it. Or Porsche with its iconic "911".

 

I frankly see very little point in graphics since they never last long enough to make sense. Would be funny though since even NVIDIA can't keep it consistent with its stupid GTX 1600 series...

007 is definitely a trademark

[Bouzoo]

4 minutes ago, Phill104 said:

007 is definitely a trademark

Depends on the usage. We have a company in our largest conglomerate called A007. No problems whatsoever. Couldn't be more obvious. 

[Guest]

On 5/26/2019 at 3:14 AM, Spotty said:

 

See: https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/1066805-nvidia-trying-to-trademark-numbers/?do=findComment&comment=12595150

Nvidia submitted the application in the EU, not America. The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) expressly states that it is possible to trade mark numbers. America's USPTO does not. Different trade mark laws so it definitely does not constitute a precedent that would apply in this situation. If Nvidia submitted their application to the USPTO, then maybe.

 

Intel lost the legal case surrounding 386 not because it was a number, but because the courts deemed that the number was too generic (references a wildly used industry term with the "x86" instruction set and the 386 name was considered too similar to that industry term. "386" itself was deemed too generic, not distinctive enough). Under trade mark laws you cannot trade mark generic terms. So you can't trade mark generic industry terms such as "7nm", "64-bit", "2048bit" or "750w". What you are trade marking also has to be distinctive enough that it is unique to your brand and that it distinguishes your product from others. The US courts decided that "386" was too generic and not distinctive enough to meet the criteria for the trade mark.

 

The application for the 586 name in America was not rejected. Intel withdrew its application for the trade mark. You can look up the trade mark and it shows the status as "Abandoned" (by Intel).

http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4809:tu7wh6.3.4

 

They withdrew it because the name they decided to go with, "Pentium", was more distinctive, not a generic term, and as such they would have a stronger case protecting it. The application for "Pentium" was filed prior to Intel abandoning the application for "586". http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4801:x2awtq.3.33

There's a lot more to it than just "It's a number so it can't be trade marked". Numbers can be trade marked, providing they still meet the other criteria for trade mark eligibility.

For example: 737 and 747 are trade marked by Boeing. 911 is trade marked by Porsche. They're just 3 digit numbers like "386", however they are considered more distinctive to the product and are not similar to generic industry terms ("x86").

 

Whether or not Nvidia will be awarded the trade mark for the 3080, 4080, 5080 in the EU is yet to be seen. There's a very good possibility that they're not distinctive enough so likely won't meet the other criteria set out for eligibility. There's also the possibility that if AMD really wanted to use the RX 3080 naming scheme they would be able to oppose the pending application for the trade mark and dispute it before it's awarded.

 IANAL

 

007 is trademarked and rightly so as it is instantly identifiable. Even with all the daftness of the EU I doubt they will entertain the 3080 crap. Good marketing from Nvidia though, it get's them a lot of press visibility.

[Anomnomnomaly]

On 5/27/2019 at 10:36 AM, RejZoR said:

You can't trademark cylinders number marking because it's a widely used thing by all manufacturers.

Intel tried to trademark '586' for CPU's over 20yrs ago and couldn't... Because trademarking numbers isn't and has never really been something that's possible. That's the reason they moved to naming CPU's... Hence why Pentium came about.

 

nVidia can trademark RTX because that's a word/abbreviation.  Applying for a trademark and having one granted are two entirely different things... and in the tech industry, it's highly unlikely to happen.  This is just nVidia reacting to some rumour bullshit that was never true in the first place.

[RejZoR]

54 minutes ago, Anomnomnomaly said:

Intel tried to trademark '586' for CPU's over 30yrs ago and couldn't... Because trademarking numbers isn't and has never really been something that's possible. That's the reason they moved to naming CPU's... Hence why Pentium came about.

 

nVidia can trademark RTX because that's a word/abbreviation.  Applying for a trademark and having one granted are two entirely different things... and in the tech industry, it's highly unlikely to happen.  This is just nVidia reacting to some rumour bullshit that was never true in the first place.

It's more of a contextual number trademarking. Peugeot can trademark their 3 digit null in the middle numbers for cars within a consumer segment. Something Ford wanted to overextend by bitching about F1 cars and their name to their pickup truck F150. Which is stupid. One is a race supercar and another is a big ass pickup truck. They literally have nothing in common apart from having 4 wheels and a steering wheel.

 

Just like Boeing can't own 737 or 747 model numbering. They can in aviation since it's their segment, but if a car manufacturer wants to use it, I don't see a relation or confusion. It's not like someone's gonna mistaken an airliner for a hatchback... Then again mentioning 747 and everyone knows it's an airliner. If car had same model, you'd explicitely had to state you're talking about a car which is kinda dumb.

[Anomnomnomaly]

1 hour ago, RejZoR said:

It's more of a contextual number trademarking. Peugeot can trademark their 3 digit null in the middle numbers for cars within a consumer segment. Something Ford wanted to overextend by bitching about F1 cars and their name to their pickup truck F150. Which is stupid. One is a race supercar and another is a big ass pickup truck. They literally have nothing in common apart from having 4 wheels and a steering wheel.

 

Just like Boeing can't own 737 or 747 model numbering. They can in aviation since it's their segment, but if a car manufacturer wants to use it, I don't see a relation or confusion. It's not like someone's gonna mistaken an airliner for a hatchback... Then again mentioning 747 and everyone knows it's an airliner. If car had same model, you'd explicitely had to state you're talking about a car which is kinda dumb.

You raise a valid point, I recall that Peugot made the 1007, but were barred from calling it the 'one double O seven' due to trademarks existing with the Bond franchise. Instead it has to be called and marketed as the 'one thousand & seven'

 

So perhaps within a very specific niche market it's possible with regards to a subset of the whole computer/IT industry... But on the whole it's generally dismissed as not possible.

 

As for the whole 5700 naming... just 3 systems back... I had a Xfire 5770 setup on a Phenom II 955BE... Which was about 10yrs ago now. and I've had ATI cards like the 9700 back in the early/mid 2000's. So these numbering schemes do appear cyclical and both sides have used similar numbering techniques since 3D gaming cards became a thing some 23yrs ago. I'd imagine they'd find it hard to justify using a number similar to something that's already been done before. For example ATI/AMD had a mobile series in the 3xxx range.

 

 

[Norseman4]

On 5/25/2019 at 7:43 AM, NumLock21 said:

Amd did the same with their chipsets and cpus to copy intel. At least intel did not file for a trademark because they were not afraid of amd. Nvidia needs to grow a pair.

Actually, eys they did and actually had 386 trademarked before it was lost in a lawsuit. They tried for 486 and 586 as well. (They got i586, with the understanding that 586 was still a valid generic mark) They swithched to Pentium because they could trademark that.

 

https://tedium.co/2017/05/18/intel-386-486-trademark-battles/

[mr moose]

On 5/25/2019 at 9:50 PM, leadeater said:

I'd love it if AMD had zero intention of using those namings and Nvida was a victim of 'tech media' hype bs lol

 

Now we have no way of knowing if AMD always intended to use the numbers they did, or whether this attempt to TM numbers was a PR stunt to highlight it thus forcing AMD to change their scheme.   Either way Nvidia deemed it important enough to invest in. 

[Curufinwe_wins]

4 hours ago, mr moose said:

 

Now we have no way of knowing if AMD always intended to use the numbers they did, or whether this attempt to TM numbers was a PR stunt to highlight it thus forcing AMD to change their scheme.   Either way Nvidia deemed it important enough to invest in. 

Yeah. Dumb but with what petty things AMD did with naming and numbering to mirror Intel, I can't blame them at all.