141–150 of 203 posts
Wow, I just got my trademark (Techdroid) renewed a few days ago. I do have a signed agreement with Lucasfilm from when I first registered it but I wonder if I will have issues with Google in the future and my android apps.
I can sue you for more or less anything. And, especially if I'm a big company, I can make you waste a lot of time and money (even if you're also a big company). That's why, as someone who has been involved in a number of product naming decisions, my experience is that lawyers are very conservative in terms of what names they let you use even if, on paper, it seems like you have a good argument that your somewhat over…
That is because in USA you pay your lawyers. In other countries, if you loose, you have to pay the lawyers of the other part.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that's the reason, it seems strange that they kept off of Google Play for just as long
I dont think any alternate app stores are on Google Play.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-beatles-music-idUSKBN0U60...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Allow the poor to sue when they do have a case but no money to fallow through. The issue is that lawsuits are often not obvious. There's almost always a non-trivial risk of losing. Therefore, in a universal "loser pays" system, it's even riskier for a poor (or even middle-class) person to sue a company given that they could be responsible for bankruptcy-level legal fees if they lose.
> Therefore, in a universal "loser pays" system, it's even riskier for a poor (or even middle-class) person to sue a company given that they could be responsible for bankruptcy-level legal fees if they lose. The simple[1] solution to that would be “loser pays if they spent more”. Which might seem odd at first glance (why punish the loser even more?), but would align the incentives in the right direction. [1] Read: I…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Allow the poor to sue when they do have a case but no money to fallow through. The issue is that lawsuits are often not obvious. There's almost always a non-trivial risk of losing. Therefore, in a universal "loser pays" system, it's even riskier for a poor (or even middle-class) person to sue a company given that they could be responsible for bankruptcy-level legal fees if they lose.
> Therefore, in a universal "loser pays" system, it's even riskier for a poor (or even middle-class) person to sue a company given that they could be responsible for bankruptcy-level legal fees if they lose. The simple[1] solution to that would be “loser pays if they spent more”. Which might seem odd at first glance (why punish the loser even more?), but would align the incentives in the right direction. [1] Read: I…
https://slatestarcodex.com/2020/03/30/legal-systems-very-dif...
The article title’s a play on David Friedman’s book: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/30066446 (I haven’t read this but sounds interesting)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From what I was told you can't use a similar name on a similar product or company, but if it's different enough it's ok. A friend had a few stores selling clothes with a name that was french for something I've forgotten. Then a large chain started selling and heavily marketing a perfume with the same name. My friend wanted to stop them using the name, but after a few rounds of lawyers he got nowhere because selling c…
> Also from what I've understood if you got a trademark, you have to defend it or else risk losing it. So while it often looks like a dick move, they're kinda forced. This is false, but it's a myth that unfortunately just won't die. Genericide (which is what people usually mean with "losing a trademark") only applies if you are extremely negligent in defending a trademark. See also: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then Android has nothing todo with droid because it's a different word and has nothing todo with Android right? Or do you want to sue everyone that has Andr (Man) in his name?
ugh 1) trademark don't cover just exact matches 2) trademarks are in their own classes, you can't litigate across classes 3) common words are perfectly fine as trademarks, as long as commonly associated with a product
Yes exactly and Droid is NOT associated with a Smartphone-OS but Android is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The general spirit is to protect consumers from confusion by competing companies, which is good. It only becomes a problem when the hypothetical consumer becomes doormat dumb and half blind. I think that Firefox should have kept the name Phoenix, nobody would get confused by that.
General spirit is to protect company profits. For example, I'm much better served by Sandisk having a tamper-proof verification codes on their uSD cards that I can lookup on their official website and verify the card being genuine. I don't remember the last time I bought non-genuine Sandisk card from random sellers on Aliexpress after they introduced this. Yet I have a bunch of Samsung ones from China (probably fakes…
How so? Once you have the uSD card in hand, they have your money.
Wow, I just got my trademark (Techdroid) renewed a few days ago. I do have a signed agreement with Lucasfilm from when I first registered it but I wonder if I will have issues with Google in the future and my android apps.